Loading...
PCMIN 03 25 1997 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, Califomia March 25, 1997 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:03 P.M. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Butler 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 Gardner/Newkirk 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, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA- A. Commissioner Gardner asked that the Agenda be amended to show that the Minutes for March 4, 1997 were not before the Commission for approval. III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of February 11, 1997 and February 28, 1997. Commissioner Gardner/Newkirk asked that the Minutes of February 11, 1997 and February 28, 1997 be approve. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None PC3-25-97 I Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 1997 - V. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. TENTATIVE TRACT 28409 AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-335; a request of Mr. Charles Murphy and Mr. Lynn Kunkle for approval of a subdivision of 9.15 acres into 19 single family and other common or private streets. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public heating and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio 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 Tyler stated that Ordinance 289 had placed temporary restrictions on the subject site. What happens after this Ordinance expires in September, 19977 Planning Manager stated Council would consider an ordinance that would specify the height requirements. 4. Commissioner Woodard asked about the perimeter wall regarding landscaping, why was the landscaping plan not submitted for Commission consideration at this time. Planning Manager stated the plans had not been prepared and it was not required at this time. 5. Commissioner Woodard asked about the eight foot landscaped planter on the entry street and if it included an eight foot sidewalk. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it was not required to submit it at this time. Commissioner Woodard stated that as staff was asking the Commission to approve the project suggesting there be an eight foot buffer zone; but he is uncertain how far the wall is from the house. How far does the wall go into the site. Staff explained it would serve as the exterior side/perimeter wall for the adjacent residence. It would go in as far as the wall could meeting the front setback requirements. Commissioner Woodard asked why eight feet was determined and how does it enhance the entrance. Staff stated it was based upon building a house with the setback requirements. Discussion followed regarding the wall, landscaping, and how they will be addressed regarding the tentative tract. Commissioner Woodard stated he was more concerned about the streetscape than what was planned for on inside of the wall. Commissioner Woodard, asked what the setback was from the curb to the wall on Avenida Montezuma. Staff stated it varied. Commissioner PC3-25-97 2 -- Planning Commission Meeting March 25. 1997 Woodard stated there was no wall plan included in the Commission packet. Staff stated the wall plan was to be approved by staff at a later date. Commissioner Woodard stated the distance from the house to the wall could be ten feet from the wall and the distance from the wall to the curb is ten feet. Commissioner Woodard asked if there was to be any undulation of the wall for the length of the wall. Is that the standard of the City for walls? Staff stated it was. 6. Commissioner Woodard asked about the requirement to have the applicant submit his plans on AutoCAD; is the applicant going to be able to scan the plans. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated they would accept the scanning. 7. Commissioner Woodard asked for clarification on Condition #26 regarding the pad elevation. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated this was a requirement of the City to keep the new lots adjacent to the existing lots from being higher than the other. It is an opportunity for the builder to build on the higher pads first to alleviate the problem of the lower house being constructed before the higher pad elevation and not being happy with the house being higher than his. Commissioner Woodard asked what the home buyer would do if he didn't like it. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained that if the higher house was built first, the lower lot would know that he was buying the house with the higher house already existing. Commissioner Tyler suggested that the wording "and buyer satisfaction" be removed. Commissioner Woodard also asked that the wording be removed. 8. Commissioner Butler asked if there was a sidewalk for pedestrian traffic on Avenida Montezuma. Staff explained that the Bear Creek Bike Path is a bike path, jogging trail, and pedestrian walkway. Discussion followed with staff regarding the landscaping along the Bike Path's and the Path's location. 9. Commissioner Woodard stated that if more than eight feet of landscaping is required, Lot 16 becomes almost unbuildable. Discussion followed regarding the landscaping and setback requirements of the entrance and the residence to be built adjacent to the entrance. 10. Commissioner Newkirk asked if a 100 year flood could cause a flood if the creek bed overflowed. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained that it is an improved creek bed, with a throddled retention basin which controls the water. PC3-25-97 3 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 1997 11. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the flood plan designation. Steve stated he would have to look at the map to see what it is. 12. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Lynn Kunkle, applicant, stated they were here to address the concerns of the community. Stated they had met all the City's requirements and hoped for approval. 13. Commissioner Woodard asked how the applicant was going to get water back to the detention basin. Mr. Bill Murphy, applicant, stated it would be by. gravity so that the water would flow down to the catch basin through the streets. It was designed according to engineering requirements. 14. Commissioner Woodard asked how the water gets to the detention area. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated they had two options; put it in the detention basin or drain into the channel. Commissioner Woodard asked how the water would get from the street to the catch basin and would it have to flow through Lot 1 ? Mr. Bill Fitch, engineer for the project, stated the water would be picked up at the end of the cul-de-sac, take it along the easement to the detention basin. It is not shown on the plans as they were not designed that far. If the storm water exceeds the detention basin top, it will be taken to the Bear Creek Channel. 15. Commissioner Woodard stated he would be recommending an 15-foot landscape lot on each side of the main entrance and would this affect Lots 15 and 16 negatively. Mr. Fitch stated a 15-foot easement would be excessive. Commissioners discussed with staff and the applicant regarding the distance from the curb to the wall to the house. Following discussion, Mr. Murphy stated he would have no objection to a 12-foot landscape lot. 16. Commissioner Butler explained that in his opinion eight feet might be enough to develop a landscape entrance. 17. There being no further questions of the applicant, Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment. 18. Mr. Joe Daniels, 51-315 Avenida Juarez, stated his house was directly across from proposed Lot 1. In conversations with the builders, it was stated that before putting up homes, they would use sight poles to determine the view PC3-25-97 4 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 1997 that would be blocked by the new homes. If the property lines are moved it will affect his home. In addition, he was concerned about the fence that will be put along the Bear Creek Channel; what is the height and location of the fence. If a wall is built along the CVWD service road, the wall could be 16 feet above his ground level. Developer has not stated where the houses will be built, and according to the pads they are acceptable; is there a way to require the pads stay as they are planned.9 19. Commissioner Butler asked Mr. Daniels to identify his house. Mr. Daniels stated his home was located on Lots 4 and 5 on Avenida Juarez. 20. Commissioner Woodard stated Mr. Daniel's home was across from the retention basin and would not have a house constructed across from him. 21. Commissioner Tyler stated it was the pad locations that the Commission was approving. Mr. Daniels stated if that was tree, it was acceptable to him. 22. Commissioner Woodard explained the 'pad locations and asked staff to explain the service road to the rear of the lots. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained that the lot is two feet lower than the elevation of the road and the wall would be on the pad height not the elevation of the road. This would be approximately four feet above the road. The wall is on the property line and would extend approximately two feet above the road and will be sloped. 23. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that this property is designated and zoned Medium Density Residential (four to eight units per acre). However, there is an urgency ordinance in affect that does not expire until September regarding height standards. Staff will be bringing a redesignation of this property to be compatible with the Cove requirements to the Commission prior to that time. 24. Commissioner Woodard asked if the ten foot requirement from the wall to the house, is' this same requirements for Lots 1, 19 and 18, and if the new homes could be constructed ten feet away from the rear property line. Staff stated the minimum rear yard setback requirement is ten feet for the Cove. Staff stated that due to the configuration of the adjacent homes, will not be built within ten feet of the adjoining lot. PC3-25-97 5 Planning Commission Meeting -- March 25, 1997 25. Mr. Edward Armendarez, 51-800 Montezuma, stated he did not receive any notice of the meeting. His concern was to see that the height restriction stays at 17-feet. In addition, he asked if anyone considered restricting the sodium lights in the cove. Staff stated they are not permitted in the City, however the existing lights were grandfathered in at the time the ordinance was passed. 26. Mr. Clayton Russell, stated he was constructing a home at 51-715 Avenida Montezuma, and he was concerned about his view. The landscaping and trees presently being planted will eventually block his view. He would like the City to pass a landscape sight easement to protect his view. He was not concerned with the wall as it would enhance the quality of the project. 27. Mr. Mike Wales, 52-870 Montezuma, asked that careful consideration be given to the perimeter wall as it may be creating a nuisance area. 28. There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed. 29. Commissioner Tyler asked that a condition be added to state that the maximum height of the homes would be 17-feet. Condition//63 be amended to add, "...landscaping, including the perimeter landscaping..." Commissioner Butler stated his concern that the Bike Path is an already approved landscaPe area and it is included. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell clarified that the bike path landscaping maintenance would be grandfathered into the landscaping district. 30. Commissioner Tyler asked if Lot A going across the bike path needed to be clarified in the conditions. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated Condition //41.(1). required the easement. Community Development Director Jerry Herman added that Condition 41 also needed to be amended to require the 10 foot median requirement be changed to 4-feet and 59-feet become 46-feet. 31. Commissioner Woodard asked that a new condition be added to require an easement to Lot 1 for the detention basin and that the entrance landscaping on Lot A be increased 12 feet. 32. Commissioner Butler asked that the sight poles be required. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that as this project is approved with the 17-foot high stipulation, there was no need. PC3-25-97 6 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 1997 33. Commissioner Woodard stated that if he were building a home on a lot, the landscaping could eventually block the view. Can the landscaping heights be restrictive? City Attorney Dawn Honeywell clarified that the city has no limitations on the height of the trees, or any landscaping height restrictions. 34. Commissioner Gardner stated there is a state-wide landscaping code being drafted and hopefully the City will adopt it. 35. There being no further comment it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97- 023 recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 96-335 prepared for Tentative Tract 28409. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Seaton. ABSTAIN: None. 36. There being no further comment it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97-024 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 28409, subject to the f'mdings and Conditions of Approval as amended: a. Condition//4.1 - changing 59 feet to 46 feet and ten feet to four feet b. Condition #26 - deleting the words "buyer satisfaction" c. Condition #63 - add the wording "including perimeter landscaping" d. Condition#78 - be added restricting the building height to 17 feet and single story. e. Condition//81 - be added requiring an easement through Lot 1 to the detention basin. f. Condition//80 - be added requiting a landscaping lot. along the entrance road be increased to 12 feet on each side. g. Condition #52 - be changed to require the wall and landscaping plans be approved by the Planning Commission. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Seaton. ABSTAIN: None. PC3-25-97 7 Planning Commission Meeting _ March 25, 1997 VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: Commissioner Tyler withdrew due to a possible conflict of interest as he is a member of the Soap Box Derby Committee. A. TEMPORARY USE PERMIT 97-137; a request of the Greater Coachella Valley Soap Box Derby for approval of a one day Soap Box Derby Race and sign program to be held on April 5, 1997. 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio 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. There being no questions, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. 3. Ms. Lucia Moran, applicant, showed a sample of the directional sign of the event and gave a review of the contest. 4. Commissioner Woodard asked if the cars are all bought from the same place. Ms. Moran explained that the kits must be bought from the franchise which governs the cars restrictions. 5. There being no further comment it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Butler to adopt Minute Motion 97-002 approving Temporary Use Permit 97-137, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Tyler rejoined the meeting. B. SIGN APPI,ICATION 97-375; a request of Wells Fargo Bank for approval of a new sign and deviation to the approved sign program for the bank mini-branch located in the Albertson's Supermarket. 1. Chairman Abels 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. PC3-25-97 8 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 1997 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. 3. Commissioner Woodard asked if the other signs in the area were individually mounted letters. Principal Planner Start Sawa stated staff was requiring individual letters for compatibility with the remainder of the shopping center. 4. Commissioner Woodard asked staff to clarify Attachment 1. Staff stated it was the floor plan for the mini-branch. 5. Commissioner Butler asked if the individual letters were used, would they still be able to use the stagecoach logo. Staff suggested that be answered by the applicant. 6. Commissioner Gardner stated that Von's Shopping Center has the Wells Fargo mini-branch without any signs. Why is a sign needed here? Staff stated it is up to the Commission to determine the need for a sign. The mini- branch located within the Von's store is small with an ATM machine on-site. This site is planned to be a manned site with an office and counter. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked if this was taking the place of the branch office located at Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive which is closing. 8. Mr. George Hellerich, sign company representing Wells Fargo, stated their problem with the staff's recommendation. If they go with 8-inch letters the sign would be 18' feet long and staff's recommendation is to keep the 13-foot length. The City's 75% Rule would allow 21 linear feet. Ifthey are allowed the 21-feet, they could go with 18-inch letters. They do not use the stagecoach with the individual letters. If they use 15-inch letters the sign would be 15 feet. 9. Commissioner Woodard asked the height of the Albertson's sign. Staff stated they were four to five feet high. If the applicant was willing to have letters as small as on the cabinet sign, they could leave the letter size the same as shown, and make then individually illuminated letters. Discussion followed regarding the sign size. 10. Commissioner Woodard stated he would prefer the 15-inch individual letters. 11. Commissioners Tyler and Newkirk stated they would prefer the 18-inch letters. PC3-25-97 9 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 1997 12. Commissioner Gardner stated they had denied the Pharmacy and other signs and now allowing the Wells Fargo sign. Staff stated the signs had been denied because it was determined that signs displayed the products that were sold there. If a sign was requested to distinguish another business within the store, it would be allowed. When McDonalds went into WalMart a sign was approved by the Commission. 13. Commissioner Butler stated he had no objection to the sign but was uncertain as to whether the 15 or 18-inch should be required. 14. Commissioner Woodard stated he shared the concem raised by Commissioner Gardner, as he would assume that as food is sold, signs would not be needed to identify the products. However, he would not assume that' a bank would be inside. He would therefore approve of the sign and would go along with the 18-inch letters. 15. There being no further comment it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Newkirk to adopt Minute Motion 97-003 approving Sign Application 97-375, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval - as recommended by staff and as modified: a. Individual letters be 18-inch in height and 21-feet in length, with the stagecoach logo being deleted; and b. Unanimously approved. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VIII. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS. A. Commissioner Woodard stated that while attending the League of California Cities Conference he had spoken with several of those attending regarding study sessions and each time he was informed that they were holding study session. He would therefore, like to see the City's policy regarding study sessions be reinstated. Chairman Abels stated that a discussion would need to be held with the City Attorney to explain what the other cities are doing regarding study sessions. Community PC3-25-97 10 Planning Commission Meeting March 25, 1997 Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that it was the decision of the City Council not the City Attorney. The City Attorney has indicated that study sessions can be held for items that are not public hearing items. Discussion followed as to a possible solution. B. Commissioner Gardner requested staff notify the City Council of their appreciation for allowing them to attend the League of California Cities Conference and see that they receive a copy of their reports. C. 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 a regular meeting to be held on April 8, 1997, at 7:00 p.m.. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:03 P.M. on March 25, 1997. PC3-25-97 11