PCMIN 07 28 1998 MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
July 28, 1998 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by
Chairman Tyler who asked Commissioner Robbins to lead the flag salute.
B. Chairman Tyler requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Kirk,
Robbins, Butler, and Chairman Tyler.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Associate Engineer Fred Bouma,
Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand, and Executive
Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of July 14, 1998.
Commissioner Robbins asked that Page 5, Item 8 be corrected to spell "aquifers".
Chairman Tyler asked that Page 5, Item 11 be deleted as it was repeated on Page 7,
Item 7. There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Kirk to approve the minutes as amended. Unanimously
approved.
B. Department Report: None
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 98-626; a request of Real Property Associates for approval
to construct a 5,500 square foot commercial building on a 30,850 square foot site in
the Regional Commercial Zone within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center.
1. Chairman Tyler 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.
C:\My Documents\W PDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd
_
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
2. Commissioner Abels asked who the tenant would be. Staff stated the
applicant could address this.
3. Commissioner Kirk asked if under Quality Assurance, within the Conditions
of Approval, what sort of quality assurance measures does the City require
as part of the construction. Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated the Public
Works Department was interested mostly in the site improvements. The type
of quality assurance they are interested in is the review of the designs and
materials used in the pavements, concrete, trench back fill, someone
observing and providing inspection reports that this construction meets the
standards for the design life of the improvements.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked if City staff reviewed those tasks or just assumes
the applicant has quality assurance as part of the project. Staff stated they are
responsible for the overseeing of the quality of the project. Some items are
done "out of house" and are paid for by the developer, but staff oversees
everything.
5. Commissioner Butler asked staff to explain what the Architecture and
Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) recommended. Staff stated the
only ALRC concern was lack of design interest on the east side of the
building and the Highway 111 entry and their recommendation for additional
plant material.
6. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Mr. Rob Sanford, speaking on behalf of the developer, stated his architect
was not able to attend, but they have conformed to the architecture and
landscaping requirements adopted for the Center. It is to be a multi-tenant
building and because of the storefront facing westerly, they have created a
canopy with an overhang to create an architectural theme with vining on the
columns. In regard to the ALRC comments, one item of concern was how
the landscaping on the east elevation would be addressed. To address this
concern, they would be lining up the date palms at approximately the same
height as those at the Boston Market. He has retained Michael Buccino to
prepare landscaping that will soften the back of the building. It is not their
desire to install the vining as they do not believe this will be a long term
solution.
7. Commissioner Abels asked who the tenants would be. Mr. Sanford stated
one would be Starbucks. He is currently talking with other national and
regional tenants for the remainder of the building; but there will be three or
four others.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 2
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
8. Commissioner Butler asked about the realignment of the sidewalk and if it
was compatible with the Highway 111 Design Guidelines. Planning Manager
Christine di Iorio stated it met the guidelines. Associate Engineer Fred
Bouma stated that after reviewing the site, he determined the sidewalk
realignment could be made and still retain the graceful sweep to all curves
through this area. A condition was added that the applicant would have to
coordinate with City staff inspectors as to exactly how the forms would be
installed.
9. There being no further public participation, the public comment portion of the
hearing was closed and open to Commission Discussion.
10. Commissioner Robbins asked why there was a duplication of Conditions # 15,
#16, #30, and #31. Staff stated that Conditions #30 and #31 would be
deleted.
11. Commissioner Butler asked about Condition #22 regarding retention of on-
site or nuisance water. Associate Planner Fred Bouma stated that stormwater
drainage was drained to the channel, but nuisance water, which is
contaminated water, is required to be retained otherwise according to the
National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) under the Clean
Water Act. Commissioner Butler noted that other properties within this
development are currently using the Channel for nuisance water. Staff stated
the approval for the specific plan for the entire development was prior to the
enactment of the Clean Water Act in 1989. Some of the conditions could be
challenged by the applicant because of this; but since the City is backed by
Federal Law, it is staffs understanding the City would prevail. This is only
for nuisance, or irrigation water. Discussion followed regarding the how the
water could be retained.
12. Commissioner Kirk asked if the City should know how the nuisance water
will be retained and disposed of before approving the project. Staff stated it
is a part of the plan review process. It will not affect the grading plan, but
they will probably need to show a basin with an filtration device.
13. Commissioner Kirk stated he supported the suggestion of the ALRC and the
applicant's request.
14. Chairman Tyler questioned Condition #39 as he was concerned the
landscaping should also be kept low at the entryway/corner/crossway and he
would like this included in the condition. Staff stated they would add it to the
condition.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 3
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
15. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-
055 approving Site Development Permit 98-626.
a. Condition #39 - requiring the landscaping not block the site visibility
at the corner of Highway 111 and the entrance, and the interior corner
at the sidewalk, and change the word enhance to ensure.
b. Deletion of Conditions #30 and #31
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
B. Site Development Permit 98-623; a request of Kerr Project Services and Hall &
Foreman, Incorporated for approval to construct an International House of Pancakes
Restaurant on 1.21 acres in the Regional Commercial Zone within the Jefferson Plaza
Shopping Center.
-- 1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Planning Manger Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in the
staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department. Staff clarified that outdoor seating would be provided.
2. Chairman Tyler asked if the area was intended tis waiting seating or a dining
area. Staff stated it was for dining. Chairman Tyler asked if the previous
application for a restaurant was still valid. Staff stated it had been
withdrawn~
3. Commissioner Kirk asked if on Page 3 of the staff report, where it called for
turf to be used to soften desertscape setting, was this being required because
of the Highway 111 Design Guidelines. Staff stated no, the site had already
been planted and some mounding would be provided at the corner.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked if the design guidelines applied to the entire
property, or where? Staff stated it only applied to the 50-foot Highway 111
setback.
5. Commissioner Kirk asked which signs would apply to the minor deviation
request and which would not. Staff stated the deviation was to allow three
lines of copy on the south elevation sign. The east is consistent with the sign
program. Commissioner Kirk asked if the sign program took into
consideration the allowance for National tenant logos. Staff stated there are
three elements to the sign program: the Center sign program, the Highway
111 Design Guidelines, and allowances for Nationally recognized companies.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 4
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
6. Commissioner Butler noted the Architectural and Landscape Review
Committee had no comments in regard to the project and he was personally
glad to have this business in the City.
7. Chairman Tyler stated he had visited the two other IHOP's in the desert and
the signs are consistent with the others. He noted the front entranceway was
not directly adjacent to the parking lot and would require a long walk to the
entrance which could be a problem in the heat of the day.
8. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone would like to speak regarding this project.
Ms. Deborah Kerr, representing the applicant as consulting project manager,
stated she was present to address any questions the Commission may have.
In regard to their question concerning the orientation of the building, the
purpose is to face the entrance to Highway 111.
9. Commissioner Kirk asked about the use of turf abutting the north elevation
as to whether they felt strongly about it. Commissioner Kirk asked if they
_ would be interested in providing a more desert landscape. Ms. Kerr stated it
was their desire to be compatible with the remainder of the Center.
10. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was a lot of turf on the interior of the
Center. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it was used mostly on the
wider planters adjacent to Jefferson Street and along Highway 111.
11. Chairman Tyler stated there was a door shown on the west side of the
building facing the parking lot and asked if this was an emergency exit. Ms.
Kerr stated it was the door to the outside serving area.
12. Chairman Tyler noted the north elevation appeared to need additional
landscaping to buffer its appearance.
13. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the
public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion.
14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-.
056 approving Site Development Permit 98-623.
15. Commissioner Kirk asked that the use of turf, in the north planters, be
decreased and stated he would not support the applicant's request for
deviation of the sign. In his opinion, the extra line was not necessary as
IHOP is a National entity and well recognized; a customer would know who
they are without the word "Restaurant". He would suggest the landscaping
be drought tolerant.
C:\My DoCuments\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 5
-- Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
16. Chairman Tyler stated he too was concemed about the word "Restaurant",
but noted it was included on the other restaurants and appeared to be a part
of their National logo.
17. Commissioner Kirk stated this may be true and it may be larger in other
cities, but in La Quinta they are trying to be sensitive to design guidelines, in
particular signs, and even though it is a minor deviation, it could be the "tip
of the iceberg", and he would hate to see sign proliferation in the City,
especially along Highway 111.
18. Commissioner Robbins asked the applicant to respond. Ms. Kerr stated the
word "Restaurant" is part of their registered trademark logo and they would
like to retain it. Following discussion, it was determined the sign would
remain as submitted by the applicant.
19. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated Condition//35 would be modified
to substitute some of the turf in the north planter with a desert planting
scheme.
ROLL CALL: AYES: CommiSsioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
C. Environmental Assessment 98-360 and Tentative Tract Map 28867; a request of
Winchester Development Company, for Certification of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-360 and
recommendation for approval of a reconfiguration of Tract 28470 to create an
additional 32 residential lots.
1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand presented the staff report, a copy of
which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff informed
the Commission of the modification to Condition//57 and the addition of
Condition #58.
2. Commissioner Butler asked if the 17-foot height limitation was for the houses
in the south end of the tract. Staff stated it was for those homes that would
be parallel to Avenida Bermudas and on Del Gato Drive.
3. Commissioner Robbins asked for clarification on the number of lots being
deleted. Why was staff more concemed about increasing the lots in the lower
part and not those in the upper portion of the tract. Staff stated that with the
development and analysis of the entire tract, there would not be the visual
C:\My Docurnents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 6
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
impact on the upper lots as there would be on the lower lots. Staff is
recommending denial of the reconfiguration for Lots 50 through 68; but
approval of Lots 94 through 106.
4. Chairman Tyler asked about the impact of the letter from the Department of
Fish and Wildlife Service. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the Fish
and Wildlife letter had been received and even though Fish and Wildlife
believe the project may have an impact on the sheep in the hills, the City had
received no evidence to substantiate their claim. There is no evidence that a
change to the lot configuration of a tract within an already graded
development would have any impact.
5. Commissioner Abels asked if any sheep had been seen in this area. No
comment was made by staff.
6. Commissioner Butler stated he was concerned about the impact of a fence as
recommended by the Department of Fish and Wildlife. City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell stated a fence in this area would be against City regulations if it
were to be constructed above the 20% grade. Commissioner Butler asked if
it would be possible to ask someone from the Department of Fish and
Wildlife to present their argument to the Commission. City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell stated that as projects are brought to the City, there will be several
opportunities to hear from the Department of Fish and Wildlife.
7. Commissioner Kirk asked if the Department of Fish and Wildlife had reacted
to the HUGO Ordinance. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated no
information had been received. Commissioner Kirk stated his
disappointment with the Department to not provide the Commission with a
recommendation for guidance in conjunction with this request.
8. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Mr. Mike Rowe, representing the applicant, stated he appreciated working
with staff and the Commission on this development. The reason for this
request was due to the demand of the real estate market. He then questioned
Conditions #21 which requires them to apply for a CLOMAR. As they were
not changing anything on the FEMA maps, he did not believe it applied to
this tract, or the project as a whole. Condition #57, they were asking to be
deleted as they have provided additional setbacks which creates more open
space.
9. Chairman Tyler asked if the lots along Del Gato had been graded for the prior
configuration. Mr. Rowe stated the reconfiguration will cause the lots to step
down quicker and thus will have to be regraded.
C:LMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 7
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
10. Commissioner Butler stated he too questioned why the project had to meet
the requirement for FEMA. Mr. Rowe stated the master drainage program
that was constructed within the project was to take care of this. Associate
Engineer Fred Bouma stated this is not a new condition, it is a carryover from
the original Conditions of Approval. There are retention basins within this
development that are Zoned AO on the National FEMA Map. AO is a
designation which is very expensive to obtain insurance for. In order to get
a letter of map revision, or the CLOMAR, for your property, once it is
classified as being in this zone, you have to prove that your home is not a part
of this area which is a long and tedious process. FEMA will not allow the
City to make the determination. The property owner must submit an
application and then follow the process. The maps that are used to determine
whether a property is within the area or not, does not show property lines. It
only indicates an area and it is the property owner's responsibility to prove
whether or not their property is within the area. The City is conditioning the
developer to take care of this process for the future property owners. It is not
expensive for the developer when he has a large group of properties for which
mapping is already on the computer and surveyors and engineers are available
-- who can make a group, multiple property request for letters of map revision,
or at least recognition that these properties are not within the flood zone. Mr.
Rowe stated he did not disagree with what staff has stated, but the normal
process is for the lender to require it of the property owner. His concern is
that it is required prior to pulling a building permit.
11. Commissioner Kirk stated that if this was a condition placed on the original
development, and building permits have been issued, is this condition not
being met or what? Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated it is possible that
building permits are being issued without this condition being met.
Commissioner Kirk asked if it could be verified that this condition was
contained in the original conditions. Discussion followed regarding the
conditions.
12. Commissioner Robbins asked for clarification on the word "near existing
special flood hazard areas". Staff would look into the matter.
13. Commissioner Kirk stated in regard to staffs recommendation for Lots 50 to
68, the applicant indicated the step down would dramatically reduce the
visual impact. At Lot 68, the highest elevation, it appears it would be the
same regardless of what is decided. Lot 50, which is the lowest elevation,
would also be the same. Will these lots be graded different so that all lots
between 50 and 68 would be dropped some appreciable distance? Mr. Rowe
explained the reduction process and what the visual impact would be with the
increase/decrease in lots. Discussion followed regarding the elevation change
and roof massing which could affect the visual impact.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 8
,
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
14. Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated the condition regarding FEMA was
contained in the original conditions for the project and staff would need to
offer the applicant an opportunity to satisfy this condition. If the applicant
could have the grading plans for all lots near the retention areas viewed by
FEMA's consultant and obtain assurance from FEMA that the lots are not
contained in the flood zone, it would be less complicated than the CLOMAR
process and would relieve the City of the responsibility for saddling the
homeowners with the high flood coverage. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell
suggested the condition be Changed to read as it was worded in the original
approval for the development. "The applicant shall comply with the City's
Flood Protection Ordinance. The applicant shall apply for conditional letters
of map revision from FEMA for all lots near existing special flood hazard
areas within the development as shown on the Flood Insurance Rate Map.
Prior to issuance of any building permit for these lots, the applicant shall have
r~ceived relief letters for these lots. Prior to final inspection of homes on the
lots, the applicant shall provide FEMA with the required 'as built'
information to receive FEMA letters removing the structures from the Special
Flood Hazard Area." Staff will see that the condition is met before any
further building permits are issued.
15. Commissioner Robbins stated he had a problem with this condition because
dealing with FEMA is a long drawn out process and depending upon what the
City's interpretation of "near" is, the City could delay the project for a
number years and he is not sure that is necessary. Associate Engineer Fred
Bouma suggested it be amended to apply only to the fronting units.
Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the original condition
applies to the overall project of the entire site and could not be changed
during this public hearing. The Commission could reword or delete
Condition/t21 for this tract, but regardless, the original condition for the
entire site will remain in force.
16. There being no other public participation, Chairman Tyler closed the public
participation of the public hearing and opened to issue for Commission
discussion.
17. Commissioner Kirk stated the only outstanding issue is staff's
recommendation on Lots 50 through 68. He would like to see a cross-section
that more accurately depicts what the visual impact would be.
18. Commissioner Butler stated he agreed with Commissioner Kirk. He
understands the consumer demand, but the roof massing does make it
confusing as. it is hard to envision what will really be built. He asked if staff
could provide more information on the massing. Staff stated the applicant
could be requested to provide additional information.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 9
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
19. Commissioner Robbins stated he was not convinced that 35% more roof mass
with the additional houses, is anymore than 35% roof mass with fewer
houses. He questioned Condition #31.B.3. and the width of a cul-de-sac
which he thought was too small. Staff stated it meets the Fire Marshal's
requirements. Commissioner Robbins asked that Condition #48 be corrected
to read "W-33".
20. Chairman Tyler stated his concern about the lots on Avenida Bermudas as
they were an issue of great concern to the community. He recommended that
Condition #58 be deleted. He would concur with leaving the lots at their
current size as proposed under Condition #57.
21. Commissioner Kirk stated he would be willing to support staff's
recommendation, but if the applicant would like to spend time with staff to
give a presentation to the Commission that would substantiate his position
and continue this item, he would like to make this suggestion. Chairman
Tyler noted the next Commission meeting would not be until September. Mr.
Rowe asked if there could be a recess to see if this could be resolved with
staff at this time.
Chairman Tyler recessed at 8:41 p.m. and reconvened at 8:48 p.m.
22. Following the break, staff recommended that the applicant increase the size
of Lots 50 though 68 to 100-foot minimum widths. This will decrease the
number of lots by approximately three instead of seven.
23. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-
057 recommending to the City Council Certification of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-360.
The findings, were revised to reflect that the Commission believes by
requiring the 100-foot lot size it would adequately mitigate the view corridor
concerns.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
24. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 98-058, recommending to the City Council approval
of Tentative Tract Map 28867, subject to findings and conditions as
amended:
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 10
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
a. Condition #21 would be deleted.
b. Condition #48 correct to read "CVWD Standard W-33".
c. Condition//57 would be modified to require Lots 50-68 to have 100-
foot widths.
d. Condition #58 - added: "For a distance of 150-feet east of the
ultimate fight-of-way of Avenida Bermudas, single family residences
shall be restricted to a maximum of 17-feet in height, excluding any
roof projections (chimneys, etc.), which are subject to the
requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for all lots abutting Del Gato
and parallel to Avenida Bermudas."
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
A. Environmental Assessment 98-359 and Conditional Use Permit 98-040; a request of~
La Quinta Golf Properties for approval of a Specific Plan to allow 28 resort
residential lots and a recreation building with related amenities, and approval of a
conditional use permit to allow construction of 28 resort residential units.
-- 1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted one additional
condition to the Specific Plan; Condition//23 be changed to require the
maximum building height to be 28-feet instead of 34, and add a condition to
state the conditional use permit will not be valid until the Zoning Code
update becomes effective.
2. Commissioner Robbins asked if the only place the building would be visible
would be from the access road to Lake Cahuilla. Staff stated that from
outside the project, yes.
3. Commissioner Kirk stated the elevations were one story and if two story was
being considered he would like to the elevations to come back to the
Commission, especially if they are going to 34-feet. He questioned why a
specific plan application was needed for a relatively small project, and asked
if a specific plan was needed for a resort-residential project. Planning
Manager Christine di Iorio stated no, it would only need a conditional use
permit and site development permit. Community Development Director Jerry
Herman stated the reason for the specific plan is because the applicant wanted
-- to deviate some of the zoning standards and in order to do this a specific plan
would be required. The deviation is to allow parking spaces instead of
parking garages, one space for each bedroom.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 1 1
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
4. Commissioner Abels stated he agreed with the 28-foot height limitation.
5. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Mr. Tim Day, Keith International, Inc., spoke on behalf of the applicant, and
stated they had no objection to the 28-foot requirement. In regard to Plan 3
they would like to have the opportunity to have the two story, knowing that
they would be required to come back to the Commission for approval at a
future date. He asked when the Zoning Code update would become effective.
Staff clarified it would become effective 30-days after the second reading of
the Ordinance on August 4th, or mid September. Mr. Bain stated his concem
was the four building plans that were in for plan check. Staff stated they can
pull a building permit, but cannot use the building permit for a resort
residential until the zoning changes are in effect.. City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell clarified the reason they had to wait until the Zoning Ordinance
took effect was the change to allow resort residential in a residential zone
with the conditional use permit. The building is not an issue, it is the planned
use of the building. Mr. Bain requested Condition #9 be deferred to
Condition # 12 and it is their belief they are somewhat competitive and asked
_ that Condition #9 be deleted. Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated that the
ten foot easement came from a request of Imperial Irrigation District many
years ago. Staff has no documentation or reason to not support the
recommendation for deletion, but will re-examine the condition and speak to
Imperial Irrigation District before the project goes to the City Council to see
if the condition can be modified or deleted. He does concur with the deletion
of Condition #9.
6. There being no other public participation, Chairman Tyler closed the public
comment portion of the public hearing and opened the hearing for
Commission discussion.
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-
059 recommending to the City Council Certification of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-359.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
8. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 98-060, recommending to the City Council
approval of Specific Plan 98-032, subject to findings and conditions as
amended:
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 12
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, ! 998
a. Condition #9 being deleted.
b. Add a condition to the specific plan to require a 28-foot height
limitation for the buildings.
c. Correct the wording on Condition #21.
10. Commissioner Robbins stated his concern with the comer of Lake Cahuilla
and Quarry Road as it could be a safety hazard. Staff suggested that a new
Condition//24 be added to require adequate visibility at that comer.
d. Add a new condition//24 requiring adequate visibility at the comer
of Lake Cahuilla and Quarry Road
11. Chairman Tyler stated his concern about the parking requirements for
overflow parking needs. Principal Planner Stan Sawa stated parking would
be permitted at the curb as well as the parking lot and parking spaces.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
-- 12. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 98-061 recommending to the City Council
approval of Conditional Use Permit 98-040, subject to the findings and
conditions as amended:
a. Adding the effective date of the Conditional Use Permit to the
conditions.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
B. Tentative Tract Map 28738; a request of KSL Land Corporation for approval of a
subdivision of 8.27 acres into 22 single family and other common or street lots within
the boundaries of Specific Plan 83-002, Amendment//3 within PGA West.
1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the staff report, a copy of
which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff stated
they were requesting Condition//32 be clarified to state that in regard to the
PGA West Off-Site Improvement Phasing Plan, that as a requirement of the
__ Specific plan, prior to final map submission, the PGA Off-Site Improvement
Phasing Plan shall be submitted and approved to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. In addition, staff Would like to recommend modifying that the
applicant shall satisfy this tract's share of off-site street obligations to be
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 13
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
specified in the PGA West Off-Site Improvement Phasing Plan for approval
by the City Engineer. This is a clarification of the timing and the completion
of the improvement phasing plan.
2. Commissioner Kirk asked for clarification as to whether or not a PGA West
Off-Site Improvement Phasing Plan existed at this time. Staff stated there is
one in draft stage and' staff is working with the applicant to finalize it. One
did not exist for the prior phases. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated this
plan was being prepared now, because all the tracts required the
improvements to be done at some future time and that time needed to be
clarified as to when the obligations would be completed. This plan will
determine when each of the improvements will be completed in conjunction
with the tracts.
3. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Mr. Chris Berg, civil engineer.for the project, stated they are in agreement
with all conditions as presented and amended.
_ 4. Chairman Tyler asked about Condition # 10 in regard to the golf cart crossing
on Madison Street and the signalization. Mr. Berg stated it was his
understanding there would be signalization at Airport Boulevard and
Madison Street, but the golf cart crossing would probably be east of Madison
Street. Ms. Cindy Zamora, representing KSL Development, stated they do
plan to have signal lights at Madison Street and Airport Boulevard and will
be requesting to have surface crossing for the Greg Norman Course, north of
Airport Boulevard. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that prior
Council approvals allowed a round-about at this intersection as well.
5. There being no other public participation, Chairman Tyler closed the public
participation and opened to Commission discussion.
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
98-062 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 28738,
subject to the conditions as amended.
a. Condition #32 be clarified to state the PGA West Off-Site
Improvement Phasing Plan, prior to final map submission, the PGA
Off-Site Improvement Phasing Plan shall be submitted to and
m approved to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
b. The applicant shall satisfy this tract's share of off-site street
obligations to be specified in the PGA West Off-Site Improvement
Phasing Plan for approval by the City Engineer for clarification of the
timing and the completion of the improvement phasing plan
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 14
Planning Commission Meeting
July 28, 1998
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEM: None.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS.
A. Chairman Tyler gave a report of the Council meeting of July 20, 1998.
B. Community Development Director Jerry Herman informed the Commission of the
dates for the two joint workshops to be held with the City Council to review the
General Plan. They will be advertised to obtain public input.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to
adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning
Commission to be held on September 8, 1998, at. 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning
Commission was adjoumed at 9:24 P.M. on July 28, 1998.
C :\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc7-28-98.wpd 15