1999 09 28 PC� 2 ul�cv
rY
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
September 28, 1999
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 99-067
Beginning Minute Motion 99-021
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing.
Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of the Minutes for September 14, 1999
B. Department Report
PC/AGENDA
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Item .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-656
Applicant.......... World Development, Inc.
Location........... Within Tract 25691, on the north side of Miles Avenue, east of
Dune Palms Road.
Request............ Approval of architectural and landscaping plans for four new
prototype residential plans.
Action .............. Resolution 99-
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Item .................. MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES 99-008
Applicant.......... Lendel Ventures, inc.
Location .......... Throughout the Cove
Request ........... Review of plans and guidelines for housing units.
Action.............. Minute Motion 99-
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS
A. Discussion regarding a joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission.
B. Discussion of Fence and Wall Standards - Zoning Code Section 9.60.030.
C. Commission report on the City Council meeting of September 21,1999
IX. ADJOURNMENT
PC /AG,3NDA
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
September 14, 1999
CALL TO ORDER
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by
Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Abels to lead the flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Steve Robbins, Robert Tyler,
and Chairman Tom Kirk.
C. Staff present: Jerry Herman, Community Development Director, City Attorney Dawn
Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer,
Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS: .
A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of August 24,
1999. Commissioner Butler asked that Page 2, Item 2 be amended to read,
"Commissioner Butler asked what the City could do to increase the number of
ingress/egresses along Highway 111 ..." Chairman Kirk asked that Page 3, Item 8 be
amended to read, "Chairman Kirk asked staff to address the issues..." Also, page 4,
Item 12 to read, "...indicated it could have been..."There being no further changes, it
was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to approve the minutes as
corrected. Unanimously approved with Commissioner Tyler abstaining.
B. Department Report: None.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 99-656; a request of World Development, Inc. for approval
of architectural and landscaping plans for four new prototype residential plans within
Tract 25 69 1, located on the north side of Miles Avenue, east of Dune Palms Road.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Planning Manager Christine di Iorio informed the Commission asked that this
item be continued to allow time for the Architectural Landscaping Review
Committee to review the project.
CAMy Documents\WPD()CS\PC-9-14-99.wpd I
Planning; Commission Minutes
September 14, 1999
2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Tyler/Abels to continue Site Development Permit 99-656 to September 28,
1999. Unanimously approved.
B. Tentative Tract Map 29421 ; a request of KSL Land Corporation for recommendation
of approval of a subdivision of 50.83 acres into four lots, one golf cart access lot, and
a private street and landscape lot within Specific Plan 83-002, located on the east,
north, and south sides of PGA Boulevard at the street's southern terminus in PGA
West.
Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report.
Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in
the staff report, copies of which are on file in the Community Development
Department. Staff proposed a change to Condition #44: "Prior to issuance of
a final map approval, a Site Development Permit shall be approved for the
relocation of the clubhouse parking lot."
2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant
would like to address the Commission. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing KSL
Land Development, stated they agreed with staff s revised condition. The
issue of the alignment and configuration of PGA Boulevard at the terminus
point has been a dynamic part of their plans. The parking analysis took the
La Quinta Zoning Code into consideration for the various uses either existing
or abandoned, and Spanish Bay deletes 25% of the existing parking for the
abandoned uses. When you take the square footages and parking spaces
required for the uses, it creates an available parking count of 248 cars for the
area. So by the Code it is 21 spaces under parked. This allowed them to
install 30 parking spaces at the end of the roundabout. In regard to Condition
#25.A., which addresses the width of PGA Boulevard, staff s suggestion that
the additional 33 parking spaces would be added in the site development
permit area approved prior to final map recordation is acceptable to them.
3. Commissioner Tyler asked Mr. Haag to explain the location of the
roundabout, which he did.
4. Commissioner Butler stated that if a customer did not want valet parking, self
parking was not available. Mr. Haag stated that by the time the roundabout
is installed, the signage will direct the customers to go right on Spanish Bay
for parking or, proceed on for valet parking.
Chairman Kirk asked if the proposed parking lot would have egress and
ingress from the roundabout. Mr. Haag stated it would.
CAMy I)ocuments\WPDOCS\PC-9-14-99.wpd 2
Planning; Commission Minutes
September 14, 1999
6. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any concern about the number of curb cuts
on the roundabout. Mr. Haag stated that his experience with roundabouts is
that it slows down the traffic significantly so it is not difficult to make the
turns. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the number of accesses into the
roundabout is appropriate as well as the traffic speeds. The four lanes
coming into the roundabout is hard to visualize until you see the plans. Staff
stated that generally they have no objection with the changes proposed by the
applicant.
7. There being no further questions of the applicant, Chairman Kirk asked if
anyone else would like to address the Commission on this project.
8. Mr. Robert Falk, president of the Master Association at PGA West, stated
they had met with Mr. Dodd of KSL regarding the application, and as they
have agreed to widen PGA Boulevard to the four lanes with the sidewalk and
golf cart lane they have no objections. KSL have taken into consideration the
need for the parking and on that basis the Master Association is comfortable
accepting the application as submitted.
9. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public
participation portion of the hearing and opened the issue for Commission
discussion.
10. Commissioner Abels stated he had no objections and supports the project.
11. Commissioner Robbins stated it looks a little convoluted with the number of
egress and ingress, but if the Association is happy, he has no objection.
12. Commissioner Butler stated he has no objections.
13. Commissioner Tyler stated he concurred.
14. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Tyler/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-066
recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 29421,
as modified:
a. Condition #25.A. Install variable width four lane Arterial street
improvements with raised median and roundabout terminal end.
b. Condition #44. Prior to issuance of a final map approval, a Site
Development Permit shall be approved for the relocation of the
clubhouse parking lot.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
CAMv Documents\WPDOCS\PC-9-14-99.wpd 3
Planning; Commission Minutes
September 14, 1999
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Street Vacation 99-039; a request of Brian Ewing, Bristol Construction, representing
Thomas and Stacy Siebel for a determination of General Plan consistency for a
proposed street vacation
1. Chairman Kirk asked for the staff report. Senior Engineer Steve Speer
presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department.
2. Commissioner Tyler asked if the huge pile of dirt would be removed. Staff
stated the dirt was to be used for the proposed house construction.
3. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to indicate the location on the map. Staff
did so.
4. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant
would like to address the Commission.
5. There being no public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public
participation and opened the issue for Commission discussion.
6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Abels to adopt Minute
Motion 99-020 making a determination that Street Vacation 99-039 is
consistent with the adopted Circulation Element of the La Quinta General
Plan. Unanimously approved.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioner Abels stated that the corner of 48`h Avenue and Washington Street
there is the Lake La Quinta development and on the south side Rancho La Quinta
Country Club and the street scape is very attractive. When you get down to 48'
Avenue going edst to Jefferson Street where the new Catellus development is located,
the houses back right up to the street. The setback should have been sufficient
enough to be compatible with the rest of the street. Should the Commission consider
making changes to the Zoning Code?
1. Chairman Kirk asked if the Commission relaxed the requirements for this
project. Staff stated yes, the 20-foot setback was reduced as this was an
affordable housing project.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC-9-14-99.wpd 4
Planning; Commission Minutes
September 14, 1999
2. Commissioner Robbins stated he concurred and would like to see the view
from the exterior streetscape improved. Staff stated this was part of issues
raised for the recent projects before the Commission.
3. Commissioner Butler stated that normally a development would have the 20-
foot setback. Staff stated that was correct.
4. Commissioner Abels stated the streetscape is developing to be very good
with this exception.
5. Chairman Kirk stated his hope was that as the landscaping develops the lack
of setback would be screened.
6. Commissioner Tyler stated that the Bella Vista development had stated the
wrought iron fencing would be replaced with the wall when the model homes
were sold. Staff stated they have been conditioned to do so and staff would
continue to monitor to see that it was done.
7. Commissioner Robbins suggested that on projects that back up to major
streets, they should be require to plant larger trees to soften the view.
B. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of September 7,
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 September 28, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission
was adjourned at 8:46 P.M. on September 14, 1999.
Respectfully submitted,
BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC-9-14-99.wpd 5
-I
rQ
N
w
w
o
r-
(J
go O n
Ln
n w D
0
� oo
�o a
v °' co
�w
m
D
owo
p 0)
n
CD
0 coo
-�
N n
N
0
� c�
c0
= 0
0 -A
�.�
ca Q°
-n
(.0
rn
Ln
cn
CD
�
-n
<
CD
n
�CD
o
D
0'
�
cn
o(n
3 0
.a
o
rt CD
�N
a
o
cn
0
°
n K
< vOi
CD , +
D m
m 0
°' 0
�
c
CD
c
o
m
-{
-
cn
K
C
�
cn
r-
O
E
CD
a
m
r+m
cn cn�
n
m
CD
Cc
CD
Cl)
O
cn cn
O
m
cn -O -u D
-0.-,
co
o
-
w
c
O CD
v m p
m
Cn
c
a
cn
c
c
cn
c
w
c
c
(n
3
(nD
CD3
3
3
3
3
`n
� O
o <
o
O
0
� 0
n CD
CD
Q
CD
O'
0
:3
CD
Q.
CD
Q.
CD
Q.
CD
Q.
CD
O_
CDO
Im
< N
7J
.
3 r+ ,+ o
O
CD
C A
CD
0
Lr+
O
� O Q
'D
•a
CD
a�
CD
n -�
CD
O 'a �'
(D
r+
CD
0�
c"< v
c
m
jw cn
6• r. (D
Q
CA
0
+
OCD
Cn CND
CD O
,+
O
. r+ CD
cnv
v,
Q
a'3
CD
:3 n n (D
." �- -.
3
O N
CD
:3 :3 0
r+ '*
m O
O
Z
O.
c CQ
CD0)
O
O
r+ O C O
CD
3
a n
0 -•
_
a�=
Qv
:3
Cl)fDa`D
m m
- to
(D
cu
a
Oo °
w�'
c
aO
-*
c<D CD
00
D .a
a
3
a
o+
°m m
mrnw
a.
n n
o
av
Co
cn
n0
0'
D w
?
CD
a
�"a
c
rn�
D
o °
m
°-
o
n
-i
Q. m
3
-c
O
°
tD
Z
CD
n cn cn
CD o '�
:3 CO
CO
CCD W W
O
W w
0o W
N
CD
:3
CD
CD
n
c n
cn c
D 'v
-� CO
r° CO
' O
CD
3 Q°
W
o
Co
W
�
'
w
o
co
O
O
O
Q
CD
<
m
3
CD
.�
--i
—I
co
-0.1
7C
--i m
o D
0 W
< co
o w
O 0o
� W
v
W
O
O
'D
-;h. cn
co -v
o' W
cp co
m 0
O W
cn V
o
D
W
O
C31
•A
D
CO
n cn
o -u
"O W
O
O
M
m
a..
W
7C
cn
r'
0
n.
D
CD -0
m D
O -a
p N D
C CTI ••a
o m
+ (D
a co cn m
C C -O (D
m
m m
O D O
m M
'a cD
h°
�
a
O
D
m
n
'
(p
27
CD
CD
o
X
o
m°
Z
cDCDm
CD
a
CD
o<
mr°+
mrm+
oCo
CD
0
a
m <
o <
v
<
cn
m
3w
-
°m
= CD
° n
cn
mo
cn
o
t,33
_
33
0ram+
O
m
cD
o
°-.
0
-
3 (D '
OU)
cn
CD
(D
:3
C �
0)
m m
0)
°M °
O
ao
CD
m
0 :3 to
NNOa
O
n
on
m
CDm+
0w
O-mo
Q°
{
_,-—
m
or
m
CD
0
0
C
<
CDo
Q
OW
CD
n <
°cn
3
a*0
°
Ca
CD
o
67
p °
�
m
-U m
o:
m w_0
cn
?
o=r
B
_
0
mCD c
�-�
-++
� 0
CD
.,Om
n o
+
-i+
r+
+
D w
CD 3
o
:3
—3
m o
0 :3
m
C m
CD
a• c,;3
O
r+
CD
Q�
omN:3
r+
CD
m:3:3
CD
CD
m
o ,+
-,' O
m r+
3
o (n
'�
m
3
m
CD D
o
-�
°
a
O
0
°
0.
co
-<
a°
-*
m
3 r+ m
m
m cn
< r+
m
o_ cn
D
3
,{ m
-�
CD
0
a.
cn cmn
m
m
X' m
N
CD a m
m w
o
a
��
0
N
n cn
U)°
0)
a: CD
m
0 3
D
Z °<
m
3
0 cc
0
D
a
n a .O+
o° *
v°
MCl)
r+
a°
m
3 ai �
a m
a3i o
m
D
CCD
3 v
,�
m
r+ W
W
O -°
7
(<D
Q
CD
0
3
-0
((DD
3
-° p
°
o
0
C=
cD
o
X
�'
cD o
O
n• Q "O
a- O
�' 0o
fD
C, N
3
m
3
0
3
v m O
_. ch 32
<
m
Cl)
m°
0)
o
o co' CD
3 CD
o -.
o.
cn
o
o_ -,
m °'
�< , +
o
-�, r+
:3
o. o m
(o , + x
cn
°
° w
D
wD
n-u
n'v
n-v
nzD
O o
-a
nr-
nn
nn
nn
C)0
3 0_
a
a
Cp m
n
CD
—► oo
Cfl -1
Co 00
m
"
N
--
C31
O m
�I
�! ►�
J
v ~'
�
00
rr-+
co
r+
00
-P
D
m <
6
cn
D
-a
a D
a •a
D
-a
D
can
3
o -
"
-0
0
°
3
m
M cCDD
m
o_
°
CD
n
o
o.
r+ CD
r+or
CD
3
3
CD
U)
w
o
N
V
3
3
CD
C L
CD
n G)
N "D
CD iLo D
2. oILO
r0+ co p
CD -�
w
'� Cn Cn
O. -D CD
O
"a O
Q. Cn
'o
O a N
CD
(n3 — En+
70
N
n O
CD '+ .•a
0 -0
X
CD
O�
' 'i n
t31 7
O
3
CD
n
cn
(D' 1
.fnr'
O
CD
(OD r0+ <
O
O
to
"'' U7
< CL
_
o
fl
�'O�
(D
r+
'<
CD�o
=N O'�
DCD
r+
N+
o r+
N
Co
C
Q a o
W
3
iv
0 0
CD
-n O.
Ort CD
>CD
CO
aa•-+,vim,
<
N
ch.0
0
N
CD
O
<
(a
CD 3
-� r+ -0
'<
rn
N v� CD
X
-p
Q (D
?
N
:3 C L
CD
O
E
O I
QCD
CD
N
N,
N CD F
Q..
N 3
_ncD'*CD�°
O
�m
CD
w
a CD
o' h
Co
o
CD
Q o cn
0
m
CDo'
cn
rt
W < o o
n
� •a
co �- ch
o
N a" " <
0
3
CD O
-� CD -*
r+ c r+
C
CD
O
r
a. N
:3
O O
CD
O
o
+-
o- co o
c
0
o
v
CD
v CD-�
,<
con
�. cn r+
O
a
M "a
ccni � �
<
�
O :30
cQ
, cn..0�'
CD
m
m
c o
r+
= CD
o
CD
<
D CC] O
O
,.
-r+
o
O
cn
-�
D
_
,+
3
_ O O CD
CD
N
O
O
r�r FAo
m
o v� r0r
w
m
n nO
o
w
-� -
33
O
v
� O
m
,<
NCD
N
:3<
CD
-
Cn
CD
Cn
r+
O
C1
CD
r+
CD
1
3
CD
o
n 'm
3
"a
o x
co
•►
O
7 O
O
*
O
y
C0
01
01
f% 7
O
C1
n
-•
O
„t O
.O+
O -n
0
O
O
n
n
r
r
y
_
T
tD
(A CD
W
CD
7
CD
o
n 0
'*
n
3
m
p N
M
m
m
D
3
CD T)<
M
W
�
-*
o
CD
co 9
o
-«
0
�.
0
-.,
0
cO
m
w
-
3 0
'a
o
0)
_v
`D
0
tD
p
m
0
o
v
c
v y
n
0
a
�D
y
C
0 a
3•
C
C
O
co
00
(DD
'*
m
=+ O
o '`
v_
0
0
3
r+
0
m
=
01
a
-w
c
7
cD
0
0.
0
CD O
w
O
O
v
..
'<
y X
.+
r
O
m
Of
0
CD
=r
CD
CA
H
O0
01
0
A
?
Cl)
m
r
V
00
m C
CO
-Ph
D O
�
CD
C
O
p
0 0
O
0 O
0 0
O
v
C 01
n
0
0
0
O
0 �
No
0
0
C7
0
�
o
v,
o
N
o
o n
O
p3
0,0
CD
CD
Oo
A
v
N
CO
P
C1t
_0
00
-�
N
CC
(O
tO
co
N
�
m
p,
G.
n m
rn
Ul
3 �
O
A
N
N
flCD
(0CNO
O
O
tt
(O
0
0
0
PH #A
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 1999
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-656
APPLICANT: WORLD DEVELOPMENT, INC.
PROPERTY OWNER: JIM DAN D, LLC.
LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN TRACT 25691 ON THE NORTH
SIDE OF MILES AVENUE, EAST OF DUNE PALMS ROAD
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING
PLANS FOR FOUR NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL PLANS
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST
HAS BEEN ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-372, PREPARED FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25691, WHICH WAS CERTIFIED
ON FEBRUARY 16, 1999. NO CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED
WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166.
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)
SURROUNDING ZONING
AND LAND USES: PROJECT SITE: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; VACANT
LOTS
NORTH: LOW DENSITY; RESIDENTIAL UNITS
SOUTH: SOUTH SIDE OF MILES AVENUE IS IN
THE CITY OF INDIO
EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; VACANT
PARCELS
WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; VACANT
PARCEL
The 9.3-acre, 38 single family lot subdivision was approved in February, 1999, under
City Council Resolution 99-35. The applicant proposes four residential prototype plans
for Tract 25691. The project, known as Wildflowers, will be a single family residential
community with public streets.
The four proposed single -story floor plans vary from 1,704 square feet to 2,520
square feet of livable area. Homes are situated on lots ranging in size from 7,224 to
9,593 square feet. Units will range in height from 16' 2" to 17' 9" feet, excluding
chimney projections. Roof heights vary due to the different roof planes and sizes.
Each plan is laid out with a front entry courtyard with either single or double front
doors. The plans feature two and three car garages, with both front and side loading
options.
A Mediterranean architectural style is proposed, utilizing exterior plaster walls and
concrete tile roofing. Color and materials exhibits featuring four color schemes will
be available at the meeting. Plans 1, 2, and 4 include two different facades, while
Plan 3 offers three options. Side and rear elevations are the same within each plan.
Specific on each unit are:
Plan 1 Option A 2 bedroom
3 baths
2-car garage, front loading
1,704 square feet liveable
475 square feet garage
2,179 square feet total
Option B (Only roof lines changed)
Plan 2 Option A 4 bedrooms
2 baths
3-car garage, front loading
2,100 square feet- liveable
700 square feet- garage
2,800 square feet total
Option B (Only roof lines changed)
Plan 3 Option A 3 bedrooms
3 baths
3-car garage, front loading
2,200 square feet- liveable
695 square feet- garage
2,895 square feet total
Option B 3 bedrooms
3 baths
3-car garage, side loading
2,200 square feet- liveable
695 square feet- garage
2,895 square feet total
Option C 3 bedrooms
3 baths
2-car garage, front loading
2,200 square feet- liveable
600 square feet- garage
2,800 square feet total
Plan 4 Option A 4 bedrooms
3 baths
3-car garage, side loading
2,520 square feet- liveable
688 square feet- garage
3,200 square feet total
Option B (Only roof lines changed)
The material for the garage doors is not specified. Window frames will be white
enameled aluminum. Earth tone trim colors for window shutters, lintels, etc., will be
provided. Exterior finish will include terracotta -style concrete tile roofing with various
color flashing, earth tone color -coated stucco walls and fascias. Architectural
features include, but are not limited to arches, shutters, stucco window and door
surrounds, decorative attic vents, glass block windows, and stucco trims.
The typical front yard landscaping plan is included in the proposal that includes a
minimum of two shade trees, palm trees and numerous shrubs highlighted by lawn.
A varied plant palette is proposed. Caliper size of the proposed trees is not specified.
On September 15, 1999, the ALRC considered this request (Attachment 3). By
Minute Motion 99-017, the ALRC determined that the proposed architect ire and
landscaping is compatible with the Design Guidelines contained in Section 9.60.330
of the Zoning Ordinance for residential tract development review, subject to
recommended conditions which have been incorporated into the attached Conditions
of Approval.
MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings necessary to approve this request can be made and are containea in the
attached Resolution. Condition Nos. 1, 4, and 5 specifically enable staff and the ALRC
P:\perptSDP 99-656 World DevelopmentWILDFLOWERS9-28-99.wpd
to make the necessary findings for a recommendation of approval.
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_ approving Site Development
Permit 99-656, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Application portfolio
3. ALRC Minutes - September 15, 1999
Prepared by:
Leslie Mouriquand, Associate Planner
Supmitted by:
n, Community Development Director
P:\perptSDP 99-656 World DevelopmentWILDFLOWERS9-28-99.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, PROVIDING
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE APPROVAL OF FOUR
PROTOTYPE UNITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN TRACT 25691
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MILES AVENUE, EAST OF DUNE
PALMS ROAD
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-656
APPLICANT: WORLD DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 28th day of September, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider approval architectural and landscaping plans for four new prototype
residential plans to be constructed, on the north side of Miles Avenue, east of Dune
Palms Road, more particularly described as:
Tract 25691
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee of the
City of La Quinta, California, did on the 15th day of September, 1999, hold a duly -
noticed public meeting to consider approval of architectural and landscape plans for
four new prototype residential plans to be constructed on Miles Avenue, and did, by
Minute Motion 99-017, recommend approval of the request subject to conditions;
and,
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be
exempt from California Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 5303,
Class 3 (A) of the Guidelines For Implementation; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit:
1. With the recommended conditions of approval, the proposed units provide a
varied and aesthetically attractive view within the tract, as the four prototype
plans provide a minimum of two front elevations with structural changes to
insure a varied and marked difference. No more than one plan features a
continuous roof when viewed from the front and rear of the unit. The units
utilize varied architectural features such as tile roofs, exterior plaster, shutters,
popout window and door surrounds, and arches.
P:\PCRESsdp99-656wl LDFLOW ERS9-28-99.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 99-
Site Development Permit 99-656
September 28, 1999
2. The proposed landscaping plans will provide a minimum of one 24-inch box
size tree in the front yard area. All units will have at least one additional 15-
gallon tree and other shrubs and groundcover.
3. The final plot plan will ensure compliance with the requirement that identical,
or similar, front elevations shall not be placed on adjacent lots or directly
across the street from one another.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 99-656 for the reasons
set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached
hereto;
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 28" day of September, 1999, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\PCRESsdp99-656wlLDFLOWERS9-28-99.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-656 - WORLD DEVELOPMENT
SEPTEMBER 28, 1999
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Final front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Community
Development Department prior to issuance of the first building permit for these
units. The plans shall provide 24-inch box tree sizes with a minimum 1.5-inch to 2-
inch caliper measuring 10 feet tall from the top of box, and 15-gallon trees with a
minimum caliper size of 3/4- to 1-inch, as per Section 9.60.300 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
2. Garage doors shall be constructed of metal, composite, or wood and be sectional
roll -up style if located less than 25-feet from the front property line. Lutes are
optional.
3. Air conditioning mechanical equipment shall not be installed in the 5-foot side yard
setbacks.
4. Decorative chimney caps shall be provided for all plans.
5. The window and door surrounds shall be a minimum of 3-inches in depth for
continuous single plane elevations.
P:\LESLIE\pccoaSDP99-656Wildflowers9-28-99.wpd Page 1 of 1
B I #A
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
ceaf 4 4Q"
MEMORANDUM
HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
SEPTEMBER 28, 1999
MASTER DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR LENDEL VENTURES, I'NC.
(MDG 99-008)
The Zoning Code requires additional development standards for the Cove Residential
area called Master Design Guidelines. Design Guidelines are required for any
developer/applicant constructing five or more houses in the RC District. Therefore
when a developer wants to pull a permit for the fifth house, the Guidelines must have
been reviewed and accepted by the Planning Commission.
Lendel Ventures, Incorporated seeks building permit approval for its sixth plus house.
Enclosed is a copy of the Master Design Guidelines from the developer. Proposed are
four prototype housing units. The Guidelines contain information as to how the
developer intends to vary the exterior of the units through changes in architectural
style, roof types, window and entry treatments, and setbacks.
Staff has reviewed the Guidelines and determined the applicant has provided adequate
deviations to the building elevations to comply with Section 9.50.090 of the Zoning
Code. These Guidelines, if approved by the Planning Commission, will be used to
evaluate each building permit application from this developer for compliance with the
approved Guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Minute Motion approving the Master Design Guidelines
(MDG 99-008) as presented.
Prep red by:
G T 6usdell, Associate Planner
Submitted by:
, Community Development Dir.
A:\MDG 98-008.pc.wpd - 36
CI #P
Tjlf 4 4 a"
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
r
FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
6
DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 1999
RE: JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING
COMMISSION SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 26, 1999
A Joint Meeting of the City Council and Planning Commission is scheduled for
Tuesday, October 26, 1999 from 5:30 P.M. to 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers
to review Land Use Alternatives for the General Plan Update.
Earlier this year, the City hired Terra Nova Planning & Research to complete the
General Plan Update. This meeting will focus on a discussion the preferred land use
patterns for the City and the proposed planning areas. The goal of the meeting is to
solidify a Preferred Land Use Map which will enable staff and consultants in finish the
Circulation and other Elements of the General Plan, and to complete the
Environmental Impact Report.
Pc Memo. Gp Mtg Notice
CI #B
c&ty/ 4 e(P Q"
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 1999
SUBJECT: FENCES AND WALL
Recently a house was constructed in the Cove with a unique fence color. Attached are the
regulations contained in the Zoning Code which pertain to fences and walls. This issue is before you
for review and discussion. Pictures of the subject fence are attached.
9.60. SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS
' a. The height of fences, trees, shrubs, and other visual obstructions shall be limited to a
maximum height of 30 inches within the triangular area formed by drawing a straight line:
1) Between two points located on and 20 feet distant from the point of intersection of two
ultimate street right-of-way lines.
2) Between two points located on and five feet distant from the point of intersection of an
ultimate street or alley right-of-way on one hand and the edge of a driveway or another
alley right-of-way on the other if parkway width is less than 12-feet wide.
b. For purposes of this Code, "point of intersection" shall mean the intersection of the
prolongation of the right-of-way lines, excluding any curved portion joining the two lines.
c. The height restrictions of this Paragraph CA. shall apply to fences, walls, trees, shrubs,
vegetation, or any other material which obstructs or may obstruct visibility.
D. Gates.
Materials. Gates shall be constructed of ornamental iron/tubular steel and/or wood. Such gates
may be placed in any location provided they meet the requirements of this Section and provided
any wood used is not less than a grade of construction heart or merchantable and better
redwood or #2 and better (no holes) western red cedar, stained or painted to match or
complement the adjacent wall or structure. Alternatively, if left in natural color, all wood shall
be treated with a water -repellant material. Wood gates over 36 inches wide shall have a metal
frame. Chain link gates are prohibited. Vehicular driveway gates shall be constructed of
ornamental iron/tubular steel and metal if solid. If screening an RV, the gate shall be
constructed of a solid opaque material.
2. Width. Pedestrian gates shall not exceed 5-feet in width, except that gates may be any width
within sideyard setbacks of at least 12 feet.
00 .saw
E. Fence Construction and Materials. All fencing in residential districts shall conform to the
following construction and material standards:
1. Wood Fencing.
a. Except for gates and for equestrian fencing regulated by Section 9.140.060, wood fencing
is permitted in rear or interior side yards only, and only if not visible from the street. Gates
may be of wood in any location provided they comply with the standards of this Section.
b. All wood fencing shall be constructed of not less than a grade of construction heart or
merchantable and better redwood or #2 and better (no holes) western red cedar, stained or
painted to match or complement the adjacent wall or structure. Alternatively, if left in
natural color, all wood shall be treated with a water -repellant material.
C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\zoupdate-residential&supres.wpd 60-3
9.60. SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS
c. Fence boards may be horizontal or vertical. Support posts shall be a minimum of nominal
4" x 4" redwood, pressure -treated lumber, tubular steel or block and installed per the
Uniform Building Code.
2. Ornamental Iron and Tubular Steel Fencing. Ornamental iron or tubular steel fencing may be
permitted. The iron or steel shall be painted to match or complement the adjacent wall or
structure.
3. Masonry Fencing. Solid Masonry fencing (i.e. block, rock, brick, with or without stucco
_17 covering) is permitted in any location on the lot provided the color of the masonry or stucco
matches or complements the adjacent wall or structure. Precision concrete block shall not be
used unless all exterior surfaces visible from outside the property are covered with stucco,
paint, texture coating, or other comparable coating approved by the Director.
4. Material Combinations. Combinations of two or more of the preceding materials may be used
provided that the bottom one-half of the fence is constructed of a masonry material.
Combinations incorporating wood materials shall only be used for the rear and interior side
yards and only when not visible from the street.
F. Fence Landscaping and Maintenance.
1. Landscaping. The area between the back of curb and any fencing shall be landscaped, have a
suitable permanent irrigation system, and be continuously maintained by the property owner.
(Devised 4/97)
2. Maintenance. All walls and fences shall be continuously maintained in good repair. The
property owner shall be provided thirty days after receiving notice from the City to repair a wall
or fence. The Building Official may grant an extension to such time period not to exceed sixty
days.
G. Prohibited Fence Materials and Construction Fences. The use of barbed wire, razor wire, chain
link, or similar materials in or on fences is prohibited in all residential districts. Chain link fencing is
permitted for temporary construction fences when authorized by a minor use permit issued in accordance
with Section 9.210.020. Said minor use permit shall not be approved until a permit for grading, or
construction, has been filed for, whichever comes first.
H. Equestrian Fencing. Notwithstanding any other requirements of this Section, fencing shall be
regulated by the provisions of Section 9.140.060 (Equestrian Overlay Regulations) where the keeping
of horses is permitted.
I. Nonconforming Fences. Any fence which does not meet the standards of this Section but which
was legally established prior to the adoption of these standards may be maintained provided such fence
is not expanded nor its non-conformance with these standards otherwise increased. Any fence which
is destroyed or damaged to the extent of more than 50 percent of its total replacement value shall not
be repaired, rebuilt, or reconstructed except in conformance with these standards.
CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\zoupdate-residential&supres.wpd 60-4