PCMIN 07 26 1994 MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION -CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California
July 26, 1994 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Vice Chairman Abels.
Commissioner Barrows led the flag salute.
II. ROLL CALL
A. Vice Chairman Abels requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Anderson,
Butler, Gardner, Barrows, and Vice Chairman Abels.
B. Commissioners Barrows/Anderson moved and seconded a motion to excuse
Commissioners Adolph and Newldrk. Unanimously approved.
C. Staff Present: Principal Planner Stan Sawa, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell,
Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, and Department
Secretary Betty Sawyer.
III. PUBLIC COMMENT- None
IV. PUBLIC HEARING
A. PLOT PLAN 89-4 13 (EXTENSION OF TIME); a request of KSL Recreation
Corporation for a one year extension of time for a previously approved 1000-
room hotel on +65 acres in an R-3 Zoned area.
1. Staff stated this item was on the agenda as it had been advertised and
noticed, but after researching the project it was determined that no further
extensions were available. No action is required by the Commission.
Commissioner Butler withdrew from the meeting due to a possible conflict of interest in the next
public hearing.
B. PLOT PLAN 94-529; a request of Century-CroweR Communities for a
compatibility review of new model homes for the Rancho Ocotillo project.
Planning Commi~ion Minule8
July 26, 1~4
]5. Commissioner Anderson stated that he would prefer the landscaping plans
be reviewed by thc Planning Commission.
]6. Commissioner Barrows asked if Condition #28 should be modified to
address thc landscaping. Discussion followed regarding thc landscaping.
]7. Vice Chairman Abels stated that Lot 12 (behind thc original Rancho
Ocotillo model homes) was listed as a two story and this was not
acceptable. Mr. Cunningham stated he would change thc house to a
single story unit.
18. Commissioner Barrows asked what the difference was in height between
the two story and one story unit. Mr. Cunningham stated it would add
five feet. Commissioner Anderson asked what the floor to floor height
was. Mr. Cunningham stated he was uncertain as to the footprint but it
was approximately the same as the existing homes. Commissioner
Anderson stated that the two story plan scaled approximately 23'6"
above the finish grade. Discussion followed.
19. Commissioner Anderson asked staff if there were any documents in place
regarding the east property line wall with La Quinta Palms. City Attorney
Dawn Honeywell stated she would need to review the fries. The
developer has to comply with all the conditions of the tract, but it was
unknown whether there were any conditions imposed on the tract or
whether it was a private agreement between the previous developer and
the adjacent property owners. Staff would need to review this to
determine whether there were any binding conditions and to determine
what the City's responsibility is regarding the matter. She stated the
matter should be continued in order to allow time for further research.
Commissioner Anderson asked if it was possible for the Commission to
act on the project and add a condition to address the issue. Ms.
Honeywell stated a condition could be added if the applicant did not object
to the vagueness of the condition.
20. Commissioner Barrows asked that if the elevations are plain, could the
Commission make a recommendation on how to change them.
Commissioner Anderson made suggestions. Mr. Cunningham stated there
architects had designed the units to resemble the strong points of the
existing units. He further stated the guest house was at the discretioa of
the buyer. Discussion followed regarding the market demand.
Planning Commission Minutes
July 26, 1994
21. Commissioner Anderson .stated he did not object to the garage windows
as they did help t6 ~ ~e~l to the front elevations.
22. Mr. Cunningham stated his objection to the Commission consideration of
continuing the matter to September. He felt strongly that since neither
staff nor the applicants were able to find any proof of the agreement with
La Quinta Palms prior to the meeting, this request was unjustified and
would cause a great hardship on the applicant. He further stated that the
issue before them was regarding compatibility and this problem did not
relate to project compatibility. However, he would continue to pursue the
issue and would come to a solution with the La Quinta Palms
Homeowners' Association.
23. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated a condition could be written to keep
from delaying the project, but because staff has no knowledge of the
issue, it was difficult to word a condition. She felt the problem was a
compatibility problem because the wall is part 'of the tract design.
Discussion followed ~ regarding the issue.
24. Mr. Ernest Vincent, counsel for the applicant, asked staff to clarify the
condition.
25. Mr. Robert Metkus, stated the Planning Commission should look at this
issue in earnest and intelligence and review the prior approval prior to
approving this new request. He further stated that if Lot 17 was planned
to be a two story unit, he objected to any two story units on the east
boundary.
26. Staff reviewed the changes to the Conditions of Approval with the
Commission as follows:
a. Condition #15: no windows in the garage doors.
b. Condition #18: a requirement would be added to restrict the
developer from placing two story homes along the tract(s)
boundary and along Camino Del Oro.
c. Condition #19: Minimum 3' X 3' cross members were to be used
in the construction of the trellis.
d. Condition g28: The landscaping design, setbacks, and the number
(percentage) of circular driveway to be allowed and their design
were to be reviewed by the Planning Commission for approval.
e. Condition #36: The Planning Commission shall review and
-- determine if additional compatibility conditions are necessary with
PC7-26 5
Planning Conuni,,sion Minutes
July 26, 1994
res]~ct to concerns of thc adjacent development of La Ouinta
Palms concerning thc pcrimctcr wa]], drainage cu]ve~, and
maintenance of the landscaping bordering the two developments,
prior to any building permits being issued.
27. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Barrows/Anderson to adopt Minute Motion 94-023
approving Plot Plan 94-529, subject to the modified conditions. Approved
unanimously with Commissioner Butler abstaining.
Commissioner Butler rejoined the Commission.
The Commission took a five minute break.
V. BUSINESS SESSION
A. ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 23995; a request of
Inco Homes for approval of architectural plans for use in the tract.
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 Butler asked staff to clarify the colorboard. Staff stated the
colorboard was a sample of all the colors that could be used in different
combinations in the tract. The choices were at the discretion of the home
buyer.
3. Commissioner Gardner asked staff to clarify the noise study in regards to
materials allowed. Staff stated the materials that could be used to buffer
the future traffic noise (i.e., masonry, etc.). Discussion followed.
4. Mr. Fred Fart, representing Inco Homes, explained the color scheme of
the tract and how the houses were color plotted. He further stated they
planned to file a final map by August and hopefully have the models built
by early winter. In regard to the fencing, he stated the rear and sideyards
would be fenced with wood.
5. Commissioner Anderson asked that if wood posts were to be used that
they be placed in foundation bases to preserve the wood. Mr. Farr stated
they would be utilizing the standard construction method of fencing.
Commissioner Gardner informed the applicant that in order to gain the
longest life of the wood, it would be neces~ to place the wood in some
PC7-26 6
I~am~ing Comm~ioa Mims~s
July 26, 1~4
~ of design ~ufion that would ~low d~n~e. He su~es~ ~t thc
~st ~ pla~ ~ g~vel first ~ ~en ~ment~. ~is would glow
d~nage ~d w~ p~~ation. Condition ~23 was m~ifi~ to add,
'w~ ~s~ sh~ have d~nage provide".
6. Mr. F~ s~t~ his obj~fon ~ ~ndifion ff 19, ~g~ding ~uts, ~ he
felt ~e r~ of ~e pro,ny ~uld not ~ visible from ~e ~t.
~erefore, the ~ifion~ ex~n~ w~ not w~~. He had no obj~fion
m ~e gable ~ ven~ have ~e ~o inch ~chi~m~ ~uts.
Commissioner ~ows s~t~ ~e ~u~ were r~uir~ na for
~chit~tur~ de~l but for shading of the ~uth ~d west elevations.
Di~ussion follow~ reg~ding the tr~tment.
7. Mr. F~ ask~ ~at on Condition g21 that it ~ written to ~rmit a 2" X
6" facia ~d 1" X 3" ~m for ~e ~ve ~m only. Ag~n this ~ to
~u~ ~sts to ~e buyer. In addition, he ~ues~ ~at Condition g22
~ ch~g~ m r~uire a 12" over~g as ~e pro~ ~fio ~vers would
~d ~e n~s~ r~ y~d shying.
8. Mr. F~ went ~ to di~uss Condition gl 8 ~d ~k~ ~at ~e ~n~fon
~ rewfi~n to sa~ either a ~ellis or ~tio ~ver be r~uir~. Di~sion
follow~ ~ to ~hy ~e ~ellis ~ ~ing ~u~ ~d whe~er it w~
~uir~ for sli&ng d~rs only or for windows ~. ~e Com~sion
~ ~ey felt ~t if the patio ~ver did not ~ver ~ ~e l~ge ex~
~s ~ on ~ ~u~ ~d west elevation of ~e hour, ~en a ~llis
· ould be u~.
9. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell proposed a revision to Condition 18:
a. "A trellis or other shading features are to be attached to windows
and glass doorways larger than 4' X 4' on the rear of the units of
each single family home where the rear of the unit faces west or
south."
Discussion followed as to the which elevations should be addressed.
10. Commissioner Anderson asked if the dormer vent was real or dead (Plan
4). Mr. Fan' slated it was a window recessed into the house and light
~:mld enter the living room. Commissioner Anderson questioned the use
of colOr to creae differences on the elevation. He felt it should be
~ dimensioned to create depth.
PC7-26 7
Plannin8 Comnussmn MinUtes
July 26. 1994
! ]. Vice Chairman Abels stated he felt thc entry door should be hung so thc
hLngcs faced thc windows for security. Discussion followed.
]2. YJcc Chairman Abels asked thc applicant why thc homeowner would bc
entering his house into the dining area (Plan ]). Mr. Fan' stated their
houses had all been drawn this way and they had not had any complaints
from past buyers.
There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Barrows/Anderson to adopt Minute Motion 94-024
approving architectural plans for Tract 23995, subject to the amended
conditions (i.e., Conditions 18 and 23). Unanimously approved.
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. There being no corrections to the Minutes of July 12, 1994, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Barrows to adopt the minutes as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
VII. OTHER -
A. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that due to the Municipal Code
requirements, the Chairman would serve for a one year period.
B. Vice Chairman Abels stated that he and Chairman Adolph had attended the last
City Council meeting and the only item they noted was the continuance of the
Recreational Vehicle Park and Driving Range conditional use permits to
September 20, 1994.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded by Commissioners
Anderson/Barrows to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission on September 13, 1994, at 7:00 P.M. at the La Quinta City
Hall Council Chamber. This meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at
10:05 P.M., July 26, 1994.
PC7-26 8