Loading...
1986 06 24 PC Minutes  .......... ~APPROVED~m,,.,..,~ QU I.I~T'~ P~NNI~_COUMISSION PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A Regular Meeting Held at the La Quinta city Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California June 24, 2986 7:00 p.m. 1. CALL TO ORDER - Chairman Thornburgh called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m.; he then led the flag salute. 2. ROLL CALL A. Chairman Thornburgh requested the Roll Call; the Secretary called the roll: Present:Commissioners Brandt, De Gasperin, Moran, Walling, and Chairman Thornburgh Absent: None Also present were Principal Planner Sandra L. Bonner and Secretary Donna M. Velotta. 3. HEARINGS Chairman Thornburgh introduced the first item of hearing as follows: A. PUBLIC USE CASE NO. 86-003, Approval to expand an existing private school from 35 to 150 students and to construct six additional classrooms and one multi-purpose building; Marywood Country Day School, Applicant. He then called for the Staff Report. 1. Principal Planner Sandra Bonner informed the Commission that this matter had been continued from the May 27 and June 10 meetings. Once again, due to the estimated cost of improvements required to the water system by CVWD for this project, the Applicant has requested a continuance to re-evaluate their application and decide whether to proceed with their original or a modified proposal for the expansion of the school, or to withdraw their request. Therefore, it is Staff's recommendation that the hearing be continued to July 22, 1986. The Applicant has agreed with this one-month continuance. Also, because of the length of time which this case has been continued, Staff will re-notice the hearing to allow the adjacent property owners an adequate opportunity to attend the July hearing. This concluded Staff's report. After a brief discussion, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion. 2. Commissioner Brandt made a motion, seconded by Commission De Gasperin, to continue Public Use Case No. 86-003 to the meeting of July 22, 1986. Unanimously Adopted. Chairman Thornburgh introduced the next item of hearing as follows: B. TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 21433, A request to subdivide approximately 40 acres into 82 single-family lots, 3 stormwater retention lots, - and one (1), approximately 17-acre future development parcel; Lewis Homes, Applicant. He called for the Staff Report. 1. Principal Planner Bonner informed the Commission that the Applicant, Lewis Homes, is proposing to subdivide a 40-acre site at Dune Palms and Miles Avenue, adjacent to the Indian Springs area. They are proposing to create 82 single-family lots, 3 stormwater retention lots, that will be later developed with single-family homes, and they have left a 17-acre parcel for future development which she pointed out on the wall rendering submitted by the Applicant. The lot sizes range from 7200 to 12,270 square feet, with the average size being 7200 to 7800 square feet. The density for the developed area is 4.15 units per acre. Ms. Bonner stated that a question brought up at the study session was whether the area within private streets is included in the lot size determination. The Zoning Ordinance excludes any area that is used exclusively for access. In this case then, it excludes any area in a public or private street or if it were a flag lot, the one access strip leading to the buildable area. She stated that the Staff Report goes into detail regarding compliance with the map of the General Plan. The map, as proposed, is consistent with the General Plan provided that several conditions are added. Regarding the Hazards Element, Staff is recommending that the developer comply with the areawide drainage plan that is currently being developed and ready to be adopted for the area. The Applicant will also be required to do a noise study for the project. Regarding the Community Development Element, the project is consistent with the current designation of Medium Density Residential that allows 4 to 8 units per acre. Regarding the urban design aspect of this one element, currently the plan does not provide for setbacks so the map will have to be redesigned slightly to provide either a 10-foot setback along Dune Palms and Miles Avenue, or if these two streets are up- graded, which is currently being considered, the setback would have to be increased to 20 feet. - 2 - Regarding the Infrastructure Element, a major item of discussion recently has been the designation of the streets. Originally, Miles Avenue had a 100' right-of-way and under the old General Plan, it was downgraded to an 88' Secondary Arterial. We are currently reviewing the Circulation Plan in that area and it appears that Miles Avenue will have to be increased to a 100 to 110' right-of-way. This is due primarily to the increase in traffic with the change in the land uses when the General Plan was adopted and also the fact that we have several requests for High Density Residential to the west of this site. -- Ms. Bonner discussed some recommendations suggested by the Community Development Director who was not present at this meeting. First, she referred to Item No. 8 under the Findings section of the Staff Report. She noted that the Director proposes that the Finding be rewritten to read as follows: "The tract design does provide adequately for energy conservation in accordance with the General Plan and additional conservation measures, including building orientation and design, will be reviewed at the time that development plans are submitted." Regarding the conditions of approval, Ms. Bonner first referred to Condition No. 8, stating that the Applicant disagrees with the City's requirement to require compliance with our drainage plan. It is Staff's position that this is a City standard required of other development in the City and feel it is appropriate for this request. Therefore, Staff is recommending that this condition be retained. Condition No. 10.b. which refers to design standards for private streets within the development, or for any streets - within the development. The Applicant has stated that he wants the width of the cul-de-sac streets reduced to 50'. This is based on the Riverside County standard for restricted cul-de-sacs. This is generally cul-de-sacs constructed in areas where there is physical limitations to constructing a full-width street. Staff is requesting that this standard be kept at 60', although we would have no objection if it is decreased to 56' in width as noted in the Staff Report. Regarding Condition No. 11 discussing right-of-way widths for Miles Avenue and Condition No. 12 which discusses right- of-way widths for Dune Palms Road, the Director had an opportunity to talk to Mr. John Lower of BSI, Inc., who is the consultant doing the Circulation Study in the north side of town. It is his opinion that the amount of traffic in the area warrants that a minimum 100' wide (4 lanes of travel) street be proposed. Based on this, the Director is recommending that the language in Conditions 11 and 12 be retained; however, Staff would have no objection if the 110' requirement be decreased to 100' which would only affect the width of the - 3 - median. So with respect to circulation, 100' would be adequate. Condition No. 13 addresses the requirement that the streets remain private rather than be dedicated to the City. The Applicant. has requested that the streets do be dedicated. It is Staff's position that the streets do remain private and that the Applicant form an assessment district for the maintenance of the streets. Ms. Bonner advised the Commission that if they do allow the streets to be dedicated, this condition would be struck entirely. -- With regard to Condition No. 16, regarding landscape setbacks, Staff is recommending an addition of subsection c. to read as follows: "A Lighting and Landscaping Maintenance Assessment District shall be formed in order to maintain parkway landscaping and lighting." This is in response to comments brought up at the study session about the problems other developments have had where homeowner's associations would try to maintain land- scaping over the course of the project. Addressing Condition No. 17, Ms. Bonner stated that it is related to a request by the Applicant for the' Commission to make a commitment for two-story units and also for a commit- ment of a specific density on the remaining 17-acre parcel on the west side of the property. It is Staff's position that the Commission not make any recommendation or commitment on either height or density in either the Findings or the Conditions of Approval of this report. Those items will be discussed at the time the Applicant submits a revised tract map on the development on the subdivided portion of this project or a new tract map on the remaining 17-acre parcel. -- Moving along to Condition No. 18 which refers to Fire Marshal requirements, there is an error which the Commission pointed out at the study session with regard to the requirement of "Standard" fire hydrants as noted in the report. Ms. Bonner advised that she spoke with the City Fire Marshal this date and "Super" fire hydrants will be required and the "Super hydrants have a 4th outlet that is also 2-1/2". Therefore, Condition No. 18a. and b. will be revised accordingly. In Condition No. 24, the language will be changed to read: "Desert or native plant species ..... shall be encouraged to be incorporated into the landscaping plans for the site." In accordance with these conditions of approval and the Findings contained in the Staff Report, the Community Development Department is recommending approval of this request. This concluded Staff's report. - 4 - Chairman Thornburgh made note of the fact that the Applicant was made aware at the study session that on July 8 there is a case coming before the Commission that affects the property to the west of this site. At that time, we should have a firm report from the traffic consultant with regard to recommended street widths on Dune Palms and Adams Street. So, after the July 8th meeting, we can make a decision on what the streets will be. Commissioner De Gasperin: Brought up a question presented - by the Applicant at the study session regarding Condition No. 13 (public vs private streets). If we retain Condition No. 13, can the Applicant suggest that the property line go to the middle of the street. Ms. Bonner replied that the R-1 Zone specifically excludes consideration of any portion of a lot that is used exclusively for access as part of the area for minimum lot size. So, yes, he could technically have his lot line go to the centerline and provide an easement for access over it, but you would not be able to consider that area as part of the 7200 square foot lot size. There was further brief discussion regarding cul-de-sac widths and the public vs private streets. Chairman Thornburgh opened the public hearing at 7:22 p.m. Bruce Wilcox (Representative of Lewis Homes), 81-824 Trader Place, Indio, CA. - addressed the conditions with which the Applicant had concerns (these were the same conditions addressed by Principal Planner Bonner earlier). Mary Stoltsman, Real EState Broker, spoke representing property owners in the area of this site, requesting that - the Commission look upon this request favorably. Stan Morse, Morse Consulting Group, who is the engineer on this project, spoke referring to Condition No. 10 regarding cul-de-sac widths. He stated that if the County requirements are not acceptable they would like to request that the 56' right-of-way be allowed. Bill Tackabery, Dune Palms, Inc., developer of proposed project directly across the street from this site on Miles Avenue, spoke in support of this project. There being no further comments, Chairman Thornburgh closed the public hearing at 7:27 p.m. Chairman Thornburgh addressed the matter of the maintenance district stating that he would try to sum up what the Community Development Director said at the study session with regard to this. The developers we have in La Quinta - 5 - on projects that have been approved have all agreed to this maintenance district on the drainage and we are trying to go forward to accomplish this as soon as possible. The most important thing that we can say, rather than put a dollar figure to it today, is that you will be advised, you will be aware, there will be hearings, there will be the process that you will go through. If the figures are too high in your opinion, you will have the opportunity to meet with the Council and the Commission and appeal that. He stated that he knows the Applicant needs a dollar figure, but just now we do not have one. He recommended to Staff that as soon as they get some figures, they be made available to the Applicant. Chairman Thornburgh asked the Commissioners' feelings on the public vs. private streets. Commissioner Walling: Favored public streets with regard to this project. Chairman Thornburgh: Favored public streets for this project, but,.requested more research and background information be provided by Staff for any future projects. Commissioner Brandt: Favored public streets here, but would also like more research done in future instances. Commissioner De Gasperin: Agreed with other Commissioners for the same reasons, plus a concern was raised at the study session regarding precedence setting in future developments north of Highway 111 with respect to other projects which seem to be only condominium projects. This is the only single-family project and therefore, I see a difference. I do not want the world to believe we are setting precedent for all property developments north of Highway 111 by indi- cating this to be public streets because I see a difference _ between this and condominium projects. Commissioner Moran: Agreed with other Commissioners that the streets should be public. After a short discussion, it was the consensus of the Commission to reduce the width of the cul-de-sac streets to 56'. Chairman Thornburgh requested comments from the Commissioners regarding density averaging. Commissioner Walling: Stated he felt the Applicant should stick to the intentions of the General Plan. Chairman Thornburgh: Stated he would have a problem with having the Applicant go to the maximum of the General Plan which is eight units per acre. He felt he would like to see the design of the project before deciding. - 6 - Commissioner Moran: Stated she agreed with Chairman Thornburgh because when you are looking at a project this size, she could not see any density shifting. Where when you are looking at a parcel much larger and you can bring in some Open space and have clusters, it is a little different story. We do have a 7200-square-foot minimum lot size requirement for our single-family sites, so the Applicant could not really get more than 4 units per acre with that. She stated that she personally does not want to have the lots go any smaller than the 7200 square foot requirement. _ Commissioner Brandt: Had no further comment. Commissioner De Gasperin: Stated she would not be inclined to support density averaging. Commissioner De Gasperin wished to state, for the record, that at the study session she had indicated concern that the conditions of approval did not include some sort of support for a traffic signal at Dune Palms Road and Highway 111 and/or support for the improvement of Dune Palms through the wash. To this, Director Stevens answered that Dune Palms was not designated in the 10-year plan for those sorts of improvements and that is why there was no requests for Infrastructure Fees. Therefore, her statement for the record is that she is concerned about the circulation on Dune Palms and the impact that this project will have on Dune Palms and the fact that the City is not ready and able yet to accommodate that. During further discussion regarding a requirement for Lewis Homes to contribute to improvements on Dune Palms Road at the Whitewater River crossing, which would be consistent with the condition placed on Tentative Tract Map No. 20016 located to the north, the Planning Commission directed Staff to review this requirement with the City Attorney and City Engineer to _ determine if it is both fair and reasonable. Chairman Thornburgh expressed the concern that requiring this contribution, in addition to the payment of Infrastructure Fees, could be "double hitting" the Applicant. Staff was further directed to report their findings to the Planning Commission and the City Council. Questioned by Commissioner Walling, the Applicant advised the Commission that they did plan to build on the lots, but did not have a product developed at this time. There being no further comments, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion. 2. Commissioner De Gasperin made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Brandt, to approve Tentative Tract Map No. 21433 in accordance with Exhibit "A" and subject to the attached conditions of approval, as amended. Unanimously Adopted. - 7 - 4. CONSENT CALENDAR Chairman Thornburgh introduced the Consent Calendar which consisted of four requests for approval to construct single-family homes. After discussion of a couple of minor changes in the conditions of approval for Items A and B, he called for a motion. Commissioner Brandt made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Moran, to approve Items A through D of the Consent Calendar. Unanimously Adopted. - 5. BUSINESS Chairman Thornburgh introduced the first item of business as follows: A. MINOR CHANGE TO PUBLIC USE CASE NO. 84-001, A request for approval to redesign the assembly building at the Family Heritage Church of the Valley located at the northwest corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street; Family Heritage Church of the Valley, Applicant. (Continued). He then called for the Staff Report. 1. Principal Planner Bonner advised the Commission that the Applicant is requesting that'the approved design for the assembly building be modified. Their main concern is to reduce the cost so that they can continue construction and finish the church. She referred the Commission to the two alternative design renderings. One alternative is a combina- tion parapet wall with a mansard and the mansard would have concrete or clay tile on it. This would match the concrete tile on both the classrooms and also the first story of this building. The second alternative is to simply have a parapet wall around the entire roof of the building and then to provide a color band on it. Staff's main concern is not so much the appearance, at the north and south ends of the buildings shown in the elevations, but that of the elevation along the longer east and west sides of the building where the second story is 140 feet long. The height of the building cannot be lowered any further because it will be a gymnasium. Therefore, Staff is recommending that as a modification to the design that the mansard type style be approved, and in addition, a condition be added so that the Applicant would provide some additional design treatment on the second story of the buildings, which could include more windows or some sort of relief on the walls in order to break apart .the long, flat wall. Ms. Bonner advised the Commission that Staff is recommending approval of this matter in accordance with Exhibit B, the floor plan submitted to you previously, and Exhibit C which is the mansard roof design, and subject to the conditions including the addi- tion of the request for additional design treatment on the second-story walls. As the Applicant had a representative present, Chairman Thornburgh invited him to speak. Bill Rossworn, Superintendent of the Project since its inception, spoke in favor of the change, stating that - 8 - they liked both of the alternatives, but until they get their cost of construction, they could not choose any one particular design. However, they would like to be able to do either Exhibit A or B when the time comes. Chairman Thornburgh advised Mr. Rossworn that the Commission would have to make a decision tonight of one or the other, and reiterated that Staff has recommended Exhibit B which is the mansard style roof. During the discussion, the Applicant was advised that he still had the option of returning to the original approved design should the monies become available. He would not lose that option as a result of tonight's decision. There being no further discussion, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion. 2. Commissioner Moran made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Walling, to approve the minor change to Public Use Case No. 84-001 in accordance with Exhibits B and C, as amended, and with the mansard style roof as an alternative to the original elevations, and subject to the conditions of approval. Unanimously Adopted. Chairman Thornburgh introduced the last item of business as follows: B. FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 20016, Approval of a one-year extension of time in which to file a final map; Dune Palms, Inc., Applicant. He called for the Staff Report. 1. Principal Planner Bonner informed the Commission that the Applicant agrees with the conditions of approval as proposed. The only matter that is up for discussion is the possibility of the smaller streets, where there is a 24' width, to be widened to 28' per Staff's recommendation. This would involve having to relocate the building pads of which there is a sub- -- stantial number. Therefore, Staff will contact the City Engineer for discussion on this matter. This concern was raised by the Applicant today, so we did not have an opportunity to prepare a response. The Applicant is willing to stand by the conditions as proposed for forwarding on to the City Council and Staff will discuss this with the City Engineer and the Community Development Director in the meantime. Staff is recommending approval of the request for extension of time in accordance with the Findings and subject to the conditions of approval as proposed. There being no discussion, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion. 2. Commissioner De Gasperin made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Brandt, to approve the first extension of time for Tentative Tract Map No. 20016 to July 18, 1987, based upon the above Findings and subject to the conditions of approval as proposed. Unanimously Adopted. - 9 - 6. ADJOURNMENT There being no further items of agenda to come before the Planning Commission, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion to adjourn. Commissioner De Gasperin made a motion, seconded by Commissioner Moran, to adjourn to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on July 8, 1986, at 7:00 p.m., in the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California. The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, was adjourned at 8:21 p.m., June 24, 1986, in the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California. - 10 -