Loading...
1985 03 26 PC Minutes MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A Regular Meeting Held at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California March 26, 1985 7: 00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER - A. Chairman Thornburgh called the Planning Conmtission meeting to order at 7: 00 p.m. He then called upon Sandra Bonner, Principal Planner, to lead the flag salute. 2. ROLL A. Chainaan ~1~o~h requested the roll call. ~l~e F~cre~ called the ro11: Present: ~ssioners C~etoheus, Kltlevricz, M~ran, Wallir~ and Chairman ~sent: None Also present were Cxmmiinlty Develo~t Director Lawrence L. Stevens, Principal Planner Sandra L. Bonner, Assistant Planner Tamara J. Campbell and Secretary Donna M. Velotta. Chairman Thornburgh announced that, after discussing the matter with the City Attorney and Planning Staff, it was decided that he should turn the meeting over to the Vice Chairman due to the fact that he owned property adjacent to the property under discussion at this meeting. Therefore, there may be a conflict of interest. 3. HEARINGS - Vice Chairman John Walling introduced the three hearings, to be heard concurrently, as follows: A. Specific Plans Nos. 85-005A and 85-005B, proposals to amend an existing Specific Plan of alignment for Avenue 52 between Jefferson Street and Desert Club Drive; William G. Young and ~rk Land Cc~pany, Applicants. B. Change of Zone Case No. 85-015, a proposal to change the zoning from R-l*, R*++-i-10,000, R*-2-20,000, and N-A*, to R*+~--1i-10,000, R*-2-20,000 and N-A*, on a 746-acre site easterly of Avenida Bermudas and southerly of Avenida Nuestra; Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant. C. Tentative Tract Map No. 20328, Revised NO. 1, a proposal to approve a planned residential develot]nent with 843 condc~inium units, 47 single-family lots, a tennis and country club and an 18-hole golf course on a 417-acre portion of a 731-acre site easterly of Avenida Bermudas and southerly of Avenida Nuestra; Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant. Vice Chairman Walling called for the Staff Reports on these matters. 1. ~ty Develot~nent Director Lawrence L. Stevens advised that in addition to the three hearings regarding the Sand Pebble Country Club before the Conmtission at this meeting, there are also several related issues which will come before them on the April 9th meeting. These related issues are road vacations and the need to make modifications to the Duna La Quinta Specific Plan because of the realignment of Avenue 52. __ Director Stevens advised that the Specific Plans being presented at this meeting are two applications, one from Bill Young and one from Landmark. Their request is to amend a previously approved alignment plan for Avenue 52. He noted that in the early 1970's, the County of Riverside approved a Specific Plan to allow for the future alignment of Avenue 52, but the plan has never been implemented. %he proposed project will result in the ccmplete vacation of Avenue 52 and create an entirely new ali~t. Tne revised alignment will run adjacent to Avenida Nuestra, extending easterly to Jefferson Street and westerly, curving slightly southward, running into Calle Amigo. The new MINUTES - PLANNING Cfb~iISSION March 26, 1985 Page 2. road will have two travel lanes in each direction, a center median, curb and gutters frcm Desert Club Drive to a point 660-feet east of Adams Street. Frc~n that point, an interim, t~D-lane highway is proposed through to Jefferson Street. No curb or gutter improvements are proposed frum Adams Street to Jefferson Street. Sand Pebble Country Club is requesting this realist in conjunction with the development of Sand Pebble Country Club. Since the boundary of Sand Pebble Country Club is 660-feet west of Ad_a_ms Street easement and to allow for adequate circulation, Landmark Land ~y has agreed to continue the realignment through to Jefferson Street. The Applicant is requesting the realignment to allow additional space for development of flood control improvements. Major impacts and appropriate mitigation measures are noted in the Staff Report. Director Stevens stated that the City has hired a consultant to provide an acoustical study with regard to the increased noise levels which could significantly impact the residents of Avenida Nuestra. We have also contracted with ~a traffic engineer to evaluate if Avenida Nuestra should be connected to the potential realignment of Avenue 52 to assure that it is done in a safe traffic manner, as well as to look at the design radii of the curves being created. These reports are expected by Thursday or Friday of this week. Director Stevens noted that, lacking these reports at this meeting, we will not be able to come to a conclusion at this time. However, Staff believed it appropriate because of the numerous cc~plex applications of the project, to solicit public and Planning Commission cc~ments so that in working with the Applicant, Staff could resolve as many of the issues as possible before the next hearing. Director Stevens stated that the realignment, based on present information, appears to be warranted. The principal reasons that Staff believes this is we will be able to realign the street with safe radii on the curves, we can bring that ali~t to the future extension of Avenue 52 into Eisenho~er Drive, where right-of-way has already been purchased, and we recognize the Applicant's need to ex~ the project to include this parcel into the development part of the project, which was not included previously because of needs associated with flood control. Director Stevens stated that this concluded the Staff Report on the Specific Plans and turned the meeting over to Principal Planner Sandra Bonner for the report on the Change of Zone case. Principal Planner Bonner began her report with a short description of the project for those who were not familiar with the project. She then went on to state that the requested change in zoning is intended to facilitate the proposed revisions to Tentative Tract Map No. 20328. With the proposed realignment of Avenue 52 northwards, the project site will be increased by 57 acres. The Applicant is requesting that the zoning on this additional acreage north of existing Avenue 52 be changed frcm R-l* to R-2'-20,000. This is consistent with the zoning on tdTe remainder of the condcmttni~ portions of the project. The R-2 t.vpe zoning will permit a maximum of eight units per building, which should be ccmpat~le with surrounding development provided that design standards are imposed on the tentative tract map approval. A total of 395 acres is proposed for R-2'-20,000 zoning, which ~ould allow a maxinum of 860 condcminiums, 17 more units than are proposed by the Applicant. The kpplicant is also requesting a slight increase in the R-i++*-10,000 area to accc~modate four new custcm hc~e lots located to the northeast of the main cluster of single-family lots. A total of 22 acres of R-i++*-10,000 zoning is proposed for 46 residential lots and one cc~ron recreational lot. Minor adjustments are proposed to the zoning boundaries between the R-i++*- 10,000, R-2'-20,000 and N-A* areas. These changes are due to the fact that the Applicant has obtained more detailed topographic information on the site since the previous change of zone was approved. In general, the N-A* zoning on the mountainous portion of the site has been increased slightly. MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION March 26, 1985 Page 3. In general, the density allowed under the proposed zoning is substantially less than that designated by the current General Plan land use designations. In addition, the proposed 2.2 density allowed by the R-2'-20,000 zoning is substantially less than the R-1 zoning adjacent to the west and north. The 17-foot height limit will prevent tw~-story units on the single-family lots. Although the proposed R-2'-20,000 zoning will allow structures up to 35 feet in height, cc~patibility with adjacent development will be ensured through design review of the tentative tract map. Moving on to the Tentative Tract Map No. 20328, Revised No. 1, Principal Planner Bonner explained that this request for a revision to the previously approved tentative map was submitted concurrently with the request to realign Avenue 52 on the north side of the project. As described in the Staff Report on Specific Plans Nos. 85-005A and 85-005B, the Applicant is requesting that Avenue 52 be shifted approximately 500 feet northward adjacent to Avenida Nuestra for the roadway section between Desert Club Drive and Jefferson Street. The reasons for the Applicant's request for the revisions to the tract map and Avenue 52 plan include the following: o The shifting of the road northward adds 57 acres to the Sand Pebble Country Club site, thereby partially c~ating the Applicant for the lar~ within the project being cc~uitted to construction of the La Quinta Stormwater Channel and retention basins. o Due directly to the Applicant's agreement to accept drainage frcm Cove area to the west, the required holding capacity of the on-site retention areas was substantially increased over that designed for on the original development plan. o In order to obtain the additional required capacities for the retention areas, the Applicant proposes larger, shallower basins rather than smaller, deeper basins, such as Oleander Basin with - its high berm sides. Therefore, additional land is used for flood control improvements in the revised map than was proposed in the original tract. The following are the major design differences between the previously approved tract map ar~ this proposed revision: o Developable area increased by 57 acres by realigning Avenue 52 approximately 500 feet northward. o A~_~kt__ition of 166 condcminium units, almost all of which are story units. o Deletion of five single-family house lots and a change in this area' s configuration. o Placement of two-story units along the Avenida Bermudas and Avenue 52 boundaries. o Relocation of flood control retention basins and driving range away frcm Avenue 52, resulting in units being adjacent to the public roadway rather than open space. Principal Planner Bonner went on to describe sc~e major design issues that were of concern to Staff, which included tw~-story condominiums, the tennis clubhouse, views into the project and tree retention. She also discussed items such as the single-family, custcm hc~e lots, the perimeter walls, the new location for the fire station and the vacant parcel on the northwest corner of the site. _ Cc~missioner Klimkiewicz asked if he was correct in remembering the setbacks on Avenida Bermudas to be a voluntary 50' to 100' frc~ the original approval of this request. Ms. Bonner stated that she believed it was a voluntary 50' to 70' for the Avenida Bezmndas setbacks. Cc~missioner Moran. ~ondered if there would be sidewalks along Avenida Bermudas and Avenue 52. MINUTES - PLANNING CC~v~SSION March 26, 1985 Page 4. Ms. Bonner replied that the original conditions required sidewalks along the east side of Bernudas and a 4', meandering sidewalk on the south side of Avenue 52. ~nis was before the realist of Avenue 52. The conditions also requested a 5' bike path on the north side of Avenue 52. The new condi- tions of approval will also require this. _ Vice Chairman Walling asked if the RV storage area on the northwest corner of the site was going to be recessed and how close it is actually to the street. Ms. Bonner replied that it is set back 10' to 20' frc~ the wall. Under the original conditions of approval, we required that it be recessed so that a 14'-high vehicle could not be seen frcm the other side of the street. Director Stevens continued to report that as he had stated earlier, Staff and the Applicant are still working out some details on this project and it is the Staff's reccnm~_ndation that each of the three it~ns under considera- tion at this hearing be continued for additional public hearing at the next regular Planning ~ssion meeting of April 9, 1985. We do, however, recc~x~=n~d that you conduct tonight's hearing because we are interested in finding out if there are any issues associated with the project which we have not identified frcm either the Conm%~ssion's or the public's perspective, so that we can endeavor to resolve any of these concerns during the inter- vening tw~ w~eks. He stated that as indicated at the study session the day prior, we do have an agreement with the Applicant relative to the dedication, at no cost to the City, of flood control easement. Part of our understanding with the Applicant to secure those easements was that we would facilitate scheduling of these revisions to the extent that we could. Therefore, we have tried to achieve that and are hoping that the two-week continuance will allow us to solve most of the concerns and allow us to go to City Council at their second meeting in April. Our recc~r~ndation is for continuance, but -- we are strongly interested in any cc~m~_nts frcm the Con~ssion and the public. Director Stevens also informed the ~sion that Staff has received tw~ letters, both objecting to the proposal for realist of Avenue 52. One letter is frcm Mr. & Mrs. Jim Williams and the second letter is frc~ Dr. Charles Sodikoff. The letters were passed on to the Cc~m~ssion for viewing. This concluded Staff' s presentation. Vice Chairman Walling opened the public hearing at 7:41 p.m. Bill Young, President of Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant, spoke in favor of the project and explained the reasons for the revisions to the original plan, which are primarily for flood control improvements for the City of La Forrest Haag, Landmark Land Cc~pany, Applicant, spoke in favor of the project and the realignment of Avenue 52. Kevin Manning, Landmark Land Cc~pany, Applicant, spoke in favor of the project and the realignment of Avenue 52. Paul Fisher, 51-475 Calle Rondo, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to the realignment stating that with the realist of Avenue 52, he ~Duld have three roads abutting the southern boundary of his property, along with a block wall and could see his property value plunm~ting. Bob Baier, 51-485 Calle Guatamala, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to the - realist of Avenue 52, stating that he has lived in his present location for 21 years. He felt that with the realignment of Avenue 52 there would be a major road at his back door which would increase the noise impact on his property as well as block his view of the mountains if a wall were erected. He stated if this happened, he felt it w~uld be necessary to hire an attorney and sue for damages. MINUTES - PLANNING CQMMISSICN March 26, 1985 Page 5. Audrey Ostrowsky, P. O. Box 351, La Quinta, recited a letter she had prepared in opposition to the realignment of Avenue 52, which also cited several other items of concern she had with the City of La Quinta's present status. She also made a statement of the possible benefits this all ~uld have for Tc~ ~norr~h, owner of the Desert Club. Tom ~nornburgh, P. O. Box 925, La Quinta, owner of the Desert Club, spoke in rebuttal to Mrs. Ostrowsky's statements. Dr. Charles Sodikoff, Rt. 1, Box 134, Del Mar, CA, and property owner at 51-400 Calle Palcma, La Quinta, spoke in behalf of several property c~ners in the area, who are as follows: Mike Parker, 51-322 Calle Palcma, La Quinta Francisco ~breno, 78-560 Avenida Nuestra, La Quinta virginia Higgs, 51-444 Calle Palc~a, La Quinta He spoke for all in opposition to the Avenue 52 realignment, stating the reasons as noise impacts, unsightliness, etc. Diana Searcy, 52-279 Avenida Navarro, La Quinta, spoke opposing the realign- ment as well as the project itself due to the fact that the Applicant would be renoving the Eucalyptus trees and Pyracantha bushes along Avenue 52. Carmen M~D~well, 81-292 Green Avenue, Indio, CA, spoke as representative of the Riverside County Trail and Parks Subcc~mit~. Also with her were Dr. Ted ~brris and Mr. Burkett also of Indio. She stated that as a member of the Equestrian ~ttee of the Riverside County Parks Department and therefore a representative of hundreds of hikers and horsemen in the Coachella Valley and Riverside County, she called upon the City of La Quinta to include in the conditions of approval for the revised Tentative Tract Map No. 20328, the requirement that Sand Pebble Country Club deed a 12' easement for riding and hiking purposes to the County of Riverside Parks Department. This 12' ease- ment should be adjacent to or included within the right-of-way of Avenida Bermudas and Avenue 52 and the trail should be incorporated in the design of the street improvements and landscape plans provided for the Sand Pebble Country Club tract. Provision should also be made for connecting the trail along Avenida Bermudas with that along Avenue 52, preferably by additional easement along north and west tract boundaries where public streets do not occur. Sufficient land is available for such easement along the north boundary of the project. Ms. McDowell stated she will be sukn~tting a letter and a Parks Department plan for this proposed trail to the Ccx~nission. Joe Torento, 78-195 Cadiz, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to the realignment. He stated that he had not been notified of this meeting and he has lived here for 21 years. He noted that he found out about it by accident. He also stated that his mother received a notice and she has been deceased for 10 years and his father also received a notice and he has been deceased for 1% years. He felt that all residents should be notified of these hearings. Director Stevens responded to Mr. Torento's statement by advising that the City notified property owners within a 500' radius, either side of the Avenue 52 realignment area and around the project, we notified property owners with- in a 400' radius. By law, we are only required to notify property owners within a 300' area. The notices are prepared based on the current assessment rolls and spot checked against the Applicant's submittal to see that it is basically correct. Director Stevens stated he did not know why Mr. Torento did not receive a notice, but we would check our records and will add him manually to the list to assure that he gets any further notices. Karen Sodikoff, Rt. 1, BOx 134, Del Mar, CA, and property owner at 51-400 Calle Palcma, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to the realignment, stating reasons of the noise impacts on residents in the area. Cecil Hartman, 53-345 Avenida Vallejo, La Quinta, spoke against the realign- ment, stating his main concern was the noise impaction on residents. Richard Beeman, 51-401 ~uatamala, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to any type of progress in La Quinta, stating he moved here for the peace and solitude and now feels threatened that he must move, being pushed out by progress. MINUTES - PLANNING ~SSION March 26, 1985 Page 6. Hc~er Davis, 52-211 Avenida Bermu~s, La Quinta, stated his only concerns were with the wall on the east side of Avenida Bermudas and the height of the condcminiums along the perimeter of that wall. Director Stevens replied to Mr. Davis' concerns by inviting him to come into the Con, unity Development Department office to look at the plans so he could have a better understanding of the final proposal. J. Burton Gold, Vice President of Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant, explained again the reasons for the realist of Avenue 52 was primarily due to flood control improvements. He stated that they had no alternative. Either the road be moved or the land ~uld be taken and used for the flood control anyway. Virginia Higgs, La Quinta resident, opposed the realignment of Avenue 52. Bill Young, President of Sand Pebble Country Club, spoke again in favor of the project and the realignment of Avenue 52 for the flood control improvements. However, he stated that after listening to the public's cc~ments at this hearing, he wanted to be.on record that if the City does not need his support with regard to the flood control improv~nents that he would withdraw the realist request and return to the original plans. Vice Chairman Walling closed the public hearing at 8:35 p.m. Vice Chairman Walling advised the Cc~mission that he had prepared a list of items for discussion regarding these three items before them and ~uld go through them one at a time, asking each Conm~issioner for their cc~m~_nts. The first item for discussion was the two-story condc~iniums. Cc~missioner Moran stated that she w~uld like to see the one-story and two-story buildings be mixed. She was also concerned after hearing the cc~m~_nts from the residents in the area of the realignmsnt and felt she could not make a finding on that item until the acoustical study has been received and there is a plan to see the setbacks in that area. She stated she feels the rest of the project is beautifully laid out. Cc~ssi~ner Goetcheus has no ~3_arrel with the two-story buildings, only a quarrel with the aesthetics of how they look. He feels Staff has ideas on this that will make it aesthetically all right so that the developmant will be suitable to everyone. Cc~nissioner Klimkiewicz feels that the tw~-story buildings should not be on the perimeter of the project. Cc~missioner Walling feels that t%~-story buildings should be used on the interior and not along the perimeter of the project. Vice Chairman Walling requested the Cc~mission's views on the retention of trees for the project. ~ssioner Klimkiewicz stated that this was not of great concern to him as the trees were on the interior of the project. Conm~ssi~ner Goetcheus wanted to see a landscape plan before making a decision in this regard. Vice Chairman Walling agreed with the developer regarding breaking windrows and clumping the trees in most areas. He feels the windrow on Avenue 52 could be used in a manner that w~uld allow more of them to be saved. Vice Chairman Walling requested the Cc~ssion's views regarding the exterior views frcm the site along Avenue 52. ~ssioner Moran would like to see more open space where the putting clock II is located. MINUTES - PLANNING C(i~qISSION March 26, 1985 Page 7. Cc~niissioner Goetcheus feels that the houses behind the wall will be very accepta_ble. He noted that in looking at other projects in La Quinta, we were all ~Drried about the sight of the houses above the walls and now that they are all in place, everything is fine. Cc~zmi~sioner Klimkiewicz feels the perimeter of the project should be low profile and that the t~D-story buildings should be moved more to the interior. Vice Chairntin Walling does not have a problem with the units being close to the street if they are not too high and not too dense. He stated he does like to see tbs units broken up scmewhat so you can see into the project. Vice Chairman Walling requested the Cczmlission's views regarding the realignment of Avenue 52. Cc~miCssioner Klimkiewicz felt he ~Duld like to wait before commenting to see the acoustical and traffic studies that are to be received shortly. All were in agreement with Ccmnissioner Klimkiewicz. Conmlissioner Goetcheus stated, however, he feels we need to develop this east-west corridor frcm Eisenho%~r Drive to Jefferson Street. Vice Chairman Walling requested conzaents regarding the walls and setbacks on Avenida Bermudas. Oumnissioner Klimkiewicz stated he would like to see the setbacks on Avenida Bermudas be put back into the plan. Vice Chairman Walling requested ccmTe_nts on the golf course maintenance building. Conmi%ssioner 5bran stated she does not like golf course maintenance buildings to be located on public rights-of-way because of the noise, traffic, smells, etc. She feels that they should be located within the club. However, in this particular case, she cannot see any other place where a road could go into the project. She requested, ho~=ver, that the Applicant try to locate it where it cannot be seen. She feels they are very unsightly. Cc~nissioner Goetcheus and Ccmnissioner Klimkiewicz agreed with this statement. Vice Chairman Walling felt the golf course maintenance building impacted the residents in the interior of the project as well as the Desert Club at its present location. Vice Chairman Walling stated that it has been recc~me!~ied that these three hearings be continued to the meeting of April 9, 1985. Therefore, he called for a motion. Ccmmiissioner Klimkiewicz made a motion to continue the hearings regarding Specific Plans Nos. 85-005A and 85-005B, Change of Zone Case No. 85-015 and Tentative Tract Map NO. 20328, Revised No. 1, to the next regular meeting of the Planning Cc~ssion on April 9, 1985. Cc~ssioner Moran seconded. Unanimously Adopted with one abstention. CONSENT CAT.RNDAR Ounllissioner Moran wished the minutes to reflect her statement, for the record, that she would like the placement of golf course maintenance facilities for any future developments be located in the interior of the projects. A. Moved by Comnissioner Walling, seconded by Chairman Thornburgh to approve the minutes of the regular meeting of March 12, 1985, as amended. 1. The minutes of the regular meeting of March 12, 1985, were approved as amended. Unanimously Adopted. MINUTES - ~~ING CC~MiISSION March 26, 1985 Page 8. 5. BUSINESS None 6. ADJ~ - There being no further items of agenda to cc~e before the ~sion, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion to adjourn. Chairman Thornburgh made a motion to adjourn to the next regular meeting of April 9, 1985, at 7:00 p.m., in La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California. Ccmmzissioner Goetcheus seconded the motion. Unanimously Adopted. The regular meeting of the Planning Ccmmzission of the City of La Quinta, California, was adjourned at 9:35 p.m., March 26, 1985, in the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California.