Loading...
PCMIN 01 26 1999 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 26, 1999 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:07 P.M. by Chairman Tyler who asked Commissioner Kirk to lead the flag salute. B. Chairman Tyler requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. C. Staffpresent: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, Consulting Planner Nicole Criste, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: A. Staff requested the approval of the Minutes of January 12, 1999, be deleted from the Agenda. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Buffer to approve the Agenda as amended. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Department Report: Community Development Director Jerry Herman informed the Commission of the ground breaking ceremonies for the Miraflores project will be held on Janum3r 27, 1999, at 10:30 a.m. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Continued - Envirox~mental Assessment 98-369, Tentative Tract Map 28982, Site Development Permit 98-631, and Tract 24230-Amendment #1; a request of A. G. Spanos, Inc. for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and approval of a 160 unit airspace condominium subdivision project on 10.17 acres and review of the building elevations and development plans, and the elimination of Conditions #41 of Tract 24230 requiting affordable housing units within the project for the property located at the southwest comer of Adams Street and 47th Avenue. C:LMy Documents\WPDOCSLPC 1-26-99.wpd Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 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. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Butler asked if Oleanders on the south property line were to remain. Staff stated they would remain but were the responsibility of the Lake La Quinta Homeowners' Association. The landscaping proposed by Spanos is in addition to the Oleanders. 3. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to identify whether the parking spaces had been increased or decreased. Staff noted they were reduced from what is required by City Code, but they were increasing the number of' spaces from what was previously proposed. 4. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to identify on the site plan which buildings were proposed to be two story. Staff identified the units. -- 5. Chairman Tyler asked if the wall on the south boundary was a six foot wall. Staff stated it was and it would go to Adams Street. Chairman Tyler asked if the wall on 47th Avenue was block and wrought iron. Staff stated it was a combination of block with a wrought iron trim Chairman Tyler asked what the setback was on 47th Avenue. Staff stated 70 feet. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked if the changes that were made by the applicant changed the number of units or costs. Staff stated the trait number is 160 units as originally proposed. The changes that were made were due to the issues raised by the residents at the last meeting. 7. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Emily Hemphill, attorney for the A. G. Spanos project, stated there had been some misconceptions made and she would like to correct them. First, this project is not low income. It is a market rate project for condominiums of this type and will be rented at that rate. Second, the Spanos Company was the original developer of Lake La Quinta and was the first filer of the tract map on this property. Within the context of that tract map they did reserve to themselves, their successors, and assigns the fight to drain from this property into Lake La Quinta. Point being the easement are there. Thirdly, they do not intend to touch the Oleanders as they belong to the Lake La Quinta Homeowners' Association. In regard to the request to increase the density, there have made no such request. It has stayed as it was originally zoned. In addition, the density of this site was revealed in the CC&R's and explained to each C:\My Documents\WPDOCSkPC 1-26-99.wpd 2 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 property owner of Lake La Quinta when they purchased their homes. Lastly, there should be no concern to the Lake La Quinta homeowners that the residents of this project will be able to utilize the amenities of Lake La Quinta. They will have no access, fight, or ability to do so. In terms of changes to the site plan, the original project had two story units at the southwest comer of the project abutted Lake La Quinta. These units are now one story. They modified the setbacks all along the property line to move them back. The building along the southern boundary have been moved the shortest distance of 56 feet and some buildings have been moved up to 82 feet. The building set back along the southern border ranges from a minimum of 75 feet to as much as 94 feet. The pad height for the buildings on the southern border have been reduced as far as the engineering would allow for the site. On the boundary between the project and Dulce Del Mar property owners, the Oleander hedge will stay. They are suggesting to build a five foot masonry wall on top of a three foot berm. This raises the wall so that the top of the wall will be eight feet above Dulce Del Mar's curb line. This plus the Oleanders hedge, the landscaping on the median on the south side of the property, and the setbacks of the buildings creates a significant ly better arrangement for the property owners in Lake La Quinta with regard to privacy and related issues. Carports on the western border are all now garages. The carports on the southerly portion are now setback 20 feet and are buffered by the hedge and wall. In regard to the condition requiring a wall around the carports, they feel this will be less attractive. In regards to the drainage issue, they have added three dry wells to the site that will take care of the normal drain off of this site. The only time water will drain into Lake La Quinta is if there is a large storm that completely fills up the dry wells. They have changed the name by eliminating "at Lake La Quinta". This is a condominium map and is appropriately advertised as such. In regard to density, again, they are within the fight of zone as the 160 units were included in the original CC&R's for Lake La Quinta. Therefore, when the Lake La Quinta lots were originally priced, they were priced with the knowledge that this project was going to be there. To say they will have a loss in value due to this project is not supported by any type of evidence. It is merely speculation and probably not founded given the fact that this disclosure was always a pan of Lake La Quinta. In reference to maintenance, the drainage easement along the western side of the property, they would like to request that this condition be implemented to a maintenance agreement between the City and Spanos Company. Spanos already has such an agreement with the City and it is Spanos Company that maintains the landscape strip along Washington Street that fronts Lake La Quinta. In summation, property fights belong to all property owners. They have tried to do their due diligence to meet the concerns of the residents of Lake La Quinta and have believe this is a project that will be an asset to the City of La Quinta. C:hMy Documents\WPDOCSLPC 1-26-99.wpd 3 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 - 8. Commissioner Butler asked the applicant to explain a dry well. Ms. Hemphill stated she would explain it as it was explained to her. The water goes into the dry well and percolates as much as possible. In extreme conditions, the dry well has a reservoir that will fill up. Once the reservoirs are filled they will then drain into the lake La Quinta basin. In addition, there is a filtering system to keep any harmful objects from entering the lake. 9. Commissioner Kirk asked the applicant what efforts had been made to resolve issues with the Lake La Quinta homeowners. Ms. Hemphill stated they did met with the attorneys for the homeowners and reviewed the changes with them. Mr. Lucas of the Spanos Company met with the Homeowners' Association and explained the changes to them. It is her understanding the homeowners are still not happy. Commissioner Kirk asked the applicant to describe the condition regarding the low income housing that was deleted. Ms. Hemphill stated the original project requires a certain number of units be set aside for low income. As they did not intend for this to be a low income project, they requested this condition be removed as the units would be rented at market value. 10. There being no further questions of the applicant, Chairman Tyler asked if - anyone else would like to address the Commission on this project. Mr. Jay Roberts, 47-790 Via Jardin, stated he was the President of the Lake La Quinta Homeowners' Association and his remarks represented those of the homeowners. After meeting with the developer they still have concerns about the project as they still propose to construct 160 units, as well as allowing the overflow from the drainage to go into their lake. There is some legal disagreement as to whether or not the easements allowing this drainage to exist. It is their understanding that the zoning was made ten years ago. It is doubted this site would have that zoning if done today. The developer should have the fight to develop his property if they observe all the other requirements. Their proposal to relocate the buildings is a welcome attempt, but falls short of reducing the density. Common sense states that these apartments next to the Lake La Quinta homes will have an affect on the value of their homes. They urge the Commission to reject this project. 11. Mr. Morris Richter, 47-320 Via Koron, stated he understood the tough job before the Commission. He has lived at Lake La Quinta since 1994. The zoning for this site happened before Lake La Quinta was built out and should be changed to reflect what is there now. 12. Mr. Tom Oglesby, 78-855 Dulce Del Mar, stated he lives directly across the street from the proposed one story building. He appreciates the changes proposed, but the developer has not listened to their request for reduced C:~vly Documents\WPDOCS\PC 1-26-99.wpd 4 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 density. The second story should be eliminated from all buildings. The Commission should not approve the tract map if this is to be an apartment project. Code violations are more likely to occur in a rental project. The Commission should investigate to see what benefits Spanos is receiving by removing the low income units. The developer should be notified that if the density is not lowered, the project will be denied. They purchased their home with the knowledge that this was a high density condominium project, not an apartment project. 13. Ms. Geri Gouthier, 47-030 Via Lorca, stated her home backed up to 47th Avenue which now views Eagle Hardware and McDonalds. With this project the traffic will increase even more and their bedroom is just 27 feet from the street. If this plan is allowed to proceed, the empty lots in Lake La Quinta will never be built out. 14. Mr. Ben Rosker, 47-675 Via Montessa, stated they were notified that high density units would be constructed on this site through the CC&R's. Spanos, however, told them this tract was going to be built with condominiums. Lake La Quinta does not want rental properties next door. Spanos gave them the assurance that this would be condominiums as stated in the CC&R's by reference to the Civil Code section for condominiums. Apartments are not condominiums. 15. Dr. James Calvin, 47-515 Via Florence, stated apartments are inappropriate in this area. Renters are not as responsible as a vested owner. Two story units would be out of place and would be an eyesore that would downgrade their property. The proposed 160 units on this limited acreage is too many; 109 units would be better. The owners should be required to redesign the project and bring it into conformity with what is existing. 16. Mr. James McCarthy, 78-790 Via Avante, stated his home was 75 yards from the west wall of the project site and he had researched this project as to how it was originally approved in 1989. At no time during the processing of this site, was there ever any mention of what was to be built on this site. Council approved the tract consistent with the zoning designations at that time as they did not know what the owners were going to build. Now there is nothing but single family residences in the whole community and this project is now incompatible with the Lake La Quinta project. 17. Mr. Jay Badden, 47-415 Via Cordova, passed out a plan that he had drawn that showed how the units would appear ifjammed into the Lake La Quinta site and went on to explain how this project would not fit in this area that was zoned for families. C:WIy Documents\WPDOCSLPC 1-26-99.wpd 5 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 18. Mr. Dorrie Forstmann, 47-415 Via Florence, stated her concem was that she would be looking at lights and hearing car alarms that will create a lot of noise and would depreciate her property values. The site needs to be rezoned. 19. Chairman Tyler asked if there was any other public participation. There being none, this portion of the public heating was closed and opened for Commission discussion. 20. Commissioner Abels stated the fact is that the developer did meet all the concerns raised at the last meeting and now additional concerns are being raised. 21. Commissioner Kirk stated the issues are density, height, and use (apartments rather than condominiums). The developer has done an excellent job designing the project and trying to address the concerns of the residents of Lake La Quinta. The CC&R's did note the existence of the zoning that would allow this project. He would have envisioned condominiums being condominiums and not apartments. He asked City Counsel if the Commission could do anything in regard to the use of the property. City Attomey Dawn Honeywell stated that under the City's designation, both uses are allowed. Whether or not there was a misrepresentation is between the developer and homeowners. Commissioner Kirk stated the developer has reacted to many of the concerns raised at the last meeting. The density and height issues have been addressed by the developer by placing them in the middle of the project. With this change 15 of the buildings are placed very close to each other with a moat-like affect. We now have a project that is not as pleasant to live in. He then asked if the Commission had any authority to even reduce the density. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated development standards do not allow the Commission to make this change as long as the developer is within what is allowed. This would require an amendment to the zoning. Commissioner Kirk stated he is generally in favor of the project, but not sure the changes are for the best of the community. 22. Commissioner Butler stated his concern was that the floor plans were designed as condominiums and could become condominiums at any time in the future. The developer has addressed most of the concerns raised and the Commission does not have the right to change the zoning for a project that has been designed to fit this zoning. 23. Commissioner Robbins stated he was not in favor of this type of density anywhere in the City. The only issue the Commission had not asked was whether or not the project could be denied on compatibility concerns. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated compatibility is not listed in the findings as a reason to approve or deny a tract map or Site Development Permit. It is C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC 1-26-99.wpd 6 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 not a conditional use permit where the Commission would look at the surrounding uses while evaluating the project. Commissioner Robbins stated he did not feel this project was compatible, but agrees with the other Commissioners that their hands are tied and it should be referred to the City Council who may have more discretion to make changes. 24. Commissioner Abels stated that since the Commissioner's hands were tied in regard to what they are allowed to change, he too would agree with the other Commissioners. The issue of zoning should of been addressed a long time ago by the Lake La Quinta homeowners who could of requested a zone change during any of the General Plan Update meetings to prevent this. 25. Chairman Tyler stated the CC&R's are an agreement between the Homeowners' Association and developer. The City is not involved in the interpretation or enforcement. Renting versus ownership could be an issue even with your neighbor in Lake La Quinta. As to the zoning requirements, they are the same for either apartment or condominium units. The applicant has gone overboard to solve the issues raised at the last meeting by the Lake La Quinta residents. He would recommend that for security reasons the height of the wall on 47th Avenue should be increased from five feet to six feet. 26. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- 007 recommending to the City Council Certification of Environmental Assessment 98-369, subject to the Findings and Mitigation Monitoring Program. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 27. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-008 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28982, subject to the Conditions of Approval as recommended: ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. -- 28. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-009 recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 98-631, subject to the Conditions of Approval as modified: C:LMy Documents\WPDOCSLPC 1-26-99.wpd 7 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 a. Condition 42: A six foot high wall, or five foot high wall on a three foot berm shall be constructed along Dulce Del Mar to the north of the existing Oleander hedge to the satisfaction of the Community Development Department. The height of the six foot high wall is to be measured from the top of curb height on the project's perimeter street. The wall shall be constructed to match the existing Lake La Quinta perimeter wall. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 29. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-010 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 24230, Amendment #1, subject to the Conditions of Approval as recommended by staff. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Chairman Tyler recessed the meeting at 8:35 p.m. and reconvened at 8:43 p.m. B. Site Development Permit 98-635; a request of The Woodard Group for approval of building elevations, site, landscaping and lighting plans for a 24,000 square foot medical office building located at 43-576 Washington Street. 1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker 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 there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Abels asked if this was the same project approved in 1996. Staff stated it was the same project however, the applicants did not apply for an extension and the project had to be resubmitted. 3. Commissioner Kirk stated the parking standards needed to be readdressed as the 136 spaces did not make sense. He would like the applicant to explain the landscape plan in regard to drought tolerant plant uses. 4. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Steward Woodard, representing the applicant Mr. Gondi, explained why the applicant had missed his extension date and as such the new application C:XMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC 1-26-99.wpd 8 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 required additional parking spaces. The applicant is trying to design a use that has the feel of a home environment instead of a medical clinic. They did reduce the number ofberms and sloped the building to get away from the two story structure feeling. 5. Commissioner Abels stated that if the building turns out as it has been designed, it would be a great asset to the gateway to the City. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked if the addition of the 13 parking stalls caused any compromise to the building. Mr. Woodard stated the project is more expensive due to the parking requirement. It would be nice to reduce the parking, but it is the fight amount of parking for this use. Commissioner Kirk asked about the drought tolerant plants and if the pond would have a lot of evaporation. Commissioner Robbins stated it would have no more than golf courses and is more pleasing to the eye. 7. Commissioner Robbins complimented the applicant on his design of the building. 8. Chairman Tyler asked if the building design changed any from the previous submittal. Mr. Woodard stated only where the additional parking had been required in the rear. 9. Chairman Tyler expressed concerns about meeting the General Plan Circulation Element requirements for Major Arterials and Washington Street is a Major Arterial. That section of Washington Street that is in front of the proposed project is currently one of the most heavily traveled streets in La Quinta. The situation will become worse when the Southwest Community Church campus at Washington Street and Fred Waxing Drive and the new tennis venue at the comer of Miles Avenue and Washington Street are completed. Plans for improving Washington Street to six lanes from Fred Waring Drive north to Country Club Drive by the end of 1999, will exacerbate the situation. Table CIR-2 of the General Plan requires that property adjacent to a Major Arterial shall have "full access by a signalized intersection only; avoid fight in/right out driveways where possible." Since there is no intersection adjacent to this project, that type of access is not possible. Chairman Tyler stated he had concerns about approving two fight in/right out driveways, when the General Plan requires that this type of access be avoided where possible. 10. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak on this item. There being none, this portion of the public hearing was closed and opened for Commission discussion. CSMy Documents\WPDOCSXPC 1-26-99.wpd 9 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 11. Chairman Tyler asked if staff had any concern about the elimination of one of the driveways. Principal Planner Fred Baker stated the General Plan requires a driveway where possible, but it is not mandated. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that when large tracts of land are located on an Arterial street, they want as few driveways as possible. This site is very constrained and they are requesting two driveways and to reduce them to one may require a reconfiguration of the site or an elimination of the pond. The second driveway is not a safety problem. 12. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant intended to have an ingress and egress on both driveways. Mr. Woodard stated they want egress and ingress at both driveways. To require a single driveway would require a very restrictive turning radius and stacking dimension. It could require an elimination of 10 to 15% of the site. Chairman Tyler stated his concern was with the amount of traffic at this location. Mr. Woodard stated he would agree if there were no median. Chairman Tyler asked if the width would accommodate a two car stacking. Staff stated yes. Chairman Tyler asked that Condition #27 be reworded to right-in right out only. 13. Commissioner Abels asked that the tree size should be noted in caliber size. - In addition, the map legend specifies radiology and it was not noted in the staff report and asked if the facility would have radiology. The applicant stated it would. 14. Commissioner Robbins stated this project will require new water services and he would hate to see the street dug up for the utility connections after the streets were completed. Senior Engineer Steve Speer asked if the Commission was requiring the applicant to install the underground utility lines before grading the site. This street widening project will be funded by government funds and would be completed within a year. The City can ask the developer to do this, but he is unaware if this meets the applicants time line for development. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated it could not be required. 15. Commissioner Kirk asked what sort of decision making goes into determining which conditions are included and which are referred to by reference in the Zoning Code. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it is usually determined by the ones that need to be called out to the applicant. 16. Chairman Tyler asked that Condition # 10 be clarified to state the applicant is only required to do A and B for that portion that fronts his project. C:LMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC 1-26-99.wpd 1 0 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 17. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- 011 approving Site Development Permit 98-635, subject to the conditions as modified: a. Condition # 10: specify within the applicant's property. b. Condition #27 take out "or as approved by City Engineer". c. Condition added that the tree size shall be as specified in Section 9.150.L.6. to show the caliper size. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Environmental Assessment 98-371 and Tentative Tract 25691; a request of World Development for recommendation to the City Council for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of a ten acre subdivision in to.38 single family units. _ 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. Staff noted the change for clarification to Condition #41 of the tract map. 2. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated DSUSD was proposing to building a school on the south side of Miles Avenue and their proposed fire access lane lines up with the access point of this tract. Staff is proposing to use three taming movements at this site. They are agreeable to the left turn in as long as it agrees with the fire access across the street. In addition, it will require the City of Indio to agree. 3. Commissioner Robbins asked if the school had been approved. Staff stated the school site has been determined, but regardless the City controls half of the median and it will require the cooperation of both cities to allow the left mm lane. 4. Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mike Smith, Warner Engineering representing the applicant, stated they had no problem with the mm radius. They did have a question on Condition -- #14. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the Historic Preservation Commission requires all sites to have a monitor when excavation goes below the existing grade. Nicole Criste, consultant planner, stated the City's General Plan indicated this was an area of high significance and the report identifies it as being fully mitigated. C:XMY Documents\WPDOCSXPCI-26-99.wpd 1 1 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 5. Mr. Mike Smith questioned Condition #53 and ask for a 2:1 slope. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated there are a number of locations where the City did allow the 2:1 slope; however, the City is trying to move away from this. The idea is to create a wall that would serve as a sound mitigation. Mr. Smith asked if Condition #65 was in regard to the Fringe-Toed Lizard fee. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated it was. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to clarify whether the monitoring was only for the checklist; there was no condition imposed on the tract. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated a condition should be added to require monitoring for the trenching. 7. Ms. Delores Lukina, 79-665 Star Flower Trail, stated her home backs up to this project and she had submitted a letter to the City in 1996 regarding this project, and one of the provisions at that time was that the developer would honor building height limitations. Chairman Tyler stated the height was governed by the Zoning Code. Her concern was that two story units could be constructed on lots not directly adjacent to the Cactus Flower tract. They are respectfully requesting that all units be required to be one story. Mr. Smith stated no two story homes would be built. 8. Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak on this item. There being none, Chairman Tyler closed this portion of the public hearing and opened the hearing to Commission discussion. 9. Commissioner Butler asked if staff would make a presentation on what the City's stance was on what is required of a developer in regard to archaeological issues. Staff stated briefly that every developer is required to provide the City with a report stating whether significant sites are found in conformance with CEQA. The only change is that it is now required prior to certification of the EA and not at the time of grading. Commissioner Butler asked if there were any financial limitations. Staff stated that when there is a potentially significant site, findings can be made if an EIR is done to mitigate the concerns. 10. Commissioner Robbins stated he had a concern about the way the streets in the tracts are connected together as they can create collector streets with high traffic. He would prefer to see a map of the entire area to see the overall affect of the streets. 11. Commissioner Kirk asked if the subdivision could be conditioned to allow only one story. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the City does not have the right to place such a condition on the tract. If the developer has no C:WIy Documents\WPDOCSkPC 1-26-99.wpd 12 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 objection, it could then be written into the conditions. Mr. Smith stated he would be happy with a 22-foot height restriction. In addition, he agreed the projects should not be forced to piece-meal their roads together. 12. Chairman Tyler thanked Mr. Smith for being acceptable to allowing only one story units to be constructed. He does have serious concerns with the lots only meeting the required minimum width. When he visualizes the tract he sees nothing but garage doors. The developer stated they are trying to utilize side-loaded garages. 13. Chairman Tyler asked if evel3rthing is going to be fill, and if so, why are the pad elevations along the north boundary so much higher than the rest. Mr. Smith stated they have to meet the CVWD requirements to connect to the existing sewers. Chairman Tyler asked if Street Lot "B" will carry the same name as the street to the north. Mr. Smith stated it would. Chairman Tyler questioned the use of different slope examples and asked staff if there was any latitude. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the wall would only be a couple feet high if a 2:1 slope was used. Chairman Tyler asked that the design of the setback and retaining wall be approved by staff. 14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-012 recommending to the City Council Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 98-369. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN None. 15. Commissioner Robbins asked if it would cause any problems to make Lot C a cul-de-sac. Senior Engineer stated circulation is based on the street circulation pattern. The City is trying to get the homeowners to a street where they can make a full mm, and for this tract it is to the east. It is difficult to make the streets match up especially on a small tract of this nature. 16. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Robbins/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-013, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 25691, subject to the Conditions of Approval as submitted/amended: a. Condition 16.d.: Street Lot "B" shall be named Verbena Drive. CSMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC 1-26-99.wpd 13 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 b. Condition #53: Slopes generally shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way as approved by the City Engineer. b. Condition #67: All houses shall be one story and not exceed 22 feet in height. c. Condition #68: Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall provide a map of the nonfill areas, specifically those area that require trenching below the existing grade. These areas shall be monitored by a qualified archaeologist during grading. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Master Design Guidelines 99-002; a request of the Pacific Trades, Mr. David Miller for approval of master design guidelines for construction of single family residences throughout the Cove. 1. Chairman Tyler asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker 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 there were any questions of staff. There being none, Chairman Tyler asked if a four bedroom unit is allowed without the third garage. Staff stated if the lot is over 6,000 square feet they will be required to have a third garage. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Tyler asked if anyone else would like to speak regarding this project. 4. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion was closed and open for Commission discussion. 5. Commissioner Robbins asked if the trees noted on the plans were appropriate for City standards. Staff stated they were. 6. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Rc~olution 99-003 approving Master Design Gmdehnes 99-002, as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES; None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC1-26-99.wpd 14 Planning Commission Meeting January 26, 1999 VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Chairman Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of January 19, 1999. IX. 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 February 9, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:00 P.M. on January 26, 1999. C:hMy Documents\WPDOCSLPC 1-26-99.wpd 15