Loading...
PCMIN 10 26 1993 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION- CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California October 26, 1993 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting was called to order at 7:03 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows and Commissioner Abels was asked to lead the flag salute. II. ROLL CALL A. Chairwoman Barrows requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Marts, Abels, and Chairwoman Barrows. C. Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand-Cherry, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Conditional Use Permit 93-008 and Variance 93-023; a request of Agustin Martinez for approval to remodel and enlarge an existing 1,581 square foot commercial building and a request to vary from the C-V-N Zoning District standards (street sideyard setback) and modify the City's Off-Street Parking Code requirements. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Commissioner Adolph asked if there was an existing common access easement agreement between the two properties. Staff stated there was no such document in writing to the City's knowledge. It appeared to be a mutually agreed upon arrangement. 3. Commissioner Adolph asked if there would be adequate access for the gas trucks to refuel the existing Circle K gas pump tanks. Staff stated they did not know, but it appeared they could be services. 4. Commissioner Adolph questioned whether the previous owner (the pharmacy) had any liability problems with regards to the shared parking. Staff stated they had no knowledge if there had been. PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 5. Commissioner Adolph questioned the access to the dumpster by the disposal company. Staff stated that Waste Management had received a copy of the plans and were asked for their comments and none had been received. However, the final construction plans require their approval. 6. Commissioner Adolph asked what the City's position was regarding driveway access onto Calle Tampico. Staff stated this area was governed by the Village Specific Plan which had very specific requirements and this was one of the variances the applicant was requesting a deviation from. Discussion followed regarding the driveway access and parking spaces. 7. Commissioner Adolph stated his concern about the architectural design by allowing the building to project to the property line on the south elevation. He felt this would open a "pandora's box". Staff stated that this was an isolated case as future buildings would be new construction and they would have to justify special circumstances, whereas this was an existing building. Discussion followed regarding possible alternatives for the design of the remodeled structure. 8. Commissioner Ellson asked whether a stipulation could be placed on the applicant that as the land surrounding the project developed a joint access program could be provided at that time. Commissioners discussed with staff the effects of future development and the parking that would be created. 9. Chairwoman Barrows asked if the wall dividing the parking lot could be shortened and not extend out to the street but leave enough room for vehicles to exit. 10. There being no further discussion with staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public hearing. Mr. Charles Garland, representing the applicant discussed the project with the Commission and asked that instead of a wall perhaps a solution would be curbing. 11. Commissioner Abels stated the curb could end at the point the building ends. 12. Chairwoman Barrows asked that adjacent to the curb be heavily landscaped. 13. Commissioner Adolph asked if trees could be put sawtoothed into the curb to help meet the parking lot shade requirements. Mr. Garland stated he had no objections. Discussion followed regarding the location of the existing Oleanders on the north property line. PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 14. Commissioner Adolph suggested that the concrete curbing be reduced to allow room for the trash trucks to have access to the north of the proposed building expansion. 15. Commissioner Adolph asked why the restroom door opened directly into the meat locker. Discussion followed regarding Health Department requirements and the location of the restroom. 16. Commissioner Adolph asked whether the walk-in freezer was a freezer or a cooler. Mr. Garland stated it was both. Discussion followed regarding the contents of the cooler. 17. Commissioner Adolph asked the applicant what the depth of the roof parapet would be. Mr. Garland stated it would be four feet and would hide all the mechanical equipment. 18. Commissioner Adolph brought up the issue of recessing the facade away from the property line. Discussion followed regarding the facade and roof structure and how this could be accomplished. 19. Commissioner Ellson stated her concern that the signs be restricted so as not to clutter the store-front windows. Staff stated the signs would have to be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board. 20. Commissioner Ellson asked that the planting on the west elevation be appropriate to discourage graffiti. 21. Chairwoman Barrows asked that the lighting be adequate for security. Mr. Garland stated this was a condition. 22. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the public hearing. 23. Commissioners discussed among themselves the issue of common access and shared parking. The consensus was that a concrete curb be required along the east property line with landscaping. The entire plan would be reviewed by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission. 24. Commissioners discussed Conditions//13 being eliminated;//39 amended to not eliminate the sidewalk but move it to the curb;//38 be amended to require a curb and not a masonry screen wall. 25. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer asked that the Commission consider the issue that Circle K may have "prescriptive rights" in regards to the access that they have "traditionally and historically" had. He went on to explain "prescriptive rights" and stated the case(s) needed to be continued PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 for two weeks to give staff time to research the issue. Commissioners asked if Circle K had been informed of the application. Staff stated the property owner was noticed and no comment had been received. Staff and the Commission discussed possible alternatives for access onto the site. 26. Staff stated the problem with prescriptive rights was in regards to the rear access off of Avenida Bermudas. Discussion followed regarding the problem. 27. Commissioner Abels moved to continue the item to give staff time to investigate the problem. Commissioner Ellson seconded the motion. Commissioner Adolph asked staff if the Commission could approve the item on the condition that what the Commission is doing is legal after advise of counsel. Staff stated the Commission could approve the case but it would not prohibit Circle K from filing an injunction and stopping the construction. Staff stated they felt the item should be resolved before the Commission approves the project. 28. Commissioner Abels withdrew his motion and Commissioner Ellson withdrew her second. 29. Commissioner Abels moved to conceptually approve the building design but continued the parking landscaping and circulation for two weeks. Commissioner Marrs seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously subject to staff's recommendation and with the following changes: a. The roof line to be recessed back as far as possible (2 feet minimum). b. Conditions//13 and #39 of the Conditional Use Permit would be eliminated. B. Street Name Change 93-003; a request of La Quinta Golf Properties, "The Quarry", for approval to change the entry road name from Schwabacker Road to Quarry Lane. 1. Principal Planner Start 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 comments of staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the public hearing. There being no public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the hearing. PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 3. There being no discussion, Commissioners Ellson/Abels moved and seconded to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 93-039 recommending approval of Street Name Change 93-003 to the City Council. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Marrs, Abels, Chairwoman Barrows. NOES' None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT: None V. BUSINESS SESSION: A. Tentative Tract 23269; a request of Century Homes, Mr. John Pavelak for approval of architectural plans for Phase VI. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Commissioner Adolph asked if the applicant intended to install the sideyard fencing and of what material. Staff stated he was conditioned to put masonry fencing in the rear but they were allowed to install wood fencing in the interior sideyards. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairwoman Barrows asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Pavelak spoke regarding the project. 3. Commissioner Ellson asked if the applicant owned the project to the west of Las Vistas, Phase VII and if so what size home would be built. Mr. Pavelak stated they owned it jointly with Triad Pacific and their plans were for homes ranging from 1,600 square feet to 2,300 square feet. 4. Commissioner Ellson asked if the landscaping would be upscaled as compared to the other tract. Mr. Pavelak stated it would be compatible. 5. Commissioner Adolph asked why there was a lack of greenery and large trees. Mr. Pavelak stated they would address this issue. 6. Ms. Jenny Plantz, Topaz property owner, asked that the Planning Commission give these tracts the same consideration and concern that they expressed for the Village area. She felt wood fences should be outlawed in the City of La Quinta. PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 7. Ms. Allyson Devinney, La Quinta Vistas property owner, stated that she had spoken with a Century Homes sales person and they were advertising Plan 2. Chairwoman Barrows stated they are being approved for Plans 3, 4, and 5. Discussion followed between Ms. Devinney, the applicant and the Commission regarding what units would be sold. 8. Ms. Devinney asked how wood fences were allowed to be built. Staff clarified that the fences were constructed before the current fencing regulations were put in place. She further requested that no two story units be allowed. 9. Commissioner Ellson asked what could be required regarding the fencing. Discussion followed between the Commission and staff regarding the R-1 standards and the conditions suggested by staff regarding the fencing. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Abels and seconded by Commissioner Adolph to adopt Minute Motion 93-048, subject to staff recommendations. The motion carried unanimously. B. Plot Plan 93-510; a request of La Quinta Real Estate Development Partners for approval of new units for Tract 23268, Lots 24-33 and Lots 130-139 on the west side of Harland Drive off Seeley Drive, north of Miles Avenue. 1. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand-Cherry presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Commissioner Ellson asked if all the fencing would be block. Staff stated that staff was proposing it all to block. Discussion followed regarding the existing fencing. 3. Commissioner Adolph asked what was proposed for the existing fence adjacent to the Mobile Home park that was falling down. Staff asked that the applicant answer this question. 4. Mr. Rick Snyder, representing Acacia, addressed the Commission and stated they agreed with all the Conditions of Approval except Condition #19. They would like to follow the same standard conditions established in the area which are wood fences on the rear and sideyard. The front yard would be slump block wall with decorative wrought iron. PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 5. Chairwoman Barrows requested that two specimen trees be planted instead of only one. 6. Commissioner Abels stated his preference to see the condition requiring the block wall be required. 7. Commissioner Ellson requested that on Plan "B" and "D" where the back of the house is to the south, a trellis effect be applied to give shade. Mr. Snyder agreed to build the overhang. 8. Commissioner Ellson asked why the applicant went with a new architectural unit when the units were selling. Mr. Snyder stated they felt a new unit type was needed. 9. Mr. Snyder stated his concern for being required to put a block wall up when the tracts adjacent have wood fencing. Discussion followed regarding the condition of the existing wood fence and the surrounding tracts. _ 10. Commissioner Adolph asked why the applicant did not continue with the stone work on the front of the houses. Mr. Snyder stated he felt the new plan was more compatible. 11. Commissioner Ellson asked what the price range would be. Mr. Snyder stated they would be as much as the market would allow, but would range between $120,000 to $175,000. 12. Mr. Jack Stotz, Acacia resident, stated that the property owners of Acacia were concerned about the compatibility of the new units. He stated that 50% of the existing homes are greater than 2,000 square feet and what is proposed is 80% under 2,000 square feet. 13. Mr. Max Flora, Acacia resident, stated that he would request that the fencing not be wood, that the noise level during construction be controlled, and that the trucks be rerouted to North Harland and not travel down Seeley Drive. 14. Mr. Katie Tomas, Acacia resident, asked that wood fences not be allowed, and that she bought her home because of the stone front treatment. --- 15. Mr. Russell Robertson, La Quinta resident, stated he was glad to see the Planning Commission was trying to make tracts more compatible. PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 16. Mr. Bob Grimes, Sagebrush resident, asked if the developer had to come back to the Planning Commission approval for the next group of homes in this phase. Staff stated only if they changed any part of the design. 17. Staff stated that they had counted the number of houses in Phase I that are over 2,000 square feet in size and there are approximately 17-20 units and that represents 21% of the tract. 18. Commissioner Ellson asked if the mix was determined at this point or is it determined by the market in regards to what sells will be built. Staff stated it would be determined by the market. 19. Mr. Blain Grimes, Acacia resident, asked that the Commission keep consistency in the phase with the same amenities. He was also concerned for the smaller units. 20. Mr. Bob Grimes, stated that his son's house could have a 1,300 square foot house next to his because the mix is not predetermined. Mr. Snyder stated he would only build the larger house plans on each side of Mr. Grimes house. 21. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioners Ellson/Marrs to adopt Minute Motion 93-050, subject to the attached conditions that will include the block wall, shading on Plans "B" and "D" when they have a southern exposure, and at least one 24" box size specimen tree be planted. Discussion followed among the Commissioners regarding the requirement for a block wall. Following the discussion, Commissioner Marrs withdrew his second. The motion died for a lack of a second. 22. Commissioners Marrs/Abels moved to adopt Minute Motion 93-050 subject to the attached conditions, and that the existing fencing on the north would remain and the existing fencing on the east would remain and be repaired. Commissioner Adolph asked if a condition was being placed on the developer regarding mix. Staff recommended that the mix be required to be 20 of each plan. 23. Commissioners Marrs/Abels amended their motion to include a condition that at least 20% of the units proposed on the 75 lots be the larger unit of 2,360 square feet. The motion failed with Commissioners Marrs, Abels, voting yes and Commissioners Ellson, Adolph, and Chairwoman Barrows voting no. PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 24. Commissioner Abels/Marrs moved to adopt Minute Motion 93-050 subject to the attached conditions, shading on Plans "B" and "D" when they have a southern exposure, and at least one 24" box size specimen tree be planted, and that the existing fencing on the north would remain and the existing fence on the east would remain and be repaired, and that maximum 20% of the units constructed on the 75 lots would be of the smaller size, 1,280 square feet. The motion carried on the following vote: Commissioners Abels, Marrs, Chairwoman Barrows voting yes, and Commissioners Adolph and Ellson voting no. C. Street Name Change 93-004; a request of Lake La Quinta, Wilma-La Quinta and Landrex California for approval of a Resolution of Intent to set a public hearing to consider a street name change from Via Soud to Via Avante. 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 asked if the applicant wished to address the Commission. Mr. Kurt Dunham, Sr. representing Lake La Quinta stated their reasons for the name change. 3. There being on questions of the applicant, Commissioners Ellson/Marrs moved to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 93-040 adopting a Resolution of Intention setting December 14, 1993, as the date for a public hearing to consider Street Name Change 93-004. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Marts, Abels, Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. D. Street Name Chant, e 93-005; a request of the City for approval of a street name change for Via Caliente, and/or Forbes Circle, and or West Harland Drive. 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. Commissioners discussed with staff how the problem came to be and -- which streets should be changed with the least amount of trouble to the property owners. Following the discussion, staff was instructed to write PC10-26 Planning Commission Minutes October 26, 1993 letters to those property owners on Las Vistas and see if they had any objection to changing to Seeley Drive and if they concur, set the item for public hearing. 3. Following the discussion, it was moved by Commissioners Abels/Marrs to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 93-041 recommending to the City Council that West Harland Drive be changed to Forbes Circle and that Lowe Avenue be changed to Bradford Circle. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Adolph, Ellson, Marrs, Abels, Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. There being no corrections to the Minutes of October 12, 1993, Commissioners Abels/Marts moved and seconded a motion to approve the Minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. VII. OTHER Staff informed the Commission that a tentative date had been set for a joint meeting between the City Council, Planning Commission, and Design Review Board for November 23, 1993, at 7:00 P.M. VIII. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Marrs to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on November 9, 1993, at 7:00 P.M. at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers. This meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:25 P.M., October 26, 1993. PC10-26