Loading...
PCMIN 11 24 1998 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA November 24, 1998 7:00 P.M. I.. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:04 P.M. by Chairman Tyler who asked Commissioner Robbins to lead the flag salute. B. Chairman Tyler requested the roll call' Present: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to excuse Commissioner Abels. Unanimously approved. C. Staffpresent: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Associate Engineer Fred Bouma, -- Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: A. Chairman Tyler requested the agenda be reorganized to move Commissioners Items before the Public Hearing Items. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to approve the Agenda as amended. Unanimously approved. IV. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Chairman Tyler asked the Commission to consider what meetings would be held in the month of December. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to cancel the Planning Commission meeting of December 22, 1998. Unanimously approved. V. CONSENT ITEMS' __ A. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of November 10, 1998. Commissioner Kirk asked that the minutes be corrected on Page 16, Item 50, to correct the spelling of the word "to" to "too"; Page 19, Item 73, correct the spelling of the word (agreed to agree); Page 20, Item 75, change the vote to show that he voted "No" and also for Item 76 on Page 21. Chairman Tyler asked that Page 7, Item C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 1 ' Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 11 .b., correct the spelling of the word "objection" to "objective"; Page 8, Item 12.c. correct the spelling of the word "wall" to "walk". There being no other correction, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to approve the minutes as corrected. B. Department RepOrt: None. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 98-369. Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631, and Tract 24230-Amendment #1; a request of Mainiero Smith and Associates, Inc. for A. G. Spanos for approval and recommendation to the City Council for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-369 and approval of a 160 unit airspace condominium subdivision project on 10.17 acres; review of the building elevations and development plans; and the elimination of Condition #41 of Tract 24230 requiring affordable housing units within the project. 1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing 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. Commissioner Kirk asked why the applicant was being required to install median improvements. Associate Engineer Fred Bouma stated the Updated General Plan changed the designation of this street to a higher'level which required the median improvements. This project is subject to the conditions at the time of approval, therefore, to bring the project into conformance with the General Plan, it is being required to have the median improvements for a Primary Arterial. 3. Chairman Tyler asked staff to indicate where the single car garages and carports would be located on the project. Staff indicated the location on the site plan. 4. Commissioner Robbins asked if the carports were assigned to a unit or are they open parking. Staff stated it was a requirement that a covered parking space be provided for each unit and the remainder will be unassigned parking. Commissioner Robbins asked if every unit would have a garage. Staff stated there is a garage for each space. 5. Chairman Tyler questioned the height of the wall along Dulce Del Mar. Staff stated they were recommending a six foot wall as measured from the project grade elevation. C :\Mv Documents\WPDOCS\i~c 11,24-98.wpd 2 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 6. Commissioner Kirk stated that most of the letters received in objection to the project expressed concern about the apartments; are these apartments or condominiums? Staff stated the applicant would address this. 7. Commissioner Robbins asked if the original plans for the Lake La Quinta project showed the approved drainage plan. Staff stated the drainage plan was approved under the original tract approval for Lake La Quinta and went on to explain the line of drainage. 8. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Marvin Roos, Mainiero Smith and Associates, representing the applicant, gave an overview of the project from its inception. He further clarified the units were to be rental apartments, but they are requesting the condominium map be approved at this time. The rent structure is proposed to range from $800-$1,000 a month. There will be no access to the single family areas. All access will enter off 47th Avenue. The signal will be shared jointly with the proposed Auto Mall. ! The recreation area is located furthest from the Lake La Quinta residential units. It was their intention to minimize view obstructions by use of landscaping. This project was disclOsed at the time of purchase to each of the residents. Roof pitches were dropped to reduce the appearance of mass, a garage will be provided for each unit and most parking spaces are covered. All units have laundry and dryers built in. They will install larger plant materials upon onset to mitigate some concerns raised by the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC). The buildings are well articulated so no one mass is seen at any one location. 9. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to read the disclosure regarding the high density designation for the subjedt property, that was given to each of the property owners within Lake La Quinta when they purchased their property. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio read Item #3 on the Disclosure Statement (a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department). 10. Chairman Tyler asked if this was a recorded document. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated it is unknown how the seller handled this document. __ 11. Commissioner Kirk asked how the parking was to be handled. Mr. Roos stated staff had requested them to provide background information on multi- family parking. The City's ordinance sets forth a basic standard, however, based on ULI studies, the applicant can propose parking space requirements C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pcl l~24-98.wpd 3 Planning Commission Meeting - November 24, 1998 different than the Code. The normal standard for most Spanos projects is 1.9 spaces per unit. They have provided staff with a number of standards from other jurisdictions in the area which averaged 2.0 spaces per unit. This is their basis for what they are requesting. 12. Commissioner Butler stated his understanding was this was to be a condominium prOject and he is inclined to change his focus on how this will be handled based on the information being provided. 13. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell clarified that the standards for apartments and condominiums are the same. The tract map before the Commission is for a condominium development. It is up to the developer as to whether or not to record the map. If they were not proposing a condominium development, they would not have had to bring the tract map to the Commission for an apartment use. They would have only brought a Site Development Permit. This is an extra step they are doing for potential use as a condominium. 14. Commissioner Butler asked if the Commission had any latitude in regard to the use of the land. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated it is zoned for either use. 15. Commissioner Robbins stated a letter was sent to the Coachella Valley Water District protesting some of their fees on the basis this was a condominium project. He too is concerned over a high density project this close to relatively low density residential uses. 16. Chairman Tyler stated he was not satisfied as to why they were not meeting the City's requirement for 365 parking spaces. Mr. Roos stated they could meet the requirement, but it would require them to delete some of the planters distributed throughout the project. Long term statistics do not justify the need for 365 spaces. They chose the additional landscaping instead of the asphalt. 17. Commissioner Kirk stated he did read the information provided by the applicant on parking and it did present a compelling story. Of 60 studies the highest parking rate was 1.9 and the average was one car per apartment. What the applicant is proposing is higher than the highest of 60 studies. He would rather have open space and greenery rather than more carports. Maybe they should look at the Zoning Code to possibly reduce the parking standards. 18. Chairman Tyler stated the Spanos organization has a number of projects, where is the closest? Mr. Roos stated San Diego would be the best. They could provide a map if the Commission would like one. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 4 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 19. Chairman Tyler stated this development is of great concern to the residents of Lake La Quinta. The City has received numerous letters and petitions and all have been carefully reviewed. The Commission appreciates the time and effort that has been expressed. In regard to some of the concerns, he would like to state the following: a. The original ten acre parcel is designated as multi-family. b. Lake La Quinta's CC&R's constitute a legal agreement between the HOA and developer and not the City. c. Pedestrian and vehicle access to the single family residences is now going to have a six foot wall separating the two uses. d. In regard to the potential use of the name Lake La Quinta, the City has no jurisdiction over the use of names. The purpose of the Commission is to see that the project meets all requirements and codes of the City. If it meets all those criteria, then the Commission must make a favorable decision to the City Council. Since a large number of people have expressed a desire to speak, please limit your remarks to something new and not contained in the letters that have been received. 20. .Mr. Jay Roberts, 47-790 Via Jarden, representing the Lake La Quinta Homeowners' Association (HOA), stated these homeowners are permanent homeowners in the community and have invested in the community. They are proud of their neighborhood and community. The Board of Directors for the HOA is not opposed to development, but welcome developers who will add to the community. They have met three times with Mr. Jack Lucas, Manager of The Spanos Company, and have repeatedly stated they would like to work with them to resolve their concerns. The Spanos Company has indicated they will not make any changes to alleviate any of their concerns. They do not oppose the development of the site, but vehemently oppose this proposed use. First, the unit density is at the maximum permitted by zoning regulations; all the residential buildings are to be two story and this is not in character with the adjoining residential units. Second, it is their believe that Spanos is not entitled to cross private property to utilize Lake La Quinta as a retention basin for surface water run off. Provisions should be made to handle the surface water nm off within the proposed project site. Third, the open carports should be replaced with closed carports to be compatible with the entire community. Fourth, a five foot wall is proposed to be constructed around the project, and has now been changed to six feet. A taller wall on a raised berm would be more appropriate. Fifth, the Environmental Impact Report for this project was performed nine years ago and even though a Supplemental EIR has been prepared, they suggest this project will have an C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 5 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 adverse affect on the site, specifically with regard to traffic on 47th Avenue as well as WaShington Street and Adams Street. This project with the planned density will exacerbate any traffic problems created by the previously approved Auto Mall at the intersection of Adams Street and 47th Avenue. Desert Sands Unified School District has indicated this project and any other residential project will potentially result in an impact on their school system. They urge the Commission to withhold approval of this project as presented, to carefully review their comments and suggestions to evaluate their merit, and advise the Spanos Company of the changes that must be made to satisfy the serious concerns of the HOA. With appropriate modifications they will wholeheartedly support the project. 21. Mr. Jay Baden, 47-415 Via Cordova, distributed pictures he had taken ofthe Lake La Quinta development. He stated the first pictures showed a balloon flying on a 30-foot tether and the balloon is two feet in height which makes it 32 feet above the existing grade. It was his impression that this showed the impact on the community the proposed buildings would have as you enter the Adams Street gate. Picture #2: the Oleander hedge is 14-16 feet high, but as the Oleanders are currently being exposed to a disease, they could be lost. Due to the grade the six foot wall would not be six feet on the other side as the pads are to be raised four feet higher. Picture #3 is a typical residence in Lake La Quinta and you can see the balloon above the home. The balloon is twice as high as the house. The setback is the beginning of the ridge in the buildings. Picture #4 is similar to #3. Picture #5 is the backyard of a residential house facing the Spanos project to the east. The balloon is placed back at the first ridge or about 100 feet. This gives the Commission a visual impact of how the project will impact them. 22. Commissioner Kirk asked if the balloons were placed at the beginning of the roof line. Mr. Baden stated they were placed at the top of the ridge of the gable ends. It is not the true height because this is 32 feet maximum above existing grade and the grade is to be raised 2-4 feet higher. 23. Mr. Benjamin Rosker, 47-675 Via Montessa, stated his issue was whether they were apartments or condominiums. He asks that the Commission consider 1) everyone recognizes Mr. Spanos originally owned all the land. When he sold this parcel to Wilma, it became an item in their CC&R's. In the CC&R's the prospective homeowners were told 39 times that condominiums were to be built on that tract. The disclosure statement presented by Mr. Roos stated they are for sale or for rent units it does not mean they are to be apartments automatically. The CC&R's state specifically they will be condominiums. The State Statue that is quoted in the CC&R's governs the development of condominiums. There is a great deal of difference between an apartment and condominium. Condominiums are C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 6 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 pride of ownership and apartments are transient in nature. Noise is the common denominator of apartments. Apartments are operated by the owners and no CC&r's go along with them. Private ownership is important to pride of ownership. In his opinion, they have every right to expect this tract to be developed as told to them by Mr. Spanos in the CC&Rs. 24. Mr. Bill Hatchett, 78-975 Dulce Del Mar, stated he had bought a condominium in Palm Springs ten years age and enjoyed this Valley every weekend they were here. They researched every community in the Valley and determined that La Quinta was developing and growing that was consistent with their wishes and seemed to be well managed with strong community orientation. Now their dream home is in jeopardy as their home will border this high density project. Their concern is the proposed setbacks and how they will render his property less than appealing to him, his family and any future sale he may make. As proposed directly across the Dulce Del Mar property line and set back 20 feet will be a 30 foot apartment building with an overall height of 34-36 feet. This is unacceptable to him. Further west on Dulce Del Mar are three additional 30 foot buildings set on pads that could increase the height to 34-36 feet. These buildings will become a 34-36 foot high wall running approximately 240 to 280 feet long setback 20 feet from the Dulce Del Mar property line. 'As their property line turns north they propose 38 open ended carports at a 10 foot setback with only a six foot high masonry wall to block out car lights, noise, and other noxious odors. They also intent to install 11 open parking spaces along this line creating a potential nightmare of annoyance for the property owners only ten feet away. The City needs to reconsider setbacks on Adams Street to allow buildings on Adams Street. Spanos must reduce the high density by at least reducing all existing perimeter buildings to one story. All carports facing single family must be redesigned to garages and no open parking or garages should be at 10 foot setback to these residences backyards. This project is too dense for compatibility with surrounding low density high end residential development and must be redesigned to be compatible with the surrounding residential community and the City of La Quinta. 25. Ms. Theresa Tasso, 78-810 Via Avante, stated she and her husband visited the Valley in 1992, and appreciated the desert. They considered many developments and after a couple years search they found Lake La Quinta. They agree with the petition she signed to prevent the Spanos condominium/apartment project from being built as presented. She understands the developer has the fight to develop his land and make money, but why should his development cause them to lose money on their investment and home. The Commission has a moral obligation to the C :XMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc 1 'l-24-98.wpd 7 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 residents of Lake La Quinta to protect their investment, security, and prestige. The use of the name Lake La Quinta is unauthorized and deceptive. There cannot be any connection between the Lake La Quinta name and apartments development. Please deny the apartments as presented. 26. Mr. Frank Tasso, 78-810 Via Avante, stated that at one time Spanos owned the entire piece and they set aside two pieces; the high density area and the commercial area. He had this area zoned high density and at that time the City did not take into consideration the furore residences of Lake La Quinta which was a single story, low density, upscale prestige community. This was the City's first mistake. There are currently only two areas zoned high density in the City. Please do not approve this in its current shape. If this is approved, litigation will occur. Don't compound the original mistake. What was the trade off; what is the hidden deal? This may bear some investigation in the future. 27. Mr. Tom Oglesby, 78-885 Dulce Del Mar., stated their home is directly across from the southwest comer of the project. In accordance with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance the developer has the fight to built to the density of 16 units to the acre on these ten acres. He also has the right to put all of those units in two story buildings. This is a case where two fights make a wrong. The General Plan and Zoning Maps look great on paper but it is at the time of implementation that their flaws appear. As described in the staff report, two sides of the parcel abut existing Single story homes of light density. The other two sides abut the same streets as Lake La Quinta and because one third of the 47t~ Avenue frontage of this proposed development is across from the Coachella Valley Water District parcel, the ten acre site has less exposure to commercial use than does Lake La Quinta. The adopted General Plan only designates three sites as high density residential which indicates there isn't much demand. As the site is only ten acres in size, it would not be a great loss to change the density more in keeping with the existing development in the area. The developer may own the property but he does not own the zoning. That is a policy matter under the control of the City and since the General Plan is a living document, it is subject to change when the policy makers determine that there are inequities. This is the case with this project. The developer wishes to construct two story buildings next to a project where they are not allowed. Within the Washington Street/Adams Street corridor south of Highway 111 there is onlY one two story house. The reservoir tank at the comer of 47t~ Avenue and Adams Street. As you drive north on Adams Street you are the same distance from the tank as you would be if you were in front 0ftheir home. Imposing as that tank is, it is only 24 feet tall. Add another six feet and this is the height of the C:LMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc 11-24-98.wpd 8 t' Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 buildings that are proposed to be built in front of their home. Then it has to be raised another four feet since the pads are that much higher than their pad. City development standards require that two story buildings maintain a 150 foot setback from Adams Street. People driving on Adams Street are protected from the imposition of the buildings. Should not the same standard be supplied to them. Representatives of Lake La Quinta have expressed their concerns to the developer and they have been ignored. They are therefore, turning to the Planning Commission for redress. Send the project back to the staff with directions to reduce the density by eliminating the two story buildings. If the developer continues to not cooperate, adopt a resolution of denial on the basis of incompatibility with the surrounding development, request the City Council to initiate an amendment to the General Plan reducing the density. In so far as apartments are concerned, he spent the last 33 days in an apartment in San Diego area due to his wife's medical condition and it was not a pleasant experience. 28. Mr. Dutch Dilsaver, 78-835 Dulce Del Mar, stated La Quinta is a model city. The City has worked diligently to see that it remains a model city. Another city with a similar problem resolved their problem by getting the city, developer and homeowners together to work out the problems and keep that city a model. The same can be done here with the proper cooperation of all entities. He has met with staff and discussed the concerns of the HOA. Mr. Roos has stated they met with the homeowners and made some changes to their plan to address some of their concerns. They did change the 5/12 pitch to a 4/12 pitch which reduced the ridgeline two feet. They still have the pads four feet high above street level. If they were to drop the pitch to a 3/12 it would drop it another two feet. If they lowered the ceilings inside the two stories six inches, it would drop it another foot and if they lowered the grade another two feet it would drop it another two feet. A lot can be done if they apply themselves. They can work in cooperation with staff, homeowners, and Planning Commission to come up with a project everyone can be proud of. 29. Mr. Wayne Guralnick, 74-399 Highway 111, Palm Desert, general counsel for the Lake La Quinta HOA, displayed the carport elevation on the site plan to show the impact on the neighboring homes. These people were told these units would be condominiums. They read the CC&R's and believed their views would be preserved. If there were to be condominiums, the CC&R's would be there to control what happens there. The Commission does not need to grant the density as it is, there are several options available to the Commission. They can require changes to make the project more compatible with the surrounding residents. C:LMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 9 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 30. Mr. Dave Wagner, 47-815 Via Traiss, stated this zoning was approved before the houses were built. Now that there are houses this project is proposed. They are two separate entities. It would not be approved if it were introduced at this time. 31. There being no further public comment, this portion of the public hearing was closed and open to Commission discussion. 32. Commissioner Butler stated he was not certain that apartments are better than a condominium project. Modifications are needed to make it acceptable to each party and he is not sure it is possible at this meeting. He would like to continue the project. 33. Commissioner Robbins stated he was concerned in the trend of a lot of the subdivision having the maximum density and minimum lot sizes. This plan is a mass of building and asphalt. As nice as Spanos projects are in San Diego, this is not San Diego and it is not appropriate for the area. They have a right to built 16-units to the acre and it is zoned for that many units, but they should only have that fight if they can satisfy all the other conditions and concerns. It is his opinion they have not done that, therefore, he cannot support the project as it is submitted. 34. Commissioner Kirk stated he is very sensitive to the concerns raised and the rights of the developer. This site has been designated as multi-family development for some time. It was incorporated into a larger scheme for Lake La Quinta and there have been disclosure statements. It sounds like there is some confusion as to whether the disclosure statements and CC&Rs apply just to a condominium or multi-family apartment. He has a question as to whether it was made known whether apartments or condominiums would be built. In terms of supporting or rejecting the project, he has not reached a decision. Constructive comments have been made by residents and the project could move forward with some changes. Reducing building heights, altering grading plans, and utilizing the Adams Street setback to build more units. His concerned would be too much asphalt and cars. The Auto Mall related impacts would be much greater than the building impacts. The buildings are high for the surrounding area, but with the landscape treatment maybe it will not be as big an impact as hearing cars coming in and out. Maybe the City could work with the applicant to reduce the number of parking spaces required, redesign the parking, placing buildings further away from existing community or perhaps into the Adams Street setback. Before supporting any recommendation, he would like to hear the applicant respond to some of the concerns raised. C:LMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc 11-24-98.wpd 1 0 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 35. Chairman Tyler stated he agreed with what had been stated. He would support replacing 'the open carports with enclosed garages to minimize the noise and glare for the homeowners that abut that wall. Secondly, the four foot grade differential with this project being higher than Dulce Del Mar and the same height as the property to the west. For every foot you grade down it lowers the roof line. The Zoning Code does not allow two story houses next to existing one story houses for compatibility. Even though this is not the same, it seems you could achieve some change by having the perimeter buildings one story to minimize the impact. He too, would like to allow time for both the applicant and staff to resolve some of the issues raised. 36. Mr. Marvin Roos, stated the CC&R's were required of the home builder Wilma Pacific. The possibility of this property annexing into that was set forth in that document. The reference to apartments or condominiums was not part of the Spanos representation. The Spanos Company would like to continue to work on how they can reduce the impact on the community. They can look at those items presented and others. The matter of one story does not begin to approach the kind of property value and demand that this is. The General Plan does set high density to buffer the commercial. They would like to come back with a design that might soften the areas. Not sure what the planning process would be to explore the setbacks on Adams Street. He would also like the flexibility to explore other design altematives. Based on this information, they would like to request a continuance. 37. 'There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to continue this application to January 26, 1999. Unanimously approved with Commissioner Abels being absent. 38. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that in order to allow flexibility to the developer as it relates to the Adams. Street setback, it is a zoning requirement that it is one story along Adams Street. The only way to deviate from that requirement is to do a specific plan and the specific plan would allow the applicant the ability to modify that standard to the Zoning Code. This is the only way they would be allowed to have more than one story adjacent to Adams Street. · Chairman Tyler recessed the meeting at 8'52 p.m. and reconvened at 9:00 p.m. B. Continued Tentative Tract Map 28964; a request of Oliphant and Williams Associates, Inc. for approval and recommendation to the City Council for Certification.of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-365 to subdivide 39 acres into 78 residential lots and other common lots for the property located on the north side of 50t~ Avenue, approximately 1,600 feet west of Jefferson Street. C:WIy Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 1. Commissioner Butler excused himself due to a possible conflict of interest. 2. Chairman Tyler stated the applicant had requested a continuance to January 12, 1998. 3. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to continue this application to the meeting of January 12, 1998. Unanimously approved with Commissioner Abels and Butler being absent. Commissioner Butler rejoined the Commission. C. Tentative Tract Map 27519; a request of Century-Crowell Communities for recommendation of a Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-370 and approval of a 70 single family and other common lot subdivision map on 17.5 acres in the RL Zone District. 1. . Chairman Tyler opened the public heating 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. Staff is recommending the addition of a Condition #92 to require the trees on the northeast edge of the north property line next to the retention basin, be retained and included in the landscaping for the retention basin. They are also recommending that the larger trees adjacent to the residential lots be removed. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the City has a Code section 'that states dwellings next to the project or City, County, or tract boundary line shall be limited to one story if an existing one story dwelling is within 50 feet of the common property line unless there is a street separating the two. The existing houses to the north will be required to have one story in accordance with Code section. 2. Commissioner Robbins asked how this works when they do not line up. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the Codes requires within 50 feet of the common property line. 3. Commissioner Kirk asked if any reaction had been obtained from the property owners to the north of the retention basin as to whether or not they would like the trees to be retained. Staff stated they had not received any adverse comments regarding the project. C:LMy Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 12 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 4. Chairman Tyler stated he would hate to give up any of the trees as they are a landmark in the area. Another issue is the inter-face of this development and the golf driving range to the south. Currently, there, is no screening between the two and often golf balls go can astray. Developer should put up some suitable screen to protect against the golf balls. 5. Commissioner Robbins ask which.direction the balls are hit. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated they go from Dune Palms Road westerly. Commissioner Robbins asked why does staff want to remove the Eucalyptus trees. Staff stated they are brittle and would be acceptable in the retention basin. The trees to the west Would be in the backyard of homes and prevailing winds blow toward the south and could be dangerous for those homeowners. 6. Chairman Tyler asked how may trees would be removed and how many retained. Staff stated there may be as many as 200 to 300 feet of trees would have to be removed. They are planted linearly. __ 7. Commissioner Kirk suggested making the retention more east/westerly and replace some of the retention basin with lots. 8. Mr. Emest Vincent, Vice President of Century Crowell Communities, stated he was at a disadvantage. He is in-house counsel for the applicant and not a planner. He has been working with the landowner for four years to put this project together. His understanding is that they need to raise the grade level a great deal. Not sure what the ultimate grade level will be in relation to where the trees are. The pads will be higher and if they do not take the trees down, you would have a flat backyard, a big dip, the trees and then a slope up to the back walls of the existing unit. In regard to the retention basin in the front, there is an existing tree to the north and they thought of joining them, but this did not work out. They were going to have a perimeter wall and retention basin would be outside this wall. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the wall proposal is conditioned to have an open fencing to view into the project (Condition #91). The retention basin was modified; it was along the north property line, but due to the noise study and the height of the noise mitigation walls, the retention basin was moved to along Dune Palms Road. 9. Chairman Tyler stated he was confused as a retention basin is usually quiet. -- Staff stated the distance between the homes along Dune Palms Road was shifted away from the street due to the retention basin being placed along Dune Palms Road. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pc 11-24-98.wpd 13 Planning Commission Meeting - November 24, 1998 10. Commissioner Robbins stated more homes could be built further away from Dune Palms Road than if the retention basin was moved along the north edge, you would have more homes with the backs facing Dune Palms Road. This plan has the fencing along Dune Palms Road separating the retention basin from Dune Palms Road is going to be open facing so the public has a view into the project. 11. Mr. Vincent stated the project will be gated and the price range will be lower than most gated communities. In reference to the driving range, he has spoken to Mr. Garry Hopkins, the owner of the driving range, regarding the screening and they are not certain how high the screening would have to be. Mr. Vincent noted the project engineer is present to answer any questions. 12. Mr. Joe Soneji, civil engineer for the project, stated that in regard to the grading, they will match the existing pad elevations on the north and the retention elevations on the west. They are fairly close to the grade of the driving range. The retention basin is proposed at that location because of the drainage that comes from Dune Palms Road. He has no objection to the Conditions of Approval and as long as they can include the Eucalyptus trees within the retention basis landscape scheme they will be happy to do so. However, in the middle of the property there is a mound that is ten feet higher than the houses to the north and it is there intention to remove the mound to be on the same elevation as the houses to the north. Discussion followed as to the location of the trees. 13. Commissioner Butler asked if the southern boundary next to the driving range, was higher or lower than the driving range. Mr. Soneji stated they are almost the same. Commissioner Butler asked how the houses would be protected from the balls. Mr. Soneji stated he did not have an answer at this time. 14. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to identify where the trees were located. Principal Planner Stan Sawa showed their location on the tract map. Commissioner Kirk stated that many of the trees are on a mound. Staff stated that was probably correct. 15. Chairman Tyler asked if the trees around the retention basin would be retained. Mr. Soneji stated it would depend on the grading of the retention basin. 16. Mr. Garry Hopkins, 45-975 Dune Palms Road, stated his concern was the screening of the balls and he would meet with the applicant to resolve any issues. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 14 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 17. Commissioner Butler asked if the fence on the school side was adequate. Mr. Hopkins stated no, but the power lines restricted them from going any higher. It will need to go higher on the other side. 18. Commissioner Robbins asked the' height of the screen. Mr. Hopkins stated that on top of a berm it is 20-40 feet. 19. There being no fixaher public comment, the public participation portion of the public hearing was closed and opened for Commission disCussion. 20. Commissioner Robbins stated he had no objection as long as screening was addressed in the conditions. 21. Commissioner Butler asked that the new condition be modified. Staff noted they were only asking for the retention of the trees in the retention basin. 22. Commissioner Kirk stated that as long as a condition was added to require the applicant and golf school solve the problem of the screening before the project goes to the City Council. 23. Chairman Tyler stated he thought they should retain the trees along the retention basin. As to the screening, it should be installed before the houses are occupied and it should be the responsibility of the applicant. The traffic information on Dune Palms Road needs to be updated before going to the City Council. 24. Commissioner Robbins suggested a condition be added that states the screening would be installed prior to the issuance of a building permit. 25. Commissioner Kirk asked if the retention basin was originally planned for the northern boundary. Staff stated yes, and the noise study required the submittal that is before the Commission. Commissioner Kirk stated staff was more in favor of people than trees. Is it possible to have the plan redesigned with the retention along the northern boundary to keep the trees. Staff stated it is up to the applicant and the Commission, but if it is redesigned, the noise study would have to be modified accordingly or the initial study would be looked at again and the requirement at that time was for seven to nine foot walls. 26. Chairman Tyler asked staff to explain what would happen if you had nine foot high walls on the southerly part of the frontage. Staff stated they have to look at the previous noise study to see what it was based on. Chairman C :XMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc 11-24-98.wpd 15 Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 Tyler asked if the noise study was based on the traffic analysis that was done in 1992 and 1994. Staff stated the study is based on the ultimate buildout for Dune Palms Road with the City's 60 CNEL requirement as the maximum outdoor noise level. 27. Commissioner Robbins stated he was in favor of having as few lots as possible back up to Dune Palms Road. 28. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning COmmission Resolution 98-082 recommending to the City Council Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-370 for Tentative Tract Map 27519. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels. ABSTAIN: None. 29. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-083 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 27519, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as amended. a. Retention of the trees in the retention basin. b. Screening prior to issuance of building permits to the satisfaction of the Community Development Director. c. Deletion of the second sentence in Condition #42.a. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels. ABSTAIN: None. D. Plot Plan 94-543, Amendment #1; a request of David Chapman for approval of building elevation modifications for a 550+ square foot expansion of an existing building (formerly Sesame') for use as a restaurant located at 50-981 W. ashington Street at the northwest comer of Washington Street and Calle Tampico in the La Quinta Village Shopping Center. 1. Chairman Tyler opened the public heating 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. Commissioner Kirk asked if the water heater that is being relocated to the roof will it be screened. Staff stated yes and it is conditioned that it cannot encroach above the parapet wall. C:~VIy Documents\WPDOCS\pc 11-24-98.wpd 16 -- Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 3. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone wanted to speak on the project. There being no comment, thc public participation portion was closed and open for Commission discussion. 4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98- 084 recommending to the City Council approval of Plot Plan 94-543, Amendment #1, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels. ABSTAIN: None. E. Tract 28545-2, Amendment #1; a request of KSL Desert Resort, Inc. for approval and recommendation to the City Council of an Amendment to the Tract Map to reconfigure the shape of the condominium lots to include the patio area and other minor changes for the property located generally west of Eisenhower Drive and south of Avenida Femando, in the La Quinta Resort homes area. 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. 2. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chris Berg, MDS Consulting, representing the applicant, stated they concurred with the conditions. 3. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 98-085 reCommending to the City Council approval of Tract 28545-2 Amendment # 1, subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. ROLL CALL' AYES' Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels. ABSTAIN: None. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None C:~ly Documents\WPDOCS\pcl 1-24-98.wpd 17 · Planning Commission Meeting November 24, 1998 IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Kirk to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held December 8, 1998, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:55 P.M. on November 24, 1998. C:kMy Documents\WPDOCS\pc 11-24-98.wpd 18