PCMIN 02 25 1997 MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall'
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California
February 25, 1997 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:09 P.M. bY
Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Woodard to lead the flag salute
B. Chairman Abels requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Butler, Gardner,
Newkirk, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. It was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Butler/Tyler to excuse Commissioner Seaton. Unanimously
approved.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer,
Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand, and Executive
Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA-
A. Staff requested that the approval of the Minutes of February 11, 1997, be deleted
from the agenda. The agenda was confirmed as modified.
III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of January 28, 1997.
Commissioner Tyler asked that the Minutes be amended on Page 5, Item #16 to state
"...24-inches..."; Page 6, Item #21 be reworded to state, "Commissioner Tyler
explained that as an example..." and "This was a way to allow relief to future
developers." There being no further changes, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Butler/Tyler to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously
approved.
B. Department Report: None
PC2-25-97 I
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. SITE DEVELOPMENT 97-600; a request for approval of architectural plans for
"The Palisades" a series of three floor plans from 1,800 to 2,591 sq. ft., and "South
Shores" a series of two floor plans of 2,574 and 2,600 square feet for construction in
Lake La Quinta.
1. Chairman Abels oPened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Principal Planner Start Sawa presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department. Staff informed the Commission that five additional elevations
had been received from the applicant and were available for Commission
review. Commissioners asked to see the elevations.
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner
Woodard asked staff to indicate the location of the eleven lots being
discussed, which lots were vacant, and if the applicant had to come back to
the Commission for the next phase. Staff showed the eleven lots on the site
plan and stated the next phase would be reviewed by staff unless the
Commission requires it to come back. -
3. Mr. Chris Canaday, the applicant, stated they had worked very closely with
the current owners to stay consistent with the design of the existing houses.
All plans had been approved by the Lake La Quinta Architectural Control
Committee. They are in agreement with the Conditions of Approval with the
exception of Condition #7, regarding the setbacks on the detached guest suite.
He would request that this condition be eliminated or at least modified for the
following reasons:
a. Guest suits that are flush with the garage are consistent with the
existing homes;
b. If the goal is to vary the setbacks with the home and guest suite, they
can do this by moving the house and guest suite forward or back from
the neighboring house;
c. Their goal is to maintain an eight foot private courtyard area between
the guest suite and main house and keep the rear yard as large as
possible; having the guest house off-set three to five feet requires
them to move the house forward or back three feet which impacts the
backyard.
4. Commissioner Butler asked if the guest suite complies with the frontyard
setback. Mr. Canaday stated they do not extent into the frontyard setbacks.
PC2-25-97 2
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
5. Commissioner Woodard stated he appreciated their desire to maximize the
rear yard, but the streetscape is then unattractive. Why is the eight feet
important7 Mr. Canaday stated the eight feet was needed to have a minimum
amount of space to let light into the main house and to have a private area for
sunning or whatever. Their plans are to stagger the setbacks on the houses
from lot to lot so each house would not be exactly 20-feet. The difficulty is
in the guest houses in that they cannot plan which setback to use. The Lake
La Quinta community has a history of every unit being flush to the street.
Commissioner Woodard stated that if the houses were moved to have less
backyard, the guest house could be kept. Mr. Canaday stated this was tree,
but certain lots do not have the depth to allow this. Commissioner Woodard
asked which lots would be affected. Mr. Canaday stated that as the guest
houses are optional, it was not possible to determine which houses would be
restricted due to the rear yard, until they are purchased. Commissioner
Woodard stated that he would not object to one or two, but several would be
objeetional. Mr. Canaday stated the bigger concern was on the Plan 3 or the
off-water plan. They would request that these plans for the units on the water
have a variance to allow a 2-foot minimum. Plan 3 (Cambia), the off-water
units, could be flush if the lot constraint did not allow them to offset.
Commissioner Woodard asked if they were plotting the units before they
were purchased. Mr. Canaday stated they preplotted the initial 11 lots, but
the guest suites are an option. Commissioner Woodard clarified that the on-
water lots are able to accommodate the guest suites without any changes.
Discussion followed regarding the location of the proposed 11 lots. Mr.
Canaday stated that only Lots 48 and 102 would have the Plan 3 which has
the guest suite as an option. Commissioner Woodard asked if the remaining
lots on Via Florence would have the guest house option in this phase. Mr.
Canaday stated this was true. Commissioner Woodard stated his concern
about the elevations and the plotting, and he would like to know how many
of the units would be flush. Following discussion, it was determined that
20% would be allowed the flush face.
8. Commissioner Tyler asked if the homeowners association (HOA) had
addressed the issue of the guest house off-sets. Mr. Canaday stated they had
not proposed the situation to the HOA. He then apologized for bringing the
guest suites plans for the on-water units to the Commission so late, but it was
their understanding that the guest suites could be approved by staff. All units
that had been approved by the HOA in the past had been flush and if they
were approved in the past, it was their understanding they would approve
-- these plans.
PC2-25-97 3
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
9. Commissioner Tyler asked if these units had been built anywhere else in the
Lake La Quinta. Mr. Canaday stated no they were specifically designed to
maximize the views toward the mountains.
10. Commissioner Woodard asked that the plans submitted at this meeting be
clarified as to which ones have the flush condition and which ones have the
setback problems. Mr. Canaday stated that Lot 112 has enough room in the
backyard to meet the setback. There are only certain lots which have the
setback problem.
11. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public
hearing.
12. Commissioner Woodard asked that the plans for Lot 112 be required to drop
the setback from 13-feet to the 8-feet minimum to not have a flush situation
between the face of the garage and the face of the guest suite along the street.
The plan on Lot 72 is asking for a 1 O-foot rear yard setback which makes it
a front-loaded house and the main room of the house, which is the master
bedroom/garage faces the rear yard.
13. Mr. Canaday stated that the courtyard home is designed to accommodate the
lot configurations. The creation of the Plan 1 (courtyard) is to eliminate the
negative problem of the five foot berm in the rear and put the view and use
to the front. The courtyard home was designed to accommodate certain lot
configurations. In order to accommodate this, the house had been turned to
have the master bedroom off the pool/spa area. This is also true of the homes
off of Adams Street. The idea is to have the main rooms face onto the
pool/spa area in the front. Commissioner Woodard explained that it would
be better to have the family room/kitchen off the courtyard area to be more
usable.
14. Commissioner Butler stated he did not totally concur with having the
Commission dictate to the developer how he should lay out his interior
design; it should be a market demand issue. Commissioner Newkirk agreed.
15. Commissioner Tyler stated he concurred with Mr. Butler. He asked staff if
the size of the trees was to be predetermined as the conditions were again
requiring 24-inch box trees, but the diameter size of the trees is not stated.
Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the condition would be changed
to reflect the diameter size of the tree.
PC2-25-97 4
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
16. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify whether or not the change to the
Zoning Ordinance regarding ten foot setbacks, would affect this tract. Staff
stated it would depend on when they pulled their building permit. After the
recent Zoning Code Amendments become effective, this tract will be able to
provide a ten foot rear setback.
17. Commissioner Tyler asked if the developer intended to use the existing curbs
cuts. Mr. Canaday stated they intended to use them whenever they could.
Commissioner Tyler suggested that the cuts that are not used be filled in. Mr.
Canaday stated that until the furore homes are plotted, it will not be known
which cuts can be used. However, to replace the cuts with curbs is very
expensive. Commissioner Tyler stated it is an awkward situation. Mr.
Canaday stated that if there is a driveway cut they do not use, they will repair
it.
18. Commissioner Woodard asked if the guest suite elevations for the Plan 4 and
5 had been submitted to the HOA. Mr. Canaday stated they had not, but Plan
3 had. As the guest suite is interchangeable on all the floor plans he did not
see the need to submit all the plans.
19. Commissioner Woodard asked if the Commission could approve something
that the HOA had not seen. Staff stated the HOA approvals have no bearing
on City approvals.
20. Commissioner Tyler asked that paragraph one of the Resolution be amended
to refer to several lots. Condition 1 in the Conditions of Approval refer to the
square footage of the basic house, but does not include the guest house. Staff
stated it does on the Cambria Plan from the Palisades series, but not the La
Jolla or Malibu from the South Shore series. Commissioner Tyler asked if
the landscaping being required was for the frontyard only. Staff stated the
frontyard is the only area required to be landscaped.
21. Commissioner Woodard asked if the guest suite elevation plans that had been
received superceeded the plans received earlier. Mr. Canaday explained why
the guest suite floor plan was laid out so the bathroom and closet would be
on the street side of the house to buffer any noise. Commissioner Woodard
stated that a blank wall facing the street is unacceptable for Plan 3. He would
recommend that this elevation be revised. Mr. Canaday stated that the blank
wall is to buffer the room from the street. After it is landscaped the plant
-- materials will reduce the effect. Commissioner Woodard stated that the guest
suite needs to be treated in such a way that it is an asset to the streetscape.
PC2-25-97 5
Planning Commission Meeting _
February 25, 1997
22. There being no further comment it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Gardner/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
97-013 approving Site Development Permit 96-600 for new prototypes for
Tract 26152, subject to findings and cdnditions, as attached and amended as
follows:
a. Condition # 1 - amend to add the square footage of the guest house.
b. Condition #3 - would be amended to include the diameter size of the
trees and final landscaping.
c. Condition #7 - add a sentence stating the applicant could have 20%
of the units may have guest houses flush with house.
d. Condition # 10 - existing driveway curb cuts that are not used are to
be replaced.
e. Commissioner Woodard asked that the distance between the guest
house and residence for Lot 112 be reduced from 13 to 8 feet.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler, Woodard,
and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner
Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
B. Site Development Permit 96-601; a request for approval of architectural plans for a
single family residential trait containing 3,200 square foot in Lake La Quinta.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant
would like to address the Commission. Mr. Billy Watson explained his
proposed house plans.
3. There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed and
opened for Commission discussion.
4. Commissioner Tyler stated he felt the design was an excellent plan for the
site, but wanted the diameter of the tree size to be specified.
5. Commissioners Newkirk, Gardner, and Butler all agreed that the plan was
compatible.
PC2-25-97 6
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Butler/Newkirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
97-014 approving Site Development Permit 97-601, with the addition of the
diameter size of the trees.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler, Woodard,
and ChairmanAbels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner
Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
Chairman Abels recessed for the meeting at 8:10 and reconvened at 8:15 p.m. ·
C. Tentative Tract ?8498 and g. nviro~mental Assessment 97-336; a request of TD
Desert Development (Rancho La Quinta Country Club) for approval of a subdivision
of 98 residential lots with public streets into 96 residential lots with private streets
and access to Rancho La Quinta.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Principal Planner Start Sawa presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department. Staff noted that correspondence had been received from
Coachella Valley Water District asking that the heating be continued. Staff,
along with the City Attorney, had determined that the Commission could take
action on the conditions regarding drainage as Condition #26 does indicate
that the applicant may drain to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel provided
CVWD approves. Therefore the issue raised by CVWD has been addressed
in the conditions.
2. Commissioner Woodard asked about the transition of a public to a private
street on Sagebrush. Staff stated that from the inside of the gate to the east,
it would be private streets. The gate was to be a card-gated entry with some
landscaping. Staff clarified that the main entrance was off Washington
Street.
3. Commissioner Woodard asked why the applicant was being required to
submit AutoCAD plans. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that staff was
trying to require all plans to be submitted on the AutoCAD system to keep
the Department systematic and reduce their hard copy files. However, they
will accept a scanned image.
-- 4. Commissioner Tyler asked staff if the existing locked gate on Via Melodia
~ going into Parc La Quinta, would remain. Staff stated it would remain and
~ clarified that since the utilities were already in the road it would make it
difficult to remove the gate and road.
PC2-25-97 7
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
5. Commissioner Woodard asked who was going to maintain the gate. Staff
clarified it was an emergency gate. Commissioner Woodard asked if the road
could be removed and the land given to the property owner. Staff clarified
it was a private road and it was up to Rancho La Quinta. ·
6. Commissioner Gardner asked for clarification of where the emergency gate
was located. Staff explained the history of the emergency gates and stated the
issue was whether or not to eliminate the gate leading into Parc La Quinta.
It would cost more money to remove the gate than to allow the adjoining
propety owners to utilize the area for additional parking and have the
homeowners' association maintain it. Discussion followed regarding the
access.
7. Commissioner Gardner asked what provisions had been made to
accommodate the potential increase in traffic. Staff.stated that when the
original tract was designed, Sagebrush Avenue was the only entrance. Now
the tract is being combined with Rancho La Quinta and there would be a total
of three accesses including the emergency access. Staff explained the
location of the three accesses and discussion followed as to the circulation
and traffic concerns. Commissioner Gardner stated that with the increase in
traffic, he believed the developer should pay more than the 25% proportional
share of the cost of installing the signal at Washington Street and Sagebrush
Avenue. Staff explained the cost distribution of the signalization.
8. Commissioner Woodard asked if the house plans for this tract had already
been approved and if so was there any restrictions on the house plotting.
Staff stated the plans had been approved and the applicant is able to submit
revisions to staff. Commissioner Woodard stated the elevations needed to be
addressed and should be brought to the Commission. Staff' clarified that they
are not an issue of compatibility review. Commissioner Woodard stated that
there ought to be some design control placed on the developers as to how the
floor plans are approved. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell clarified that this
had never been a prior requirement and would have to be required of all
tracts. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that when the
Commission originally reviewed and approved this tract there were no
requirements placed on the tract regarding plotting.
9. Mr. Mark Belier - 78-685 Sagebrush, stated his concern about the possible
traffic increase on Sagebrush.
10. There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed and
opened for Commission discussion.
PC2-25-97 8
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
11. Commissioner Tyler stated he questioned Mr. Lester's letter. Staff stated the
issues raised in the letter were a matter between the developer and Mr. Lester,
and did not involve the City.
12. Commissioner Tyler questioned Condition #32 as to why the applicant was
being required to install improvements. Staff stated the conditions that were
added bring the tract into compliance with current City standards.
13. Commissioner Gardner stated he was still concerned about the traffic on
Sagebrush as he believed it should be handled in another way.
14. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that residential streets in the City are
designed to handle up to 15,000 vehicles a day. It is not recommended, but
is capable of doing this. The street speed limit is, and will remain 25 mph
and will be enforced. Staff stated the percentage being required to be paid by
the applicant for the signal is appropriate. Staff has mitigated the traffic
impact as much as possible.
15. Commissioner Tyler asked when the signal would be warranted. Senior
Engineer Steve Speer stated they do not have any idea at this time. There
have been no traffic counts since the construction of the original project was
proposed, five or six years ago. Warrants for a traffic signal are a function
of the cross street traffic.
16. Commissioner Gardner asked if the distance between signals would be
ample. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it is 1/4 mile between Sagebrush
and 50th Avenue and the signal is part of the Washington Street Specific
Plan.
17. Commissioner Butler asked if the traffic did become unusually high, could
speed bumps be installed. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the City
Council has not even considered this. Some cities have extensive speed
bumps and it has been found that the installation just proliferates the problem
onto other streets. Commissioner Gardner concurred that this could only
increase the problem. Discussion followed regarding the proposed traffic
circulation of this area.
18. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Newldrk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97-
015 recommending to the City Council approval of Environmental
Assessment 97-336, for Tentative Tract 28498.
PC2-25-97 9
Planning Commission Meeting _
February 25, 1997
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Newkirk, Tyler, Woodard, and
Chairman Abels. NOES: Commissioner Gardner. ABSENT:
Commissioner Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
19. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Gardner to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 97-016 recommending to the City Council
approval of Tentative Tract 28498, subject to the findings and conditions as
modified to changing Conditions #26 to refer to the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel and Condition #32 be amended as needed, to indicate that the
existing improvements meet the City approvals as is.
ROLL CALL' AYES: Commissioners Butler, Newkirk, Tyler, Woodard, &
Chairman Abels. NOES: Commissioner Gardner. ABSENT:
Commissioner Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
D. Tentative Tract 28470. Environmental Assessment 96-333. Change of Zone 96-081.
Conditional Use Permit 96-031. Site Development Permit 96-599. and Certificate of
Appropriateness 96-001; a request of Tradition Club Associates, LLC for approval
of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; approval of a change
of zone to redesignate the zoning classification for the proposed golf course fi.om RL
(low density residential) to GC (golf course); approval of a conditional use permit to
allow grading and construction of six residential lots and tee boxes within higher
slopes; approval of a tentative tract map to subdivide 746.6 acres into 241 single
family homesites, 18-hole golf course, private street system and accessory lots;
approval of a site development permit to allow the construction of a clubhouse cart
barn, maintenance building, half-way house, main entry guard house, and parking lot;
and approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness to allow modifications to the
Hacienda del Gato and grounds as recommended by the Historic Preservation
Commission, for the property located at the south terminus of Washington Street,
east of Avenida Bermudas.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public heating and asked for the staff report.
Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand presented the information contained in
the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff?.
3. Commissioner Butler asked staff to define the boundary of the six hillside
custom lots. Discussion followed regarding the location of the six lots.
PC2-25-97 10
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
4. Staff then showed a video that was taken of the proposed site to show the
location of the different areas in question.
5. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that the applicant had requested
to add a residential lot (Lot 56), and he would explain his request. Staff'has
no objection to the request.
6. Commissioner Woodard asked staff to explain the history of the project and
the grading that is currently taking place. Staff explained that the City
Council had granted an "at risk" grading permit to allow them to start the
project. The restriction allowed them to grade the golf course and residential
areas that are not subject to the Conditional Use Permit. This is the fourth
project proposed for this site. All the previous proposals have had higher
residential densities.
7. Commissioner Woodard asked how the City would insure that the retention
basin is repaired if it is washed out. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained
that the damage that would occur would be to their project and would not hurt
the flood control facilities.
8. Commissioner Woodard asked'staff to identify the emergency access at the
fire station on Frances Hack Lane and verified that no development would be
above the 20% grade. Staff clarified the emergency access points and stated
that the six lots were located in the scarred area and were being processed as
a conditional use permit. Commissioner Woodard stated that the rear yards
of the six lots are on a slope of less than 20%. He Would assume that some
slope would be difficult to live on. Staff stated the grading of the lots will be
level. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated a building pad will be
created however within the lot there will also be an area that is not scared and
in a natural state at the 20% level that will be under a conservation easement.
The scarred area will be' returned to a natural appearing state.
9. Commissioner Woodard questioned that a portion of the 15,000 square foot
lot would have a slope less than 20% and may or not be in the scarred area,
and does staffhave an idea of where that pad will be. Senior Engineer Steve
Speer explained that the applicant will cut into the side of the mountain and
create a 2:1 slope that goes up to meet the 20% slope and that it will be
landscaped.
10. Commissioner Woodard asked why the restrooms are being required at the
half-way house. Staff explained this was due to the distance to the nearest
restroom and the gardeners for the residents and maintenance workers would
need to have a restroom closer.
PC2-25-97 11
Planning Commission Meeting
--
February 25, 1997
11. Commissioner Woodard asked staff to explain the turnaround at the entry
guard gate. Staff clarified that there was a mm around between the guard
gate and the entry gate.
12. Commissioner Tyler asked about the maximum dwelling density for the
entire project. Staff explained that there had been a density transfer to
preserve the entire area of the hillside area with conservation easements. One
unit per ten acres could have been accommodated in the hillsides, so some of
that is being clustered in the six lots, but the applicant has not used the entire
allotment possible.
13. Commissioner Woodard asked if there was any concern that Lot 56 would be
too close to the entrance and would take away from the effeCt. Staff stated
they had just received the plans and had not had time to review it.
14. Commissioner Gardner asked staff to clarify the north property line. Staff
stated that on 52nd Avenue, the wall would nm along the south side of 52nd
Avenue. 52nd Avenue will remain an open public road. It is tree that their
property does extend north of 52nd Avenue and there are conditions requiring -
them to continue on with the construction of the wall on the north side of
52nd Avenue to carry out the existing wall theme on Washington Street.
Staff went on to explain where the wall would be constructed and discussion
followed. Commissioner Gardner asked what provisions are being made for
the 100-year flood that may flow to the wall and cross 52nd Avenue. Senior
Engineer Steve Speer stated that if a storm exceeds the 100-year capacity,
there is an emergency outlet between Lots 119-120 to allow water to pass into
the existing channel along 52nd Avenue to handle the excess.
15. Commissioner Gardner asked if each of the custom homes would come
before the Commission for review. Staff stated that the applicant is not
conditioned to bring every home, but rather to create their own internal
review with an architectural review component of a homeowners'
association. They are custom lots and not a tract and they are exempt from
Commission review. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that the project
has the general height and sideyard restrictions they are required to meet.
16. Commissioner Woodard stated that the Commission reviews production
housing due to compatibility issues, now why are custom homes not reviewed
by the Commission. Community Development Director Jerry Herman
explained that when the Commission reviewed the compatibility review
PC2-25-97 12
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
process during the Zoning Code revisions, the Commission did not change
the requirement that custom lots are exempt from the compatibility review
process. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell clarified that the compatibility
review process is primarily for partially built out tracts and is not an issue on
new tracts.
17. Commissioner Gardner asked if the archaeological monitor was on-site
during the grading. Staff stated that they were required to have the
monitoring and they have been there since the grading started. There were
six sites found and three are remaining for which there is monitoring. One
of the three has been capped for preservation. The other two prehistoric sites
are located well into the hillside above the toe of the slope and are not in
danger of any of the development.
18. Commissioner Gardner asked about the roads being provided for fire access
and whether they were for egress or ingress. Staff explained that the three
roads are internal. Due to street design and lengthy cul-de-sacs and the Fire
Marshal's requirements for a secondary access when a cul-de-sac exceeds
660 feet, the applicant is proposing to construct three 16-foot wide, six inch
concrete expanded cart paths to provide access for the cul-de-sacs to get the
residents out onto a main thoroughfare.
19. Commissioner Gardner asked if there were any provisions for public access
to the Hacienda del Gato. Staff stated they are not under the Mills Act which
may require the site to be open one day a week for public review. However,
this is a privately owned property and the City has no requirement.
Commissioner Gardner stated that the Hacienda would then be closed to the
public for any future viewing. Staff stated that unless the ownership makes
provisions for the public to enter, that is correct. Planning Manager Christine
di Iorio stated that it is listed on the State Inventory of Historic Sites and is
not required to have public access.
20. Mr. Mike Rowe, Winchester Development representing the Tradition Club
Associates, explained how the development came to be. The entitlements
they are asking for are similar as what has been approved for the prior
projects, only less. The Sienna Corporation loved the site and the Hacienda
and wanted to expand their corporation to the west coast. He went on to
explain what the Sienna Corporation wanted to see in the development.
21. Mr. Rowe stated that in reviewing the Conditions of Approval regarding the
Tentative Tract Map, he had questions regarding the following conditions:
PC2-25-97 13
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
a. Condition #7.A. regarding the dedication on Avenue 52. Requesting
that it be changed to read, "from the west property boundary to
Washington Street."
b. Condition #34. Delete as it does not pertain to this project.
c. Condition #42. Would like to have it modified to allow the project
to continue. Strike the first line and start the condition with, "The
applicant shall reimburse the successors of Landmark Land Company
upon their written demand showing proof of their fights ....... "and add
to the end of the condition, "If no notification is received within 90
days of the first recordation of the final map, this condition shall no
longer apply."
d. Condition #44.A. Delete Avenida Bermudas and add from the west
property line to Washington Street.
e Condition #44.C.1. Add, "Unless reduced widths are accepted by the
Riverside County Fire Departments.
f. Condition//44.C.2. Requested the same requirement that is found on
44.b. 1 and 2.
g. Condition #53.B. Would like to phase the walls on the north side of
52nd Avenue from Washington Street in with their phasing plan.
h. Condition #53.C. Clarification if this means the white wall with the
green tile.
i. Condition #54. Maintenance not to include the north side of 52nd
Avenue. They are required to maintain only the landscape
approvement of the adjacent setbacks along 52nd Avenue, Avenida
Bermudas, and Frances Hack Lane.
j. Condition #78. Modify to state that the maximum building pad
would be measured at the center of the building pads.
k. Condition//81. Change the single story height to 22-feet along
Avenida Bermudas as they would like to have a variability to break
up the look.
22. Regarding the Conditional Use Permit Conditions of Approval, Mr. Rowe
questioned the following conditions:
a. Condition//4. Delete as it is a fill road that they would like to leave
where it is planned as they are required to maintain the channel and
moving the road could breach that channel.
b. Condition//6. They would like to request adding" ....greater than five
feet in vertical height .... "
23. Mike Rowe requested that the condition regarding retaining all the eucalyptus
trees under the Certificate of Appropriateness, be changed to some in all the
conditions that apply and references all the Exhibits approved by the
Historical Preservation Commission.
PC2-25-97 14
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
24. Commissioner Butler asked about Condition #81, regarding the 17-foot
height limitation, if he was requesting all the houses on Avenida Bermudas.
Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that the houses on the
west side of Bermudas are 17 feet and staff'was trying to keep the continuity
along Avenida Bermudas. Commissioner Butler asked if the west side of
Avenida Bermudas were flat-roofed. Staff stated they were a mix.
Commissioner Woodard stated that if you build to 17-feet and are trying to
maximize the view, it is hard to accomplish with a sloping roof.
Commissioner Butler stated that with the street is sloping downhill the
houses are going to be staggered, with the 17-feet and the downward sloping,
it accomplishes what staff is trying to do by not having a row of ridge line
houses. Mr. Rowe stated that if they are allowed to have the 22-feet, you will
have a variation. All the houses are to be on 20,000 square foot lots and the
house will not take up the entire lot, the landscaping itself will eventually
screen out the homes. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that the
Viewshed Study as analyzed with the 17-foot height along Avenida
Bermudas. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the environmental review
_ assumed the 17-foot height. If the applicant wants to raise that limit, the
study may need to be looked at to be sure they are still comfortable with the
analysis that was done. Discussion followed regarding the roof line.
25. Chairman Abels suggested that due to the hour and the amount of material
still remaining to be covered, he would like to make a recommendation to
continue this hearing to a special meeting to be held on March 10, 1997.
26. Mr. Rowe stated that March 10th would be too late for them to meet the City
.Council deadlines. He would request that the continuance be a date sooner
than March 10th. Discussion followed and it was determined to take the
public comment and then continue the Commission discussion to March 4,
1997, at 10:00 a.m.
27. Mr. John Cook, 54-900 Avenida Rubio, stated his concern that the wall to be
constructed on Avenida Bermudas would have more of an impact on La
Quinta than any other project. It is to be about 2.5 miles long as its design
will be a permanent monument. This wall is unattractive and inconsistent
with the current developments in the Cove. He suggested that staff overhaul
the wall design and give it close attention. As the wall is meandering, no
details were given as to how much meandering. If there is going to be an
emergency access onto Avenida Bermudas the Commission needs to see that
the design is consistent with the rest of the project. The eight foot wall and
PC2-25-97 15
Planning Commission Meeting -
February 25, 1997
berm is going to seriously degrade the vistas that are currently enjoyed. Need
openings to see the vistas. Would like the landscaping to be more of a desert
theme. Concern that the digging into the hillside will be hidden. Concern
that the lighting of the hillside, perimeter lighting, security lighting and street
light should all be low intensity. In addition the PM10 requirements needs
to be adequate.
28. Mr. Art Altenback, 52-985 Avenida Bermudas, stated his concern about a
builder entering a conservation area that opens a "can of worms" that could
set a precedent. The Commission needs to drive up Avenida Bermudas and
see the building pads as they are higher than the street. The 15-foot setback
is not enough.
29. Mr. Brace Swan, 78-725 Avenida La Fonda, questioned the number of golf
tees and lots encroaching the 20% slope; concern about the 22-foot height
request; concern about flood drainage in his area as well as the lighting
conforming to the City ordinances. Would like to see that they are kept out
of the mountains.
30. Mr: Sandy Swan, 78-725 Avenida La Fonda, would like to see that the access
to hikers at south end of project kept open; truffle signals at Washington and
52nd Avenue. What about the drainage channels, could there be backwash;
is there to be a 33-ft high clubhouse; is the maintenance building to be two
story; and what will the lighting of the tennis courts be. What is the distance
from the parking lot to clubhouse. A combination of asking for 22 feet and
asking for narrower streets, this pushes the perimeter houses too close to
Avenida Bermudas; what does the restoring of the scarred areas consist of?.
What about the flood control for the six lots?
31. Mr. Robert Atkins, 52-470 Avenida Madero, stated that he believed the
project adds class to the City of La Quinta. His only objection was to
allowing the developer to utilize the hillside for any type of developmem as
it sets a precedent.
32. Mr. Mack. Carter, 53495 Avenida Bermudas, stated he looked forward to the
development of the project. As an immediate neighbor he has a view of the
Coral Reef Mountains that will be impacted by this development. His
concern is the height of the pads and the overall height of the buildings.
What kind of separation will there be between this project community and the
rest of the Cove as a result of the wall and berm to be constructed. Ten years
down the road they will not be able to see the mountains due to the trees. He
would suggest that whatever landscaping is approved that the view of the
residents on the west side be considered.
PC2-25-97 16
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
33. Mr. Fred Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, stated he agreed that this project
would be an asset to the community, however he had two concerns. One is
the intrusion into the hillside that the City zoned and designated as Hillside
Conservation to keep development from occurring in the hillside. Second,
was his concern that this is coming in on a conditional use permit. He
believed that anyone else would have to go through a general plan
amendment and zone change, but as this is a large developer, he is being
given some favoritism. The hillside area is to be preserved. In addition, the
request .that was asked for at this meeting requesting the height limit be
increased to 22-feet. The entire Cove, except earlier homes, have heights of
a maximum of 17-feet building height, and he hoped the Commission would
not approve the request for additional height.
34. Mr. John Guenther, 53-235 Avenida Bermudas, stated he was in support of
the project with a minor exception. He would prefer the wall be a white
stucco wall. This project can only increase property values and be an asset
to the community.
35. Mrs. Kay Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, stated her concern where she
disagreed with the Environmental Assessment regarding the Historical,
Archaeological, Aesthetical, Cultural Resources-Historical, Archaeological,
and Sacred Uses. Most of the areas listed were less than significant or no
impact". There are a lot of traditions within the City, and there are several
citizens who are trying to keep them and one of them is the scenic vista.
People who live further west than Avenida Bermudas would see the
infringement into the alluvial fan or scarred area. She would rather see the
scarring than homes built in this area. Capping of the historical sites is not
the answer to archaeological sites. They need to have public access. There
are areas that are considered sacred grounds by the Native Americans.
Would like the Commission to consider the precedent that is being set.
36. Mr. David Salvatierra, 54455 Avenida Madero, stated his concerned about
the proposed trees and height of the houses as they would block his view.
The Commission should consider those property owners that already have
purchased their homes as they purchased their homes to have their views.
The developer does not need to go into the hillside to have a golf course.
37. Mr. Greg Olson, 54-180 Avenida Cortez, stated this was a special, unique
- area of the desert. He is supportive of the golf course, but is concerned about
the project be integrated into the atmosphere of the Cove. The lighting and
view are a problem. The hillside community is a big problem as it is not
PC2-25-97 17
Planning Commission Meeting
February 25, 1997
integrated with the rest of the Cove and this is the most important aspect of
the development that needs to be looked at. This golf course is coming into
our community, the community is not being built around this golf course.
Need to make the Cove a beautiful place for ali to live in. Don't create an
ugly stepsister.
38. Mr. Matt Mathews, 54-860 Avenida Obregon, stated he was in favor of the
project. He is primarily concerned about the hillside conservation and he
agrees with the prior comments that if this is allowed, it will only be opening
the door for more development in the hillsides.
39. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public
hearing.
40. Commissioner Woodard asked if the applicant could place a 17-foot pole
and 22-foot pole on a lot along Avenida Bermudas to allow the commtmity
and the Commission to visually see the impact of the different roof heights.
The applicant agreed to do this.
41. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Gardner/Butler to continue this item to March 4, 1997, at
10:00 a.m. Unanimously approved.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None.
VII. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS.
A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of February 18, 1997.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to
adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to an adjourned meeting to be held on
March 4, 1997, at 10:00 a.m.. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 11:34
P.M. on February 25, 1997.
PC2-25-97 18