PCMIN 12 28 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
December 28, 1993 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting was called to order at 7:01 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows who lead
the flag salute.
II. ROLL CALL
A. Chairwoman Barrows requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Adolph,
Ellson, Marrs, Abels, and Chairwoman Barrows.
B. Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Mary Wagner,
Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer.
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS-
A. Continued - Zoning Ordinance Amendment 93-039; a request of the City to
amend Title 9, Planning and Zoning of the La Quinta Municipal Code regarding
minimum house size and compatibility with residential subdivisions.
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. Staff informed the Commission that amendments to the
ordinance had been made and were distributed. In addition written
comments had been received and were distributed.
2. Mr. Ed Kibbey, representing Building Industry Association (BIA),
requested that the Planning Commission continue this matter again and set
up a committee to review the document and make recommendations.
3. Mr. Allen Levin, representing BIA, went through the document and
commented on Page 1 Items//5, Page 2 Items//6 and #7, Page 3 Item #1,
Page 4 Item 2d, Page 5 Items//4 and//6, Page 6 Item #8, and in addition
there were no provisions for appeal to the standards.
PC12-28 1
Planning Commission Minutes
Decembero28, 1993
4. Mr. Russel Robertson, resident, asked that if a committee is formed that
the residents would like to be included on that committee, and asked if
there was any way to have more input from the residents regarding
projects to be approved by the City.
5. Mr. Michael Marix, builder in the Valley, requested that a committee be
formed to evaluate and give input into the ordinance.
6. Mr. Joseph Irwin, La Quinta resident, asked that the Commission not
delay this any longer. In addition the ordinance should require no less
than a 10% deviation in house sizes.
7. Mr. Neil Ludlam, La Quinta resident, spoke in favor of the ordinance and
in particular the minimum house size.
8. Mr. Robert Tyler, La Quinta resident, spoke in favor of the ordinance but
questioned some aspects of it. Objected to the fee schedule.
9. Ms. Christine Clarke, representing STAMKO Development, felt the
ordinance should be divided into two dealing with two separate issues.
Expressed her concern that the City should be diversified in regards to the
house size and provide housing for all aspects of the financial spectrum.
If the minimum square footage is 1400 then allow a deviation for
diversity.
10. Mr. Jay Foster, La Quinta resident, expressed his concern that their
investment in their home might be downgraded.
11. Mr. Curb McCalless, 78-575 Villeta, asked that the area be maintained
with the high quality of homes that are built in this area now.
12. Mr. Bob Dupay, 44-960 Tortolla, objected to lowering the minimum
house size as it will reduce home values.
13. Chairwoman Barrows asked staff to explain the availability of staff reports
to the public prior to the meetings. Staff explained that all copies are
available to the public on the Friday prior to the meeting.
14. Ms. Sally Young, real estate broker, stated her concern for the ordinance
and asked that the Commission separate the two issues. She felt the
minimum square footage for the City should be dealt with separately. Her
concern was that a minimum of 1400 square footage puts the house price
range out of the market for what can be sold.
PC12-28 2
Planning Commission Minutes
December.28, 1993
15. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the
public hearing and opened the discussion to the Commission.
16. Commissioner Adolph stated he felt the major concern was the amount of
affordable housing that was available in La Quinta. After checking with
a local realtor he was told there were 80 homes in La Quinta averaging
between $70,000 and $100,000. Therefore there was affordable housing
in La Quinta. But, in the existing tracts where new homes are to be built,
or next to an existing tract, it should be:
"New housing being added to an existing tract development shall not be
less than 10 percent of the square footage of the minimum size house
within that development and that the proposed minimum square foot
houses shall number in direct proportion to the existing minimum house
size houses percentage wise. There shall be no limit to the larger houses.
Due to particular lot configurations, unknown at the time, a developer
may petition through the planning process for a conditional variance to the
minimum house standards in order to make a particular lot livable."
17. Commissioner Marrs stated he felt the 10 percent below the smallest
house was needed but there was no need to have the 10 percent above the
largest. Discussion followed and a consensus was made that no limit
should be placed on the largest size house allowed to be built.
18. Commissioner Abels stated his agreement that 10 percent deviation from
the smallest unit should be allowed.
19. Staff asked for clarification on the direct proportion to the houses built.
Commissioner Adolph explained and discussion followed.
20. Chairwoman Barrows stated her concern about limiting the number of
units a developer can build of a specific unit type. Commissioner Ellson
agreed that a broader interpretation would be better and agrees with the
10 percent deviation from the smallest unit and that no house would be
smaller than allowed in the R-1 zone. It was determined that the market
conditions would determine the mix and this would allow some flexibility
for the developer and home buyer.
21. Commissioner Ellson asked that the wording for #8 in the section
regarding Development Standards for Compatibility Review Process be
revised to read, "no unit may be less than 10 percent smaller than the
existing smallest unit". Discussion followed as to possible wording.
Following discussion it was determined to change the wording to: "The
PC12-28 3
Planning Commission Minutes
December_ 28, 1993
smallest single family dwelling units proposed within a partially developed
subdivision may deviate in size so that the proposed units are no more
than 10% smaller in size than the smallest previously built unit in the
subdivision."
22. Chairwoman Barrows asked what opportunity the developer would have
to increase the percentage. Staff stated there was no process to deviate
from the required percentage. Discussion followed as to whether an
appeal process should be provided.
23. Chairwoman Barrows asked the Commissioners how they wanted to
address a new development abutting or adjacent to an existing
development.
24. Commissioner Adolph suggested the following wording: "The minimum
square foot house within the new development shall not be less than the
minimum square foot house in the adjacent development. The minimum
square foot house shall not exceed 20 percent of the total tract
development. Should the new development abutt two or more existing
developments, then the average of the minimum square foot houses in
each tract shall be used as a benchmark to establish within 10 percent, the
minimum square foot house that can be built. The minimum square foot
house would be no less than 1300 square feet in any case."
25. Chairwoman Barrows asked for clarification of what abutting
developments was. Commissioner Adolph explained. Commissioner
Ellson stated she felt this was taking it a step too far. Discussion followed
regarding controlling the size of units of new developments.
26. Chairwoman Barrows suggested the Commission take each issue under
Compatibility one at a time. The following determinations were as
follows:
Item #1: The Precise Plan process shall be used for all single family
dwelling units proposed for construction unless the compatibility review
process was required.
Item #2: No changes.
Minor and Major Design Deviation:
PC12-28 4
Planning Commission Minutes
December_28, 1993
An introduction sentence was added to this section to read, "The Planning
and Development Department shall make the determination of whether a
design deviation is major or minor using the following criteria:"
Items #1 and #2: No change
Compatibility Review Process
Item #2c: A detailed site plan delineating all siting aspects of the
development (i.e., setbacks, topography, fencing locations, locations
provided for ground mounted mechanical and heating/air conditioning
systems, parking, accessways, adjacent streets, utilities, and drainage.
Item #2d: A conceptual site landscaping plan, showing a listing of
quantities, species, location and plant sizes to be incorporated into the
final landscaping of the project. The final approved landscape plan must
be stamped "approved" by the Riverside County Agricultural
Commissioner's office prior to thc issuancc of a building pcrmit final
inspection.
Item #2e: When new units are proposed adjacent to existing unit(s) show,
with cnough in detail, the architectural relationship of the existing and
proposed unit(s). This may be done with photos, new elevations, etc.
Items #3. #4. #5. #6: No change.
Completeness of Application: No change.
Development Standards for Compatibility Review Process:
Item #1: No change
Item #2: A two story house cannot be constructed adjacent to or abutting
a lot line of an existing single story home constructed in a prior phase of
the same subdivision, unless proof can be provided showing that a two
story unit was proposed for the lot by the prior builder.
Items #3: No change.
PC12-28 5
Planning Commission Minutes
December. 28, 1993
Item //4: Ncw homcs shall bc thc same size and architectural detailing
(including garages) whcn located on thc samc side of thc strcct and abut
existing unit(s) within a partially built out phase or a new phase of thc
subdivision. When homes exist on cithcr side of a vacant lot a proposed
unit must bc compatible with thc larger existing unit.
Item//5: A proposed single family dwelling unit must contain similar b.~e
compatible in terms of:
a. architectural material such as roof material, window treatment and
garage door style.
b. Colors
c. Roof lines
as the existing units, or units which are approved for construction as
determined on the plans and materials board, within the same subdivision
unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission.
Item //6: At least one specimen {24" box) tree shall be provided in the
front or street side yard in addition to as part of the landscape
requirements of the zone.
Item #7: No change.
Item //8: Thc singlc family dwclling units proposed within a partially
developed subdivision cannot deviate by more than ten pcrccnt (10%)
from thc square footagc of thc existing or approved units provided thc
deviation docs not create a unit smaller than thc smallest unit constructed
within thc subdivision (i.e., if thc units approved range from 1,200 to
2,300 square feet, and thc smallest unit constructed is 1,250 square fect,
thcn thc smallest unit that could bc constructed is 1,250 square feet and
thc largest is 2,530 squarc fect).
Changed to read:
The smallest single family dwelling units proposed within a partially
developed subdivision may deviate in size so that the proposed units are
no more than 10% smaller in size than the smallest previously built unit
in the subdivision.
Item//9' No change.
PC12-28 6
Planning Commission Minutes
Decembero 28, 1993
Review by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission Review. No
change.
Public Hearing Process. Discussion regarding enlarging the area to be notified,
but due to the cost it was left at 300 feet.
Appeal Process: No change.
Fees: No change.
Single Family Dwelling Unit Development Standards:
Item gl: Minimum gross livable area shall be 1,400 1.300 square feet,
excluding the garage, as measured from the exterior walls of the dwelling.
Item #2: Bedroom dimensions: a minimum of tcn foot clcar width and
dcpth dimcnsions bedroom size of 100 square feet, as measured from the
interior walls of the room.
Items #3.//4: No change.
Item #5' Access between house and garage: a separate pedestrian door
into the garage shall be provided as either an interconnecting door
providing direct access between the dwelling and garage, or a pedestrian
door leading outside to a paved walkway arca cnclosed within a secured,
walled arca and which provides direct access to a keyed entry into the
dwelling.
Item #6: Mechanical and related equipment: when ground-mounted,
heating and cooling mechanical equipment shall be ground mounted and
screened from all sides. When equipment v,,et4s is located on pitched
roofs and o_rr equipmcnt on flat roofs wells and/or screening must be
provided on all sides must bc screcned. The screening must be an integral
part of the architectural design of the house.
Item #7: Thc cavc cnd of all dwclling roofs which run parallcl with
intcrior sidc propcrty lincs, mcasuring a distancc of fivc fect or lcss from
thc common propcrty linc, shall bc equipped with a rain guttcr, and
downspout directed to an approved drainagcway.
--
Item #8. g9. #I0. #1 I. #12. and #13' No change.
PC12-28 7
Planning Commission Minutes
December_ 28, 1993
Item #14: Delete until the R-1 Zoning update. Extcrior matcrials: siding
shall bc stucco, plastcr, rock, masonry or a similar matcrial. Wood, or
othcr similar matcrial(s) may bc used for facia trim, but may not makc up
morc than tcn pcrccnt (10%) of thc surfacc wall of any sidc of thc houm.
Roofing matcrials shall cithcr bc clay or concrctc tilc (Class "A") for
pitched roofs as dcfined by thc Uniform Building Codc (UBC). Thc
Planning Commission may approvc altcrnativc roof matcrials using thc
adjustmcnt proccss contained in thc SR Zonc rcgulations.
Item #15: Delete until the R-1 Zoning update. Eavcs: roof cavcs must
cxtcnd a minimum or' 18 inchcs from thc wall cxccpt for flat roof houscs.
Single Family Dwelling Unit Approval Process
One of the following methods shall be used to review new single family
dwelling unit proposals prior to the issuance of a building permit.
Item #1: The precise plan process (Section 9.42.110) shall be used for
single family dwelling units proposed for construction on a lot within the
City unless the compatibility review process is required, a) an approved
specific plan; b) a subdivision recorded aftcr May 1, 1982, whcrc thc unit
has reccived City architectural approval and no changc is proposed; c) thc
SR Zoning District; d) a subdivision recorded prior to May 1, 1982; and
c) minor dcsign dcviation.
Item//2: No change.
27. Commissioner Ellson thanked everyone who assisted in compiling this
document to help the City come to a compromise between the builders,
residents, and the City standards.
28. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Ellson/Abels to amend Title 9, Planning and Zoning of the
La Quinta Municipal Code regarding minimum house size and
compatibility with residential subdivisions by adoption of Resolution 93-
046, as amended, and recommend approval of Zoning Ordinance
Amendment 93-039 to the City Council.
Commissioner Adolph expressed his objection to some of the
recommendations in the amendment.
PC12-28 8
Planning Commission Minutes
Decembero28, 1993
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Ellson, Marts, Abels,
Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: Commissioner
Adolph. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
A motion was made by Commissioner Ellson and seconded by
Commissioner Marts to request the City Council form a committee as
recommended by the Building Industry Association to review the R-1
Zoning Ordinance update as prepared by the consultants. Unanimously
approved.
Chairwoman Barrows excused the Commission for a five minute break.
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT: - None
IV. BUSINESS SESSION
A. Sign Application 93-215. Amendment gl; a request of Laguna de la Paz to amend
and relocate the previously approved permanent monument sign for the existing
residential development.
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 what landscaping was on the site at present.
Staff explained that it consisted of lawn, trees, and palms.
3. Commissioner Abels asked what the lighting of the sign would be. Staff
explained that they did not submit a lighting program for the proposed
sign. Discussion followed regarding possible landscape lighting.
Following the discussion, it was recommended that Condition #2 be
changed to read, "approved by the Planning Director".
4. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Marrs/Adolph to adopt
Minute Motion 93-056 approving Sign Application 93-215, Amendment
#1, subject to conditions as amended. Unanimously approved.
B. Approval of Architectural Plans; a request of Mr. Jimmy R. Crowell, Century-
Crowell Communities for approval of architectural plans for Phase VII of the La
Quinta Highlands Tract 23269 - La Quinta Del Rey.
--
PC12-28 9
Planning Commission Minutes
December_ 28, 1993
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 Ellson asked if in light of the discussion on the
Compatibility Ordinance, whether the two story house on Lot 238 would
be an issue. Staff explained that the precedent had been established in the
tract and homeowners and buyers were aware that two story units were
planned for these lots.
3. Mr. Jimmy Crowell, applicant addressed the Commission regarding his
request.
4. Ms. Allyson DeVinney, resident of La Quinta Vistas, stated her objection
to the project due to the lack of parking in the cul-de-sac. She felt the
garage conversions would create a problem for the need for additional
parking on the street and there was none available in the cul-de-sacs. She
stated that the square footage of the proposed homes should be the same
as the existing houses and three car garages should be included with the
plans.
5. Mr. Robert Tyler, resident of La Quinta Vistas, thanked Mr. Crowell for
being responsive to the residents concerns as well as the Planning
Department staff. He stated his concern that the garage conversion was
being done to increase the square footage of the homes that was necessary
to meet the City requirements, but the floor plan they were using are
smaller than the surrounding homes. He did not feel these homes met the
proposed compatibility standards being proposed by the City.
6. Mr. Crowell, applicant addressed some of the issues raised by the
residents. He stated he would be willing to put in the concrete necessary
to accommodate a three car garage to allow additional on-site parking.
He further stated he would be willing to use wrought iron /'or any fence
gates.
7. Commissioner Ellson asked the applicant to clarify Plan 5L as to whether
or not a bathroom would be provided in the loft area. Mr. Crowell stated
there was no provision for a bathroom on his loft plans.
8. Commissioner Ellson questioned the parking space generated by the size
of the houses proposed. Discussion followed regarding the house plans
and the possible parking problem on the existing cul-de-sac and possible
solutions.
PC12-28 10
Planning Commission Minutes
December.28, 1993
9. Following the discussion, the Commissioners requested that the developer
provide detailed site plans for Lots //173, //175, //177, //185 for the
Planning Commission's review.
10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Adolph/Ellson to adopt Minute Motion 93-057 approving
the architectural plans for Phase VII of the La Quinta Highlands Tract
23269 - La Quinta Del Rey, subject to conditions and that the developer
submit a detailed concept site/landscape plan for Lots #173, //175,//177,
and #185. Unanimously approved.
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. There being no corrections to the Minutes of December 14, 1993, Commissioners
Ellson/Abels moved and seconded a motion to approve the Minutes as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
VII. OTHER- None
__ VIII. ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Marts/Adolph to adjourn this regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
January I1, 1994, at 7:00 P.M. at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers. This meeting
of the La Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at 11:41 P.M., December 28, 1993.
PC12-28 11