Loading...
PCMIN 04 14 1992 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California April 14, 1992 7: 00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting was called to order at 7:01 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows. The Flag Salute was led by Commissioner Marts. II. ROLL CALL A. Chairwoman Barrows requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Mosher, Ladner, Ellson, Marts, and Chairwoman Barrows. B. Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, Principal Planner Start Sawa, and Department Secretary Betty Anthony. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 92-023: a request of the City to revise Chapter 9. 212, Sign Regulations of the La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, Planning and Zoning. 1. Planning Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the Staff report and recommended it be tabled at this time for revision, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. There being no questions of Staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Michael Bangeter stated his opposition to the Amendment as it would put a burden on the community for by adding another fee. 3. Ms. Cheryl Ward, realtor, stated her objections as it would put unrealistic limitations on the real estate community that would be too restrictive. 4. There being no further discussion Chairwoman Barrows closed the Public Hearing and Commissioners Ellson moved to table the matter till further study could be completed on the Amendment. Unanimously approved. B. Variance 92-021; a request of John Guenther to exceed the 17 foot high building maximum in the SR Zone for a residence under construction. PC4-14 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1992 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. There being no questions of Staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the Public Hearing. Mr. John Guenther, applicant, gave a detailed report as to how he felt this problem had evolved. 3. Commissioner Marts questioned Mr. Guenther as to how this could happen when all the way through the process, his foreman had been warned that the house exceeded the height limit. Mr. Guenther stated how Mr. Rhodes, his foreman, had researched with the different contractors involved and everyone felt the height would not exceed the limit. He stated this was not a deliberate attempt to violate the height limit but a series of errors. 4. Commissioner Ellson questioned the Applicant regarding the architect and whether he was licensed. Mr. Guenther stated he was not a licensed architect but had drawn several hundred homes in La Quinta and was very qualified. 5. Mr. Wade Fuchs, FSB Construction, the framing contractor explained why he felt the roof line exceeded the limit. He also stated this was not an intentional act. Discussion followed regarding the truss design. 6. Mr. Rusty Rhodes, Job Foreman, spoke regarding the problem and how the roof got to be as high as it is and the costs involved in solving the problem. He submitted a letter from the truss company stating their assurance that the roof line would fall within the height limit. 7. There being no further discussion, Chairwoman Barrows closed the Public Hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 8. Planning Director Jerry Herman inquired of the Applicant why the architect did not know what the height limit was in La Quinta. Mr. Guenther stated the architects understanding was that it was 17 feet from the finish floor of the house. 9. Commission Ellson asked if the pitch of the roof was changed would that bring the height limit within the 17 feet. Tom Ha~rtung, Building and Safety Director stated it would. Mr. Rhodes stated that he was informed that with a 50 foot span the safety margin would not allow that. Discussion followed as to other homes in the area that were finaled with the height exceeding 17 feet. PC4-14 2 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1992 10. Commissioner Mosher asked Staff that if the findings used to determined whether the variance could be granted were City ordinances or State law. planning Director Jerry Herman stated they were State Code. 11. Commissioner Ellson asked Staff why the plans are stamped "conditionally approved". Mr. Hartung stated this was to make the contractor aware that not all corrections can be caught during plan check. The purpose of inspections is to catch those corrections that occur as the homes are being constructed. She then asked if a packet is made available to building giving them the information they need to construct a house. Mr. Hartung stated there was a packet made available to anyone who asked for it or to those who asked general questions regarding building a home. 12. Commissioner Mosher stated his empathy for Mr. Guenther, however the Planning Commission must find exceptions to the findings in order to approve the variance. He then read the findings and stated why he felt this variance did not meet those findings. Based on this information, Commissioner Mosher moved and Commissioner Marts seconded a motion to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92-012 denying Variance 92-021. Chairwoman Barrows expressed her empathy and that of the Commission for Mr. Guenther in his situation and felt that Staff should review their process and see if better communication could be made to prevent this problem from reoccurring. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Mosher, Ladner, Ellson, Marts, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. 13. Planning Director Jerry Herman informed the AppLicant that the action of the Planning Commission is final and will be sent to the City Council as a report of action. The AppLicant has the right to file an appeal of this action to the City Council. C. SR Adjustment 92-005; a request of La Quinta Homes for approval of an SR Adjustment to allow a deviation from the SR Zone requirement for an 18 inch roof overhand to allow "0" overhang for single family residences. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Plan~ing and Development Department. PC4-14 3 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1992 2. Commissioner Marts asked Staff if any correspondence had been received from the surrounding neighbors re~arding the adjustment. Staff responded that non had been received. 3. Commissioner Ellson inquired if there would be any problem with the location of the walls in the front yard. Staff responded that the Applicant would be conditioned to comply with all City requirements. 4. Chairwoman Barrows opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Ed Lohrbach, applicant, stated he would be sure the wall at the corner would be within the required setback. He further stated he would like to request the Commission to grant a blanket approval for all the homes they build so he would not have to go through this process with each house. Discussion followed and Staff stated this would not be possible as the City code requires that everyone within the area where the house is to be built must be notified. He further stated that the application could include more than one lot and could be notified concurrently which would help cut down on some of the processing. 5. Chairwoman Barrows asked the Applicant if the windows would be recessed. Mr. Lohrbach explained that the use of recessed windows and/or double/triple window pane, and the use of trees would all be considered and used. 6. Commissioner Ladner inquired what the price range would be. Mr. Lohrbach stated they would be $125,000 and up. 7. Mr. Michael Bangeter, resident, stated he felt this was an opportunity to relieve the property buyer financially by building this type of home and saving the cost of overhangs. He wholeheartedly approved of the home and recommended that the Planning Commission considering altering the City Code to allow more of this type of construction. He felt the Title 24 requirements would handle the City needs for stronger energy restrictions. 8. Chairwoman Barrows closed the Public Hearing as there was no one else who wished to speak. 9. Commissioner Marts stated he had attended the Design Review Board and they had unanimously recommended approval of the project. They also discussed the issue of overhangs. Commissioner Marts stated that although the overhangs do not completely solve the problem of sun exposure, if the Code were rewritten to not require them, the problem would be homes that would be built that may be extremely unattractive. PC4-14 - 4 Planning Commission Minutee April 14, 1992 10. Chairwoman BarrOw~~ §t~ted' that the Planning Commission needs to look into the issue and see what recommendations could be made in relation to Title 24 requirements in relation to City Codes. She asked Staff to place this on a future Study Session. 11. Commissioner Ellson inquired how Title 24 engineers come into play with the builders. Planning Director Jerry Herman stated that all homes are required to have Title 24 calculations submitted at the time of-plan check. 12. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Ladner and seconded by Commissioner Ellson to adopt Minute Motion 92-015 approving the SR Adjustment 92-005. Unanimously approved. C. Preannexation Zoning Amendment 91-071; a request of the City for preannexation zoning from County designation A-l-20 to the City of La Quinta zoning A-l-20 (light agricultural). 1. Planning Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. There being no questions of Staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the Public Hearing and as no one wished to address the Commission, the Public Hearing was closed. 3. There being no discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Mosher and seconded by Commissioner Marts to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92-013 approving Preannexation Zoning Amendment 91-071. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Mosher, Ladner, Ellson, Marts, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. AB SENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. E. Tentative Tract 23773 (Phase 2); a request of Starlight Dunes for approval of a secon<t one year time extension for recordation of final tract map for Phase 2. 1. Planning Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Chairwoman Barrows opened the Public Hearing. Planning Director Jerry Herman stated the Applicant was unable to attend the meeting and had called to express his opposition to Condition #33. There being no one to address the Commission the Public Hearing was closed. PC4-14 5 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1992 3. Commissioner Mosher asked if this was the same condition placed on all similar tracts by the Engineering Department regarding a registered civil engineer being on site to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. Mr. Herman stated it was. 4. Chairwoman Barrows asked Staff if the request of the property owners could be made a condition. Planning Director Jerry Herman stated it does not apply to the time extension but yes a condition could be placed on the tract. 5. Commissioner Ellson asked why it was a problem removing the rubbish and why it has remained so long. Staff stated that Code Enforcement was working on the problem. 6. Commissione~ Mosher stated his concern that the tract should be conditioned to remove the debris. Discussion followed as to how the condition should be worded. In addition, it was stressed that Condition #20 regarding maintenance of the landscape buffer strips should be enforced as well as the planting strip on Starlight Lane. 7. Following the discussion, Commissioner Mosher moved and Commissioner Marts seconded a motion to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92-014 recommending approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract 23773 (Phase 2) Extension of Time subject to the revised conditions #27.b. and the addition of Condition #34, "Subject to the developer complying with the requirement to correct the problem of soil, rock, rubbish, and concrete storage on the sub3eet property, prior to approval by the City Council". ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Mosher, Ladner, Ellson, Marts, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. AB SENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. IV. PUBLIC CO~T: - None V. BUSINESS SESSION A. Tentative Tract 25499 (Revised); a request of Sunrise Company for approval of first one year extension of time. 1. Principal Plar~ner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. PC4-14 6 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 1992 2. There being no questions of Staff, Commissioner Marts moved and Commissioner Ladner seconded a motion to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92-015 recommending approval of Tentative Tract 25499 (Revised) first one year extension of time. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Mosher, Ladner, Ellson, Marts, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. There being no other corrections, Commissioner Ellson moved and Commissioner Mosher seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of the regular meeting of March 24, 1992, as corrected. Unanimously approved. VII. OTHER - None VIII. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner Ladner and seconded by Commissioner Marts to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting on April 28, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers. This meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:12 P.M., April 14, 1992. PC4-14 7