Loading...
2000 01 11 PCOF PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California January 11, 2000 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2000-001 Beginning Minute Motion 2000-001 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 of the regular meeting on December 14, 1999 B. Department Report V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Item .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-653, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant.......... KSL Desert Resorts, Inc. Location........... Within the Norman Golf Course, on the north side of Airport Boulevard between Madison Street and Monroe Street. Request............ Approval of revised site, architectural and landscaping plans for a golf course maintenance facility. Action .............. Request to table D(, /7\nrwm7\ B. Item .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 Applicant.......... KSL Land Holdings, Inc. Location........... On the north side of PGA Boulevard at its southern terminus within PGA West. Request............ Approval of a 36 space parking lot for the PGA West Resort Clubhouse. Action .............. Resolution 2000- VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: . A. Item .................. Applicant.......... Location........... Request............ Action .............. B. Item .................. Applicant.......... Location........... Request............ Action .............. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-664 Tiburon Homes, LLC To be constructed in the Norman Golf Course, on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street. Approval of architectural landscaping plans for three new prototype residential units. Resolution 2000- SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-665 Steven Walker Homes To be constructed in the Norman Golf Course, on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street. Approval of architectural landscaping plans for three new prototype residential units. Resolution 2000- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commission report on the City Council meeting of January 4, 2000 IX. ADJOURNMENT PC/AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA December 14, 1999 I. 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 Robbins to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Steve Robbins, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Tom Kirk. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, 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 November 23, 1999. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 3, Item #3 be amended to state he asked if the lots as drawn were above the minimum square footage allowed; Page 5, Item #5 be amended to state he asked if Plan 3 could be built with an additional garage. There being no further changes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Abell to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Conditional Use Permit 99-046 and Site Development Permit 99-657; a request of RHL Design Group for USA Petroleum for approval of the use and development plans for a gasoline facility with mini -market and automated tunnel car wash located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road within La Quinta Corporate Centre. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC12-14-99.wpd Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 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, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioners asked staff to explain the circulation pattern. 3. Commissioner Butler asked if the berm would hide the building. Staff explained that as conditioned, the building pad would be lowered, but not the berming or landscaping. 4. Commissioner Tyler asked if the towers had any purpose or use. Staff stated they were decorative. Commissioner Tyler asked about the entrance/exit into the car wash. 5. Commissioner Robbins asked what the concern was with the flag pole being in the landscape setback. Staff stated that a flag pole is defined as a structure and therefore, cannot be in the landscape setback area. Commissioner Robbins stated he did not agree with staff s concern. He then asked why turf was being required for both sides of the sidewalk along Highway 111. Staff stated the requirement is dictated by the Highway 111 Guidelines. Commissioner Robbins stated the wording in Condition #79 needed to be fixed. 6. Commissioner Butler stated he agreed with Commissioner Robbins in regard to the flag pole. He also concurred with the agreement reached regarding the lowering of the tower elements. This project has some character and he is glad to see some design. He agreed with staffs recommendation regarding the rear elevation and asked where the glass block treatment was to be used. 7. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern about the noise generated by car wash being open 24-hours. He then asked about the required parking spaces and if additional parking spaces would be provided by the Corporate Centre nearby. Staff stated the number of required parking spaces was dictated by the Specific Plan and Zoning Code. Commissioner Tyler stated he concurred with the revised tower elevations and wished someone could come up with a new design for the flat roof of the canopy. He asked how the flag pole at 22 feet compared with the one at the corner of Fred Waring and Highway I I I in Palm Desert. He cannot understand how a flag pole could be defined as a structure and would like to see it prominently displayed at the corner and illuminated. In regard to the pad elevation, he asked how the proposed elevation compared with the grading plan for the entire center. He agrees with staff s recommendation for the sign on Dune Palms Road. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC12-14-99.wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 8. Chairman Kirk stated the 22 parking space requirement seemed excessive for this type of use and was the number based upon the car wash being added? Staff stated that was correct and that was why it was not necessary to have the 22 parking spaces on site. Chairman Kirk asked what the relevancy was of the sight study to this project. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated Dune Palms Road will be a Secondary Arterial with no median. Dune Palms Road has a slight rise and the crest of the hill is located at the entrance to this project. The issue of stopping sight distance has to do with how far a person trying to exit the project can see down Dune Palms Road and how fast and how far away is the car going south on Dune Palms Road. In this particular case it was 400+ feet. So a car traveling at 49 mph could stop if it had to, if the car exiting pulled out in front of the car going south on Dune Palms Road. If the car traveling south was traveling over 49'/z mph it would not be able to fully stop. Therefore, this entrance is acceptable to staff. 9. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr Jim Shivley of RHL Design Group, representing the applicant, stated they have no objection to most of the conditions, but needs some clarification on the following: a. SDP Condition # 21: they have no problem. b. SDP Condition #36: in regard to the Bike Path, they believe it is more in reference to the Specific Plan and not their project as they are not adjacent to the Whitewater Storm Channel and should be a condition of the Specific Plan. C. SDP Condition 444: he questioned the footage and stated the 378 feet should be 370, and the 386 feet should be 380. d. SDP Condition #67: in regard to the architecture they are requesting to keep the towers at their requested height. Once lowered it is a continuation of the roofs. In regard to the canopy over the gas pumps they would like to add a tile roof to tie it to the building roof. e. SDP Condition 472: regarding the flag pole they are requesting it be as prominent as possible in the landscape setback and illuminated. f. SDP Condition #73 & 74: they agree with staff s recommendation regarding the changes to the sign program except they would like to retain the Java Jon sign, but are willing to compromise. 10. Commissioner Butler asked the applicant if the Commission reconsidered the height of the towers, would they be adding some additional treatment to the rear elevation. Mr. Shivley stated that at the Architectural and Landscaping Committee meeting they agreed to add embellishment to the rear elevation. It was not clear whether it would be glass block at the car wash. opaque window, but they would work with staff to accomplish this. By adding CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC12-14-99.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 windows and score joints it would give some definition to this elevation. Commissioner Butler asked if a compromise could be reached in regard to the height. Mr. Shivley went over the drawings and stated that by lowering the towers it ties in too much with the other roof. 11. Commissioner Tyler asked if the station would be selling Compressed Natural Gas (CNG). The applicant stated no. Commissioner Tyler asked the applicant to indicate on the plans where they propose to locate the flag pole. Discussion followed regarding the location of the flag pole. Commissioner Tyler asked the applicant to explain the egress/ingress of the fuel trucks. Mr Kurt Buehler, representing USA Petroleum Corporation, stated they would arrive on Highway 111, make a right turn into the site, and park along the curvature where the underground tanks are located, fill there, and pull out onto to Dune Palms and proceed down the highway. The site is more than large enough to accommodate the trucks. 12. Commissioner Abels asked why so many signs were needed to advertise gas. He would rather see one on the corner of Dune Palms Road and Highway 111 and eliminate the other two. Staff stated the Centre Specific Plan requires a center identification at the corner. Discussion followed regarding the signs approved for the La Quinta Corporate Centre and gas station. 13. Commissioner Tyler asked about the lighting adjacent to Dune Palms Road and suggested a low bollard light be used instead of what is proposed. Mr. Shivley stated they could be shielded and adjusted to shine into the interior of the project. He further stated they are required by State Law to show their pricing on both frontages if they can't have the corner sign. 14. Mr. Scott Gaynor, representing the La Quinta Corporate Centre, stated he believes the applicant has gone beyond the normal to accommodate the architectural features to make this more than just a gas station. The only issue appears to be the height of the towers. There is some sensitivity relative to lowering the towers and in their opinion, they will lose the effect they are trying to create. They support their proposal as submitted. 15. There being no further discussion, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the issue for Commission discussion. 16. Commissioner Abels stated it was a good project and would set the tone for the Corporate Centre. He is inclined to go along with the height as requested as long as the flag is left where it is proposed. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC12-14-99.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 17. Chairman Kirk asked staff about the corner monument sign; can they delete the two proposed gas station signs and only have the corner monument sign? Staff stated they probably could with a larger monument sign that includes the gasoline prices. 18. Commissioner Abels stated they should have something more appropriate as that could take away from the corporate signage. 19. Commissioner Robbins stated he does not like to alter the architectural design as this is what the architect is hired for as long as it is designed to meet City standards. He would therefore, support the proposal as submitted. Condition #31 of Site Development Permit does need to be modified to delete any reference to the applicant being able to have the effluent water run into the Stormwater Channel. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the condition was intended to address the drainage water and not the effluent water. Condition 432 needed to be clarified as well. Commissioner Robbins stated he did not understand Condition #36.A.3; how can the applicant be required to do something on someone else's property. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the condition would be deleted. The City does not normally make such a requirement. Commissioner Robbins agrees that the flagpole should be left as proposed. He takes issue with the mandate of the use of turf on both sides of the sidewalk. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the turf is not continuous on both sides of the sidewalk on the south side of Highway 111. It is a continuous design with small areas of turf following the meandering sidewalk. 20. Commissioner Butler stated he concurs with leaving the towers alone and not modifying them as they do add some character to the building. He also agrees with the location of the flag pole. He asked if the flagpole could be lit and not be in violation of the Dark Sky Ordinance. Staff stated it is not a violation if the right type of lighting is used. Commissioner Butler stated that in regard to signs the only one he would object to is the number of signs on the car wash. He is looking forward to seeing the completion of this project as soon as possible. 21. Commissioner Tyler asked for clarification of the location of the Java Jon sign identified in Condition #74. Staff stated it refers to the sign on the building. Commissioner Tyler stated he would prefer to see the flagpole right on the point, right behind the corporate sign, and not set back in the landscape setback area. 22. Chairman Kirk thanked staff and the applicant for being persistent and making this project work. He agrees with the other Commissioners, that some things are better left alone and as the ALRC recommended the towers CAN!y Documents\WPD )CS\PC12-14-99.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 remain as proposed by the applicant. He too believes the applicant did a nice job with the building articulation, and with staffs recommendation on the rear elevation it will be an excellent project. The only area he differs with the Commissioners is on the signs. There are two monument signs and the flag will serve as an additional sign as it is an advertisement. Therefore, he does not agree with the other Commissioners in regard to the number of signs. He then reviewed the changes to the conditions. 23. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-082 approving Conditional Use Permit 99-046, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 24. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-083 approving Site Development Permit 99-657, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as amended. a. Condition: #31: delete all words after the word "Channel" and correct the name of the Coachella Stormwater Channel. b. Condition #32: correct the name of the channel to Coachella Stormwater Channel and remove any reference to effluent. C. Condition #36.A.3: delete. d. Condition #67: delete. e. Condition #72: delete. f. Conditions #73.1 & #75 shall be incorporated into one condition. g. Condition #74 shall be reworded to state the Java Jon sign as proposed on the building is not a part of the approval. h. Condition 481 shall be added and state, "Prior to issuance of a building permit the design of the canopy shall include a mansard roof subject to the approval of the Community Development Department." ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. Chairman Kirk recessed the meeting at 8:18 and reconvened at 8:23 p.m. B. Tentative Tract Map 29457; a request of TD Desert Development for approval to subdivide 277.9 acres into 262 residential and other common/miscellaneous lots located at the southwest corner of 48' Avenue and Jefferson Street within Rancho La Quinta Country Club. C:\My Documents\WPDOCSTC I 2-14-99.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 1. Chairman Kirk 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 Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if Rancho La Quinta's improvements along Jefferson Street would tie in with the City's ultimate design for Jefferson Street. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the improvements would be completed per the City's design. 3. There being no further discussion, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the issue for Commission discussion. 4. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-084 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 29457, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. 5. Commissioner Tyler asked about Condition #35, regarding the undergrounding of the utility lines. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the bottom .three lines on Jefferson Street and maybe six of the bottom lines along Avenue 48, may be undergrounded. Any utility lines below the cross members are able to be undergrounded and will be required to do so. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. C. Site Development Permit 99-661; a request of Canaday & Company for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for three new prototype residential types located on the north side of 48' Avenue east of Caleo Bay Drive within Lake La Quinta. 1. Chairman Kirk 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 Kirk asked staff to explain the clipped gable issue raised by the ALRC. Staff stated that since there are many houses in the tract with the clipped gable, its use would make the design more compatible. CAM), Documents\WPD0CS\PC12-14-99.wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 Commissioner Butler asked staff where they would want a clipped gable added. Staff stated that instead of having a hip roof, the gable roof would continue out and be clipped on the ends on one of the plans. Commissioner Butler stated he was opposed to the clipped gable roof and thought there was enough detail as proposed. 4. Mr. Roger Moore, with Canady and Company, stated he had nothing to add and concurred with staff s recommendation. 5. Commissioner Tyler asked if the Homeowners' Association had reviewed and approved the plans. Mr. Moore stated they had approved the plans. 6. There being no further discussion, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the issue for Commission discussion. 7. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-085 approving Site Development Permit 99-661, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. D. Site Development Permit 99-653. Amendment #1; a request of Forrest Haag for KSL Land Corporation for approval of revised site, architectural and landscaping plans for golf course maintenance facility for the property located on the north side of Airport Boulevard, between Madison Street and Monroe Street within the Norman Golf Course. 1. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requested a continuance to January 11, 2000, to allow them time to redesign the building and the Site configuration. 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Tyler to continue this item to January 11, 2000. Unanimously approved. E. Environmental Assessment 99-389 General Plan Amendment 99-064. Zone Change 99-092 Specific Plan 99-040 and Tentative Tract Map 29323; a request of Wade Ellis/Warner Engineering requesting Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, approval of a Pre -Annexation General Plan Designation from County Designation 2b (2-5 units per acre) to Low Density Residential (2-4 units per acre), Zone Change from County Designation of r-1-9000 to Low Density Residential, a Specific Plan for development standards and design C':\My I)ocuments\WPDOCS\PC12-14-99.wpd Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 guidelines for a residential development; and Tentative Tract Map to allow 379 residential units on 117 acres, to be located on the northwest corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. 1. 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, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Robbins asked about the condition for a north boundary wall. Staff stated the condition should be Condition #70 of the Specific Plan. 3. Commissioner Abels stated the lots appear to be 4,500 square feet on the map and not 4,800 as stated in the staff report. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated there are some lots that are larger which create a higher average, but the majority are 4,840 square feet. 4. Commissioner Butler stated he agrees that the average lot size is 4,800 square feet is misleading as most of the lots are 4,500 square feet. 5. Commissioner Tyler asked for clarification on the entrances as staff had stated they would be allowed a right out and the staff report states it will have a left turn in at both driveways. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated the Public Works Department has indicated a left turn in would be allowed at both entrances. Commissioner Tyler suggested Condition #55.A. contain the same wording as Condition #55.13 relative to the right turn out. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that on Jefferson Street the City will only have a half median as the City only controls half of the street. On Fred Waring Drive the City can construct a full median. That is why the right directed egress drive is not required. The City will be able to get the hook turn in the median and it will be a positive barrier in that regard. Whereas on Jefferson Street there is a need to get the cars going right far enough as the City will only have a half median. Discussion followed as to how the City would build a half median. Commissioner Tyler asked if there was an opportunity to recover some of the cost (Condition #46.A.) of the signals at Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street. Staff stated there was none. 6. Chairman Kirk asked if this area was within the City's Sphere of Influence. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated it was not. 7. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mike Smith, Warner Engineering representing the applicant, stated the only concern they were hearing from the Commission was in regard to the C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC12-14-99.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 smaller lot sizes. The first project layout for this site had been for a commercial corner and staff rejected this plan. The lot sizes were determined from a market study. The tract was previously approved with over 400 lots of the same size and they could not find a builder to build it so they conducted a survey to see what the demand was and this was the result. In regard to the amenities, the developer would rather wait to let the builders determine what they want. They would like to request deletion of Condition #72 and allow the Homeowners' Association to decide what they want and what they want to pay for. 8. Commissioner Tyler asked what the strip of land was between their project and Jefferson Street. Mr. Smith stated it belonged to Christine Clarke and it was not economically possible to purchase the property for the few lots that could be developed on it. It could be used as an open space retention basin for the property to the north. Commissioner Tyler stated there would be a sidewalk to nowhere until the property to the north is developed. He then asked for an explanation of the emergency exits. Mr. Smith stated there is an existing road at the west end that dead ends. They will put their road through and construct a Fire Marshal crash gate as an extra gate and on the well site there is an opportunity to gate both ends and the Fire Marshal could go through the well site. Commissioner Tyler stated that off Fred Waring Drive at Port Maria, which is a gated entrance, it will require approval from the Bermuda Dunes Country Club. Mr. Smith stated the road exists and should not require any approval from the Bermuda Dunes Country Club. 9. Commissioner Butler stated that in Planning Area 1, the City's minimum lot size is 7,200 square feet and he does not like the smaller lot size. He does like the project and the concept. If the lots were 7,200 square feet there would be no issue. Commissioner Butler stated his concern was that once the lot sizes are approved, the developer no longer has a concern or control, it is then up to the individual merchant builders. 10. Mr. Chuck McKeown, 1782 The Woods Drive, San Diego, speaking for the applicant, stated that when this project was initially put together it was when the City was suffering under the depression of 1982. They had 400 lots all the same size and could not obtain financing for so they had to come up with an alternative plan. They designed the program for a number of users that are not being satisfied by the current market. The lot size of 4,500 square feet was selected to keep the homes small for people who are either single men or women, who want security, ease of care, maintenance of the home as well as for retirees. They are across the street from US Homes and loss than a mile from Sun City and many of the people they will attract do not want to pay the high association fees and do not care about the recreational amenities CAMy Docaments\WPDOCS\PC12-14-99.wpd 10 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 of a golf course. He went on to give a history of the development in the area. Finally, they will have CC& R's contained in their architectural guidelines to control what is built. 11. Commissioner Abels stated a merchant developer could purchase the whole project without any stipulations. Mr. McKeown stated the square footage and architectural standards will be stipulated. Commissioner Abels stated his biggest concern is the small lots and the type of builder that will build on them. Mr. McKeown stated they contemplated having a senior project and found that most people do not want to be in a senior project only. They would follow any conditions the City would like to place on the project to maintain the guidelines desired. The starting price range for the zero lot homes should be $150,000 up to about $185,000. The higher end houses should start at about $225,000 up to $300,000 based on the market projections today. 12. Commissioner Abels stated his concern was that with the smaller lots there is nothing in place to prevent a builder from building a less than desirable project. Mr. McKeown stated they originally thought about have a senior project, but have since found out that projects that are senior restricted are beginning to suffer because people do not want to be in an age restricted project. They would appreciate any recommendations the Commission or staff could give them regarding guidelines to keep the integrity of the project. 13. Mr. Warren Bachtel, 42-645 St. George Drive, Bermuda Dunes, a member of the Annexation Committee for the Bermuda Dunes Council, stated they were not opposed to the project, but are opposed to piece -meal annexing of the area at the request of a property owner. The City needs to annex the entire Bermuda Dunes area, or none of it. He thought they should appear at this time and let the City know they are in the process of making application to the County to remain a County Community of Interest. 14. Commissioner Tyler stated the City is not out soliciting annexation of this area. It is responding to property owners for annexing. Mr. Bachtel stated they are aware of this as they have maintained communication with the City. They want to remain a viable area and be annexed as a whole and not piece- meal. 15. Mr. Jay Steele, 79-745 Kingston Drive, which backs up to this project, stated he had no objection to the project. He currently is serving on the Fact Finding Committee for the Bermuda Dunes area to determine what the residents of Bermuda Dunes want. The residents have made it clear that they do not want to be piece-mealed apart. They would therefore ask the Planning CAMv I)ocuments\WPDOCS\13C12-14-99.wpd 11 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 Commission to postpone annexation of this area until such time as they have an opportunity to finish their fact-finding study to determined what the will of the residents is and then they can approach the appropriate city for annexation. 16. Commissioner Abels stated this Commission has nothing to do with the annexation. The Planning Commission will only review the validity of this project. 17. There being no further discussion, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the issue for Commission discussion. 18. Commissioner Tyler stated he was disappointed by the quality, or lack thereof, of the Specific Plan document itself. Planning Area I does not measure up to the lifestyle of La Quinta. He does not believe a lot of conscious effort went into the development of the document as some of the information is outdated. He generally likes two-thirds of the plan, however he does -not believe they should lower the City's design standards for the purpose of annexation of any parcel. The minimum requirement is established by the RC Code which defines the lot sizes and setbacks and should be applied to Planning Area I of this proposal. An area that should be responded to is the safety of the City's school children to provide turnouts not only for Sunline, but school buses and seniors. The reference to Coachella Valley Water District should be changed to Myoma Dunes Water District. He likes the open space and retention basins. Most gated communities have a restriction regarding the parking of recreational vehicles, the Specific Plan states it will rely on the City's requirements. This will not work on the smaller lots. He suggested they designate an area for "RV" parking. 19. Commissioner Butler stated he concurred with Commissioner Tyler's statements as he too has a problem with the smaller lots and cannot agree that zero lot lines for 132 units will make it any better of a project. The absorption on the smaller units has not proven to be true on the projects he is aware of. Zero lot lines does not make him feel any better about the project.. Having lots of 7,200 square feet does not detract from what they are trying to achieve within their project. If the applicant would make these corrections, he would have no objection. 20. Commissioner Robbins stated he concurred with what has been stated. He can understand the developers plan, but as a Commissioner he is not here to just approve something to sell, but to protect the community and what the C:\My Documents\WPDOCS`,PC12-14-99.wpd 12 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 community stands for. Therefore, he cannot support the lots as designed. He does not see enough controls written into the Specific Plan that would guarantee the type of development they are proposing. 21. Commissioner Abels stated he too agrees with the statements made by the other Commissioners. 22. Chairman Kirk stated he too agreed with the statements made, but also agrees that one-third of the project is not acceptable. He didn't review the remainder of the project due to the concerns raised on the one third. A zero lot line could be a good project if developed with a golf course or other recreational amenities and that is not occurring here. He would like to hear from the developer in regard to the two options that appear to be before the Commission; rejecting the project as proposed and let the City Council address it; or have the applicant come back and respond to the issues raised by the Commission. 23. Commissioner Tyler asked if the applicant could also take into consideration the contours of the site and develop the project to retain some of the contours. 24. Mr. Mike Smith stated they did try to retain some of the contours with the use of the retention basins. They could also increase the size of the lots, but it would defeat the purpose of the project as the market they are trying to reach do not want that amount of yard to maintain. 25. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to verify that the RC Zone required 7,200 square feet. Staff stated that for Low Density Residential yes and for Medium Density Residential it is 5,000 square foot lots. They are proposing a Zone Change to Low Density Residential, but it is the Specific Plan that allows them a certain density and they are within that density requirement. The overall density fits the Low Density Residential averaged over the entire site, but not by Planning Areas. 26. Chairman Kirk asked if the minimum lot requirement for Low Density Residential was 7,200 square feet. Staff stated that was true, but this project is applying under a Specific Plan which gives them flexibility to have varying lot sizes. 27. Commissioner Butler asked if there was a method of approving the project with a stipulation that Planning Area I meet the standards they are looking for. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated Planning Area I could be conditioned to be consistent with Planning Area II which would bring Planning Area I to City standards in a Low Density Residential designation. She then asked for clarification regarding the lot size, as to whether C':\My I)ocuments\WPI)OCS\PC12-14-99.wpd 13 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 Commissioner Butler found the other exceptions to City standards in Planning Area I acceptable or should all of the City's standards for single family development on 7,200 square foot lots be applied. Commissioner Butler stated that if they increase the lot sizes to 7,200 square feet, then the Commission does not need to be concerned because the other issues become mute. Planning Consultant Criste stated that was not true. If you raise the lot size only, the Specific Plan still governs. The way the Specific Plan is written, the recommendation needs to state that it meets all City standards for the RL District. Chairman Kirk recessed the meeting at 9:35 p.m. and reconvened at 9:40 p.m. 28. Mr. Smith stated they would like to request a continuance, but at the same time they would like to know what the objection is to the zero lot line and smaller lot sizes. Can they work with staff to resolve the objections. 29. Chairman Kirk stated the lot size is the problem. The zero lot line is not an issue; they should be paired with amenities of some kind. 30. Commissioner Tyler stated that the City started with 50 X 100 foot lots and the Cove is an example of what can happen with the smaller lot sizes. The City has progressed beyond this and now has a minimum 7,200 square foot lot size and he would hesitate to go backwards. 31. Commissioner Butler stated that with the smaller lots and no amenities, the developer has no control over what will happen down the road. To protect the City he would propose staying with the minimum 7,200 square foot lot. Mr. Smith stated they would have to give up the open space and incorporate more houses. 32. Chairman Kirk stated that it would be better to weave medium density into the community. 33. Commissioner Robbins stated that with some amenities he could be convinced to go with the smaller lots. 34. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Robbins to continue this application to January 25, 2000. Unanimously approved. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC12-14-99.wpd 14 Planning Commission Minutes December 14, 1999 VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of December 7, 1999 IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Abels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held January 11, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:48 P.M. on December 14, 1999. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California CAMy Documents\WPI)OCS\PC12-14-99.wpd 15 PH #A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 11, 2000 CASE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-653, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: FORREST HAAG, ASLA FOR KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC. PROPERTY OWNER: KSL DESERT RESORTS, INC. ARCHITECT: DFD ARCHITECTURE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: FORREST HAAG, ASLA REQUEST: APPROVAL OF REVISED SITE, ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR GOLF COURSE MAINTENANCE FACILITY LOCATION: WITHIN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD, APPROXIMATELY MIDWAY BETWEEN MADISON STREET AND MONROE STREET BACKGROUND: Due to the applicants substantial redesign of the maintenance building, Staff has been determined that Specific Plan 90-015, Amendment #2, must be amended. An application for a Specific Plan Amendment is forthcoming and will be processed concurrently with this request. Therefore, Staff recommends tabling this application. RECOMMENDATION: Table this Site Development Permit. Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Submitted by: U/� ` Christine di lorio, Planing Manager c:\sdp 99-653 amend #1 pc rpt cont.wpd PH #B STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JANUARY 11, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY' OWNER: KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC. LOCATION: ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PGA BOULEVARD AT ITS SOUTHERN TERMINUS IN PGA WEST REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A 36 SPACE PARKING LOT FOR THE PGA WEST RESORT CLUBHOUSE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 IS PART OF SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 (PGA WEST). THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER SECTION 65457(A) OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING LAW BECAUSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 83062922) WAS PREPARED AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN 1984. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, OR CONDITIONS, EXIST WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT EIR PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE 21166. GENERAL PLAN/ SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIONS: TOURIST COMMERCIAL/TOURIST COMMERCIAL (RESORT CORE VILLAGE) AC ROUND: The proposed parking lot is within PGA West, a country club community with multiple golf courses (Attachment 1). The community design guidelines and development standards are governed by Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #3). STPC SDP99-663 - 38 RESOSDP 663 - 38, CONDSDP 663 38 (1/6/00) Page 1 of 3 The Spec"fic Plan land use designation for the proposed parking lot is Tourist Commercial (TC). Within this TC area, a 1,000 room hotel and/or condominiums is allowed. On October 5, 1999, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 29241 allowing the subdivision of 50.83 acres into various lots under Resolution 99-138. In compliance with Condition #44 of TTM 29241 this proposed parking lot will be used by the PGA West Resort Clubhouse to make up for those parking spaces lost by the extension of Spanish Bay to the south of the clubhouse. The applicant is proposing a 36 space parking lot at the southern terminus of PGA Boulevard, west of the existing PGA West Resort Clubhouse. The double -loaded parking lot has a 24' wide two-way aisleway that connects to PGA Boulevard on the south and the existing parking lot for the clubhouse to the northeast (Attachment 2). public Notice This Site Development Permit was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on December 29, 1999, and mailed to all property owners within 1,000-feet of the site. • �•' On December 1, 1999, the applicant's request was sent to affected public agencies for comment. All pertinent comments received have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. STATE)___E T O _ AN0ATORY FINDI S: Findings necessary to approve the request, per Zoning Ordinance Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permit) can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution with the exception of the following Findings: Consistency with Zoning Code padina Lot Desig_r_S_t_aD ard_s - The applicant proposes a parking lot with a 24- foot wide two-way aisleway where Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Code specifies that two-way aisle widths be 26 feet (Condition 3 is recommended to address this requirement). STPC SDP99-663 - 38 RESOSDP 663 - 38, CONDSDP 663 38 (1/6/00) Page 2 of 3 i U - . Landscape Design - The applicant is proposing to maintain the existing landscaping along the west side of the new parking lot. Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Code specifies that parking lots shall be shaded with landscaping to reduce noise, glare and enhance the visual environment. Therefore, staff is recommending landscaping shall consist of shrubs and minimum 24" box, 1-1 /2" caliper, trees providing .150 percent shading of the lot in 15 years (Condition 3 is recommended to address this requirement). RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, approving Site* Development Permit 99-663, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. PGA, West Map 2. SDP 99-663 - Reduced 3. Large Exhibits - Commission Only Prepared by: Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Submitted by: 04"LltL�. 1,6& - Christine di lorio, Plan ing Manager STPC SDP99-663 - 38 RESOSDP 663 - 38, CONDSDP 663 38 (1/6/00) Page 3 of 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A 36 SPACE PARKING LOT TO THE WEST OF THE PGA WEST RESORT CLUBHOUSE CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 APPLICANT: KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 11 th day of January, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Land Holdings for approval of a 36 space parking lot for the PGA West Resort Clubhouse, more particularly described as: Portion of APN: 775-220-018; Sections 16 and 21, T6S, R7E, SBBM WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit is part of Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West). This application has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 65457(A) of the Planning and Zoning Law because Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #83062922) was prepared and certified by the City Council in 1984. No changed circumstances, or conditions, exist which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code 21 166; 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 make the following applicable findings to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: 1. The project elements comply with the requirements of the City's General Plan and Specific Plan 83-002 in that ancillary parking for the clubhouse will ensure no negative impacts to adjacent land uses. 2. The proposed parking lot provides proper access from PGA Boulevard to the existing clubhouse parking lot. A two-way aisleway and 9' by 18' parking stalls are provided ensuring easy maneuverability for employees and guests coming to the clubhouse facilities pursuant to Chapter 9.150 of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to conditions being met. 3. Perimeter site landscaping is required for this new parking lot ensuring shade coverage for parked vehicles (i.e., minimum 24-inch, 1-1 /2" caliper size trees). Additional landscaping of shrubs will conceal the facility from view of residential properties in the vicinity. Permanent irrigation shall be provided. A:\ResoPCsdp663Forrest.wpd - 38-1/6/00 r Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 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 99-663 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions, attached hereto; PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 1 1 th day of January, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES; NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN;, TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HE:RMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California AAResoPCsdp663Forrest.wpd - 38-1/6/00 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 - KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC. JANUARY 11, 2000 G E EBAL 1. Upon Planning Commission approval, a memorandum noting that the City Conditions of Approval for this project are available for revoew at City Hall shall be recorded against the property with Riverside County. 2. The property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this site development permit thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. 3. This site development permit shall comply with the requirements and standards of Chapter 9.150 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). Prior to approval of the Precise Grading and Striping Plan, the applicant shall incorporate the following design elements: • A minimum six-foot wide perimeter landscape planter allowing the installation of 24-inch box trees (1.5-inches and larger caliper) and five gallon shrubs. Trees shall be spaced to provide shade coverage at 15 years of age (i.e., 40 foot intervals). • The two-way aisleway shall be 26 feet in width. • A minimum of one physically challenged parking spaces shall be provided, unless an adequate number of parking spaces are provided in the existing Resort Clubhouse parking facilities. 4. This site development permit shall expire within one year of approval, unless extended pursuant to the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading/paving permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. A:\CondPC sdp663 Parking.wpd-38-1/6/00 `' Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 6. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 7. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 8. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as - constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. 4:\CondPC sdp663 ?arking.wpd-38-I/6/00 t .% i Planning commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 9. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 10. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be agendia-ed for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 11. If the .applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan or in an improvement agreement, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. 12. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 13. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the k:\CondPC sdp663 Parking.wpd-38-1/6/00 ` �� Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 14. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. W:M MITM 15. Stormw/ater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for PGA West. UTILITIES 16. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirernents maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREETilFFIC AND PARKING LOT IMPROVEMENTS 17. The applicant shall design parking lot pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows; (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. 18. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. L A ND AENG 19. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. kACondPC sdp663 Parkingmpd-38-1/6/00 ) ' `I ° ) Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 The applicant shall submit two sets of plans for approval by the Community Development Department once the applicant has obtained signatures from the CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the Community Development Department. 20. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements. QUALITY A3SURANCE 21. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 22. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 23. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. 24. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all public improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be: stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENACLUE 25. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all improvements. FEES AND DEPOSITS 26. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. SPECIAL 27. The applicant shall comply with any applicable conditions of Specific Plan 83-002 and Tentative Tract Map 29421. :\CondPC sdp663 Parking.wpd-38-1/6/00 / .lt i ■ I flint H fill 6311 w� XY 4 E�. o •- z o �3s W 6► � Z � �� $ Z+3�a � W W ri Vi G° �$dii 2 It �°��y W ats s N � of ��1- g 9 Q< W g S o f c �jz N `go Ix w �4<m es t�eand �� O�Q� eA W-f V• �syF ai Z�Za t7s� c7 xd y O a C� °1�5.•:€ as aad� W d� u�z 0, v`c'CA a ca z CA Q' 't ON z0 od C7 . a0 CN LL qm L Q 991 111m oil 11b Asib 89 fY; t li i o {- z Zp ti ;.4Q S -< H o z C 2 ±ai G q S czzo 3# z y a zCiw3.w m zwbpi P s W S< '�<'4 rd J s<3. In < f2 < x 6 oc St =s s ZgLL— w i .... �i W e� � E .� NOa �aZ Q 0 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JANUARY 11, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC. LOCATION: ON THE NORTH SIDE OF PGA BOULEVARD AT ITS SOUTHERN TERMINUS IN PGA WEST REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A 36 SPACE PARKING LOT FOR THE PGA WEST RESORT CLUBHOUSE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 IS PART OF SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 (PGA WEST). THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PER SECTION 65457(A) OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING LAW BECAUSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 83062922) WAS PREPARED AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL IN 1984. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, OR CONDITIONS, EXIST WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT EIR PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE 21166. GENERAL PLAN/ SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIONS: TOURIST COMMERCIAL/TOURIST COMMERCIAL (RESORT CORE VILLAGE) BACKM-UND: The proposed parking lot is within PGA West, a country club community with multiple golf courses (Attachment 1). The community design guidelines and development standards are governed by Specific Plan 83-002 (Amendment #3). STPC SDP99-663 - 38 RESOSDP 663 - 38, CONDSDP 663 38 (1/6/00) Page 1 of 3 The Specific Plan land use designation for the proposed parking lot is Tourist Commercial (TC). Within this TC area, a 1,000 room hotel and/or condominiums is allowed. On October 5, 1999, the City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 29241 allowing the subdivision of 50.83 acres into various lots under Resolution 99-138. In compliance with Condition #44 of TTM 29241 this proposed parking lot will be used by the PGA West Resort Clubhouse to make up for those parking spaces lost by the extension of Spanish Bay to the south of the clubhouse. Pwject Request The applicant is proposing a 36 space parking lot at the southern terminus of PGA Boulevard, west of the existing PGA West Resort Clubhouse. The double -loaded parking lot has a 24' wide two-way aisleway that connects to PGA Boulevard on the south and the existing parking lot for the clubhouse to the northeast (Attachment 2). Public Notice This Site Development Permit was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on December 29, 1999, and mailed to all property owners within 1,000-feet of the site. Pu_bLe_Agen_y_R_ev�i w On December 1, 1999, the applicant's request was sent to affected public agencies for comment. All pertinent comments received have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. STAFMENTQF MANDATORY FINMNGS: Findings necessary to approve the request, per Zoning Ordinance Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permit) can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution with the exception of the following Findings: Consistency with Zoning Code P-arkjn_q.Lo-tQe-sin tan-dards - The applicant proposes a parking lot with a 24- foot wide two-way aisleway where Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Code specifies that two-way aisle widths be 26 feet (Condition 3 is recommended to address this requirement). STPC SDP99-663 - 38 RESOSDP 663 - 38, CONDSDP 663 38 (1/6/00) Page 2 of 3 Landscape— Design - The applicant is proposing to maintain the existing landscaping along the west side of the new parking lot. Chapter 9.150 (Parking) of the Zoning Code specifies that parking lots shall be shaded with landscaping to reduce noise, glare and enhance the visual environment. Therefore, staff is recommending landscaping shall consist of shrubs and minimum 24" box, 1-1 /2" caliper, trees providing 50 percent shading of the lot in 15 years (Condition 3 is recommended to address this requirement). RECQ)1llMENDQTIO : Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, approving Site' Development Permit 99-663, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. PGA West Map 2. SDP 99-663 - Reduced 3. Large Exhibits - Commission Only Prepared by: Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner STPC SDP99-663 - 38 RESOSDP 663 - 38, CONDSDP 663 38 (1/6/00) Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planking Manager Page 3 of 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A 36 SPACE PARKING LOT TO THE WEST OF THE PGA WEST RESORT CLUBHOUSE CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 APPLICANT: KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 1 1 th day of January, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of KSL Land Holdings for approval of a 36 space parking lot for the PGA West Resort Clubhouse, more particularly described as: Portion of APN: 775-220-018; Sections 16 and 21, T6S, R7E, SBBM WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit is part of Specific Plan 83-002 (PGA West). This application has been determined to be exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 65457(A) of the Planning and Zoning Law because Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #83062922) was prepared and certified by the City Council in 1984. No changed circumstances, or conditions, exist which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code 21166; 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 make the following applicable findings to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: 1. The project elements comply with the requirements of the City's General Plan and Specific Plan 83-002 in that ancillary parking for the clubhouse will ensure no negative impacts to adjacent land uses. 2. The proposed parking lot provides proper access from PGA Boulevard to the existing clubhouse parking lot. A two-way aisleway and 9' by 18' parking stalls are provided ensuring easy maneuverability for employees and guests coming to the clubhouse facilities pursuant to Chapter 9.150 of the Zoning Ordinance, subject to conditions being met. 3. Perimeter site landscaping is required for this new parking lot ensuring shade coverage for parked vehicles (i.e., minimum 24-inch, 1-1/2" caliper size trees). Additional landscaping of shrubs will conceal the facility from view of residential properties in the vicinity. Permanent irrigation shall be provided. A:\ResoPCsdp663Forrest.wpd - 38-1/6/00 Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 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 99-663 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions, attached hereto; PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 11 th day of January, 2000, 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 A:\ResoPCsdp663 Forrest. wpd - 38-1/6/00 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-663 - KSL LAND HOLDINGS, INC. JANUARY 11, 2000 GENERAL 1. Upon Planning Commission approval, a memorandum noting that the City Conditions of Approval for this project are available for review at City Hall shall be recorded against the property with Riverside County. 2. The property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this site development permit thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. 3. This site development permit shall comply with the requirements and standards of Chapter 9.150 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). Prior to approval of the Precise Grading and Striping Plan, the applicant shall incorporate the following design elements: • A minimum six-foot wide perimeter landscape planter allowing the installation of 24-inch box trees (1.5-inches and larger caliper) and five gallon shrubs. Trees shall be spaced to provide shade coverage at 15 years of age (i.e., 40 foot intervals). • The two-way aisleway shall be 26 feet in width. • A minimum of one physically challenged parking spaces shall be provided, unless an adequate number of parking spaces are provided in the existing Resort Clubhouse parking facilities. 4. This site development permit shall expire within one year of approval, unless extended pursuant to the requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance. 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading/paving permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. A:\CondPC sdp663 Par.<ing.wpd-38-1/6/00 Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 6. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 7. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 8. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as - constructed conditions. If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. A:\CondPC sdp663 Parking.wpd-38-1/6/00 Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 llVIPRQ LEEM-ENT AG E_E_MENT 9. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 10. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 11. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan or in an improvement agreement, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 12. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 13. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the A:\CondPC sdp663 Parking. wpd-3 8-1/6/00 Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 14. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 15. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for PGA West. UTILITII=S 16. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREETl_T_RAFFIC_AND_-PAR�CING LOZLM_PB_QV MENTS 17. The applicant shall design parking lot pavement sections using Caltrans' design procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials): Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. 18. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. LANDSCAPING 19. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. A:\CondPC sdp663 Pandng.wpd-38-1/6/00 Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ Site Development Permit 99-663 January 11, 2000 The applicant shall submit two sets of plans for approval by the Community Development Department once the applicant has obtained signatures from the CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the Community Development Department. 20. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements. (2L!A_LITY A_aSU-RANCE 21. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 22. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 23. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. 24. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all public improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. MAINTENANCE 25. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all improvements. FEES -AND DEP-0-SLTS 26. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. SPECIAL 27. The applicant shall comply with any applicable conditions of Specific Plan 83-002 and Tentative Tract Map 29421. A:\CondPC sdp663 Parking.wpd-38-1/6/00 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 11, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-664 APPLICANT: TIBURON HOMES, LLC ARCHITECTS: BBG ARCHITECTS SOUTH COAST ARCHITECTS HOVE DESIGN ALLIANCE ARCHITECTS REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR THREE NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD, EAST OF MADISON STREET ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: GENERAL PLAN/ SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING: BACKGROUND: THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED FROM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303, CLASS 3(A) OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION. LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 2-4 DWELLINGS PER ACRE) RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)/RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN The lots to be developed are in the Norman golf course on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of PGA West. These units are proposed for Tract 29348-1, 19 lots on Royal St. George, north of Tiburon Drive. This is the first request for approval of residential units in the project. Specific Plan 90-015 Amendment #2 for The Norman Course, approved under Resolution 99-112, provides the Community Design Guidelines for the residential units. PROJECT PROPOSAL: Proposed are three prototype plans as follows: C:sdp 99-664 pc rpt.wpd Plan 1 xt (BBG Architects) size - 3,994 square feet including guest unit # of bedrooms - four baths- four garage spaces - three Plan�SCp`) size - # of bedrooms - baths - garage spaces - Plan 2xa and 2xb tHOVE) size - # of bedrooms - baths - garage spaces - 4,375 square feet four three and one-half three 4,716 square feet four four and one-half three All of the plans are variations of plans presently being constructed in the Citrus project by the applicant. The proposed plans are slightly larger and taller with most having minor exterior changes, most prevalent on the rear elevations to take advantage of the golf course views. Each plan is designed by a different architect, but utilize a common "Spanish/Mediterranean" theme. Architectural features commonly used include combination hip and gable the roofs, front courtyards, courtyards tower entries, arches, smooth trowel plaster, multi pane windows and exposed rafters on the facades, window and door trim, metal roll -up garage doors, and decorative chimneys. Maximum building heights of the one story structures vary from 20 feet to 21 feet. Each plan will have two facades, with the rear and sides the same within each plan. The exterior plaster colors will be in the range beige to light tan, with darker earth tone accent colors, and red blended tile roofs. Approximately five color combinations are proposed, however, only one combination has been submitted at this time. Landscaping plans have not been submitted at this time. They will be submitted separately at a later time for approval. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW: The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of January 5, 2000, and determined the project was acceptable as presented. The applicant requested that rather than prior to issuance of building permits, the landscaping plans be approved by the ALRC C:sdp 99-664 pc rpt.wpd ' 19 and Planning Commission prior to their first building final inspection. The Committee unanimously (3-0) adopted Minute Motion 2000-001, recommending approval, with the requested landscaping plan approval revision. PUBLIC NOTICE: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on December 30, 1999, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet around the project boundaries. To date, no correspondence has been received. FIND_ The findings as required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning Ordinance can be made as noted in the attached draft Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-_,approving Site Development Permit 99-664, subject to conditions: Attachment: 1. Plan exhibits Prepared by: a� P--.) 14:5awz�- Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Submitted by: UWv Christine di lorio, Plan 'ng Manager C:sdp 99-664 pc rpt.wpd , 0 0 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THREE NEW PROTOTYPE PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE (TRACT 29848-1) CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-664 APPLICANT: TIBURON HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 1111 day of January, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of TIBURON HOMES for approval of three new prototype plans in the Norman Golf Course, located on Royal St. George, more particularly described as: Portions of Tract 29848-1 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be categorically exempt From California Environmental Quality Act Requirements under Section 15303, Class 3(A) of the Guidelines for Implementation; and, WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, at its meeting of January 5, 2000, did review the architecture for the proposed prototype units and recommended approval, subject to conditions. WHEREAS, at said Public Meeting, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following findings for said Site Development Permit: 1. This project is consistent with the General Plan in that the proposed single family residences are allowed within the General Plan designation of low density single family residential. 2. The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code and Architectural Guidelines of applicable Specific Plan 90-015, Amendment #2 in that the design guidelines require a minimum of two different front elevations, varied roof heights, and window and door surrounds for flat elevation planes. The proposed units comply with these requirements in that two facades per plan are proposed, roof heights are varied with the combination of different roofs, and plaster surrounds are provided where required. The Specific Plan guidelines dictate architectural themes, exterior color ranges and materials, and design criteria. The proposed plans are in compliance with these items. p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- January 11, 2000 3. This project has been determined to be categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act Requirements pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3(a) of the Guidelines for Implementation. 4. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, is compatible with, surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City in that the units are compatible with surrounding development to the south and west. 5. The proposed lots for these plans are sufficient in size to accommodate the prototype units. 6. The prototypical landscaping plans are conditioned to be reviewed and approved by the ALRC and Planning Commission to ensure they are of high quality and are consistent with surrounding development. 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 99-664 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto;. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 1 1 to day of January, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- January 11, 2000 TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-664 TIBURON HOMES JANUARY 11, 2000 1. This approval is for three prototype units (3,994; 4,375; and 4,716 square feet), for which plans are on file in the Community Development Department. 2. The perimeter walls around lots shall be of masonry construction. 3. Detailed front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the ALRC and Planning Commission prior to final inspection of the residences. The plans require Community Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, and Riverside County Agricultural Commission approval before they will be considered final. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this approval, final architectural working drawings shall be approved by the Community Development Department. p:\stan\sdp 99-644 pc coampd 1 DRAFT MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 5, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER II. IV. V. A. This meeting of the Architectural and at 10:02 a.m. by Planning Manager Cl B. Committee Members present: Bill Reynolds. C. Staff present: Planning Ma Executive Secretary Betty PUBLIC COMMENT: None. 10:00 a.m. iig Committee was called to order Iorio who led the flag salute. Dennis Cunningham, and Frank di Iorio, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and CONFIRMATION OF TXE AGENDA: Confirmed. CONSENT C ALE AR: A. Planni Manager Christine di Iorio asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of cember 8, 1999. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by mmittee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to approve the minutes as submitted. nanimously approved. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Sile Development Permit 99-664; a request of Tiburon Homes, LLC for approval of architectural plans for three new prototype residential units located on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street within the Norman Golf Course. 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. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant had anything to say. Mr. Peter Jacobs, representing Marvin Homes, asked for an amendment to Condition #1 as there was no way they could have the landscaping plans submitted for approval prior to pulling building permits. He asked that the A:\ALRCI-5-00.wpd DRAFT Architectural & Landscape Review Committee January 5, 2000 condition be reworded to be required prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Their landscaping plans had not been drawn as of yet and would have to go the approval process with KSL, the Homeowners' Association, ALRC, and Planning Commission and they could not do this prior to pulling building permits. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no objection and asked staff if there was any internal check system to monitor this. Staff stated it would be better to require the approval prior to final inspections. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no problem as long as the landscaping plans were approved prior to installation. Staff stated that requiring them to submit their plans prior to final inspection of the first residential unit would meet that requirement. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2000-001 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 99-664, subject to conditions as amended: a. Condition #1: modified to stated prior to approval of ALRC and Planning Commission before final inspection of the first residential unit. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 9/nee quest of Steve alker Homes for approval of architectural plans for thototype res' ential units located on the north side of Airport Boulevard, dison S et within the Norman Golf Course. 1. Planning Manager Ci I o presented the information contained in the staff report, a cis on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Mr. Hans Anderle ian Lagoni Architects, went over the design elevations for the C. 3. Committee Me ber Cunningham stated that the rear elevation did not have much archite tural detail, but, in his opinion, that is better. He approved of the design as submitted and stated that being on the Norman Course it allows t e architect more freedom for design by not having to meet the mmna,eibilitv issue. A:\ALRCI-5-OO.wpd 2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 11, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-664 APPLICANT: TIBURON HOMES, LLC ARCHITECTS: BBG ARCHITECTS SOUTH COAST ARCHITECTS HOVE DESIGN ALLIANCE ARCHITECTS REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR THREE NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD, EAST OF MADISON STREET ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: GENERAL PLAN/ SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING: BACKGROUND: THIS SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED FROM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303, CLASS 3(A) OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION. LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 2-4 DWELLINGS PER ACRE) RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)/RESIDENTIAL SPECIFIC PLAN The lots to be developed are in the Norman golf course on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of PGA West. These units are proposed for Tract 29348-1, 19 lots on Royal St. George, north of Tiburon Drive. This is the first request for approval of residential units in the project. Specific Plan 90-015 Amendment #2 for The Norman Course, approved under Resolution 99-112, provides the Community Design Guidelines for the residential units. PROJECT PROPOSAL: Proposed are three prototype plans as follows: C:sdp 99-664 pc rpt.wpd Plan 1 xt (BBG Architects) size - 3,994 square feet including guest unit # of bedrooms - four baths - four garage spaces - three Plan (SCA) size - 4,375 square feet # of bedrooms - four baths - three and one-half garage spaces - three Plan 2xa and 2xb (HOVE) size - 4,716 square feet # of bedrooms - four baths - four and one-half garage spaces - three All of the plans are variations of plans presently being constructed in the Citrus project by the applicant. The proposed plans are slightly larger and taller with most having minor exterior changes, most prevalent on the rear elevations to take advantage of the golf course views. Each plan is designed by a different architect, but utilize a common "Spanish/Mediterranean" theme. Architectural features commonly used include combination hip and gable tile roofs, front courtyards, courtyards tower entries, arches, smooth trowel plaster, multi pane windows and exposed rafters on the facades, window and door trim, metal roll -up garage doors, and decorative chimneys. Maximum building heights of the one story structures vary from 20 feet to 21 feet. Each plan will have two facades, with the rear and sides the same within each plan. The exterior plaster colors will be in the range beige to light tan, with darker earth tone accent colors, and red blended tile roofs. Approximately five color combinations are proposed, however, only one combination has been submitted at this time. Landscaping plans have not been submitted at this time. They will be submitted separately at a later time for approval. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW: The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of January 5, 2000, and determined the project was acceptable as presented. The applicant requested that rather than prior to issuance of building permits, the landscaping plans be approved by the ALRC C:sdp 99-664 pc rpt.wpd and Planning Commission prior to their first building final inspection. The Committee unanimously (3-0) adopted Minute Motion 2000-001, recommending approval, with the requested landscaping plan approval revision. PUBLIC NOTICE: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on December 30, 1999, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet around the project boundaries. To date, no correspondence has been received. FINDINGS: The findings as required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning Ordinance can be made as noted in the attached draft Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2000-_,approving Site Development Permit 99-664, subject to conditions: Attachment: 1. Plan exhibits Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Submitted by: �l Christine di lorio, Planning Manager C:sdp 99-664 pc rpt.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THREE NEW PROTOTYPE PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE (TRACT 29848-1) CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-664 APPLICANT: TIBURON HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 1 1 to day of January, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of TIBURON HOMES for approval of three new prototype plans in the Norman Golf Course, located on Royal St. George, more particularly described as: Portions of Tract 29848-1 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be categorically exempt From California Environmental Quality Act Requirements under Section 15303, Class 3(A) of the Guidelines for Implementation; and, WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, at its meeting of January 5, 2000, did review the architecture for the proposed prototype units and recommended approval, subject to conditions. WHEREAS, at said Public Meeting, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following findings for said Site Development Permit: 1. This project is consistent with the General Plan in that the proposed single family residences are allowed within the General Plan designation of low density single family residential. 2. The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code and Architectural Guidelines of applicable Specific Plan 90-015, Amendment #2 in that the design guidelines require a minimum of two different front elevations, varied roof heights, and window and door surrounds for flat elevation planes. The proposed units comply with these requirements in that two facades per plan are proposed, roof heights are varied with the combination of different roofs, and plaster surrounds are provided where required. The Specific Plan guidelines dictate architectural themes, exterior color ranges and materials, and design criteria. The proposed plans are in compliance with these items. p:\star\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- January 11, 2000 3. This project has been determined to be categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act Requirements pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3(a) of the Guidelines for Implementation. 4. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, is compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City in that the units are compatible with surrounding development to the south and west. 5. The proposed lots for these plans are sufficient in size to accommodate the prototype units. 6. The prototypical landscaping plans are conditioned to be reviewed and approved by the ALRC and Planning Commission to ensure they are of high quality and are consistent with surrounding development. 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 99-664 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto;. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 11 th day of January, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- January 11, 2000 TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-664 TIBURON HOMES JANUARY '11, 2000 1. This approval is for three prototype units (3,994; 4,375; and 4,716 square feet), for which plans are on file in the Community Development Department. 2. The perimeter walls around lots shall be of masonry construction. 3. Detailed front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the ALRC and Planning Commission prior to final inspection of the residences. The plans require Community Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, and Riverside County Agricultural Commission approval before they will be considered final. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this approval, final architectural working drawings shall be approved by the Community Development Department. p:\stan\sdp 99-644 pc coampd 1 A MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 5, 2000 I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Architectural and Lani at 10:02 a.m. by Planning Manager Christi B. Committee Members present: Bill Reynolds. 10:00 a.m. $fig Committee was called to order i Iorio who led the flag salute. Dennis Cunningham, and Frank C. Staff present: Planning Manhristine di Iorio, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sage er. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF T AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALE AR: A. rnanimously Manager Christine di Iorio asked if there were any changes to the Minutes ber 8, 1999. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by ee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to approve the minutes as submitted. approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. She Development Permif99-664; a request of Tiburon Homes, LLC for approval of architectural plans for three new prototype residential units located on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street within the Norman Golf Course. 1. 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. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant had anything to say. Mr. Peter Jacobs, representing Marvin Homes, asked for an amendment to Condition # 1 as there was no way they could have the landscaping plans submitted for approval prior to pulling building permits. He asked that the AAALRC 1-5-00.wpd DRAFT Architectural & Landscape Review Committee January 5, 2000 condition be reworded to be required prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Their landscaping plans had not been drawn as of yet and would have to go the approval process with KSL, the Homeowners' Association, ALRC, and Planning Commission and they could not do this prior to pulling building permits. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no objection and asked staff if there was any internal check system to monitor this. Staff stated it would be better to require the approval prior to final inspections. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no problem as long as the landscaping plans were approved prior to installation. Staff stated that requiring them to submit their plans prior to final inspection of the first residential unit would meet that requirement. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2000-001 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 99-664, subject to conditions as amended: a. Condition # 1: modified to stated prior to approval of ALRC and Planning Commission before final inspection of the first residential unit. Unanimously approved. B. Site__Deyeloopmen Per i 99-665; a request of SteveoValker Homes for approval of architectural plans for three new prototype res' ential units located on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison St et within the Norman Golf Course. 1. Planning Manager Christine di I o presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of hi is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Mr. Hans Anderle of assenian Lagoni Architects, went over the design elevations for the C mittee. 3. Com/ibilitvissue. er Cunningham stated that the rear elevation did not have much detail, but, in his opinion, that is better. He approved of the dmitted and stated that being on the Norman Course it allowct more freedom for design by not having to meet the comp. A:\ALRCI-5-OO.wpd 2 r 0 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 11, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-665 APPLICANT: STEVEN WALKER HOMES ARCHITECTS: BASSENIAN LAGONI REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR THREE NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD, EAST OF MADISON STREET The property is located in the Norman Golf Course on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of PGA West. These units are proposed for Tract 29348-1, 39 lots. Specific Plan 90-015, Amendment #1 for the Norman Course, approved under Resolution 99-112, provides the Community Design Guidelines for the residential units. Proposed are three floor plans as follows: size- # of bedrooms- bathrooms - garage spaces- size- # of bedrooms - bathrooms garage spaces- size- # of bedrooms - bathrooms garage spaces- 3,995 square feet three three and one-half two with space for a golf cart 3,563 square feet three three and one-half two with space for a golf cart 3,743 square feet three three and one-half two and space for a golf cart PACHRISTITC SDP 99-665.wpd Each of the three proposed prototypes has three facade alternatives. All three building elevations propose S the roofs with varied roof styles. The walls are all clad with smooth trowel plaster. Proposed architectural features consist of tower entries, arched inset windows, multi pane wind shutters, decorat vedecorative chimneys.wrought Max mum exposed rafter tails, plaster molded soffits and building heights of the one story structures vary from 20 feet to 21 feet. The exterior plaster colors will be in the range beige to light tan, with darker, earth tone accent colors and red blended tile roofs. Approximately three color combinations are proposed. Landscaping plans will be submitted separately at a later time. D LAND 3CAPING REVIEW The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of January 5, 2000, and determined the project was acceptable as presented. The applicant requested that rather than prior to issuance of building permits, the landscaping plans be approved by the ALRC and Planning Commission prior to their first building final inspection. The Committee unanimously (3-0) adopted Minute Motion 2000-002, recommending approval, with the requested landscaping plan approval revision. FIND_ As required by Section 9.210.010 Site Development Permits of the Zoning Ordinance, the Committee is required to review and comment on the following findings: 1. The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code. RESPONSE- The proposal includes three facade design alternatives where the Zoning Code requires a minimum of two alternatives. Each of the prototypes proposes the use of a variety of roof heights and styles. Lastly, only one of the two side elevations propose a single wall plane. A variety of window sizes and shapes with surrounds are proposed to provide design interest. 2. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. The Specific Plan design guidelines also specify that the design of the residential units address the same issues. P:\CHRISTI\PC SDP 99-665.wpd RESPONSE: The proposed building design and materials are compatible with the Specific Plan design guidelines in that a simplistic color scheme consisting of an earth tone palette, variety of roof styles, walls clad in smooth trowel stucco and wood and wrought iron used as accents are proposed. Additionally, the proposed scale and massing create an interesting street scene to avoid visual monotony. RECDMMEUQAnON: Approval of Site Development Permit 99-665, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of final inspection, detailed frontyard landscaping plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, final working drawings shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Attachments: 1. Excerpt from ALRC (Draft) minutes - 1 /5/2000 2. Plan exhibits Prepared and Submitted by: di lorio, Pla ing Manager P:\CMSTI\PC SDP 99-665.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THREE NEW PROTOTYPE PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE (TRACT 29848-1) CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-665 APPLICANT: STEVEN WALKER HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 11th day of January, r approval a�lof threelic new prototype plans considerng to the Norman the request of STEVEN WALKER HOMES o pp Golf Course, located on Royal St. George, more particularly described as: Portions of Tract 29848-1 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be categorically exempt From California Environmental Quality Act Requirements under Section 15303, Class 3(A) of the Guidelines for Implementation; and, WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, at its meeting of January 5, 2000, did review the architecture for the proposed prototype units and recommended approval, subject to conditions. WHEREAS, at said Public Meeting, said Planning Commission did make the following findings for said Site Development Permit: 1. This project is consistent with the General Plan in that the proposed single family residences are allowed within the General Plan designation of low density single family residential. 2. The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code and Architectural Guidelines of applicable Specific Plan 90-015, Amendment #2 in that the design guidelines require a minimum of two different for flat elevations planes.varied roof The heights, and window and door surrounds proposed units comply with these requirements in that two facades per plan are proposed, roof heights are varied with the combination of different roofs, and plaster surrounds are provided where required. The Specific Plan guidelines dictate architectural themes, exterior color ranges and materials, and design criteria. The proposed plans are in compliance with these items. 3. This project has been determined to be categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act Requirements pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3(a) of the Guidelines for Implementation. p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- January 11, 2000 4. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, is compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City in that the units are compatible with surrounding development to the south and west. 5. The proposed lots for these plans are sufficient in size to accommodate the prototype units. 6. The prototypical landscaping plans are conditioned to be reviewed and approved by the ALRC and Planning Commission to ensure they are of high quality and are consistent with surrounding development. 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 99-664 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto;. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 11 th day of January, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd r i „ Planning Commission Resolution 2000- January 11, 2000 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-665 STEVEN WALKER HOMES JANUARY 11, 2000 1. This approval is for three prototype units (3,994; 4,375; and 4,716 square feet), for which plans are on file in the Community Development Department. 2. The perimeter walls around lots shall be of masonry construction. 3. Detailed front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the ALRC and Planning Commission prior to final inspection of the residences. The plans require Community Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, and Riverside County Agricultural Commission approval before they will be considered final. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this approval, final architectural working drawings shall be approved by the Community Development Department. 1 ,a p:\stan\sdp 99-644 pc coa.wpd DRAFT Architectural & Landscape Review Committee January 5, 2000 condition be reworded to be required prior to Certificate of Occupancy. t been drawn as of yet and wo have to go Their landscaping plans had no the approval process with KSL, the Homeowners' Assoc' on, ALRC, and Planning Commission and they could not do this p ' r to pulling building permits. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated no objection and asked staff if there was any internal check syst o monitor this. Staff stated it would be better to require the approval p ' r to final inspections. 4, Committee Member Bobb' stated he had no problem as long as the landscaping plans were proved prior to installation. Staff stated that requiring them to su 't their plans prior to final inspection of the first residential unit wo meet that requirement. 5. There being n er discussion, it was moved Minutsecended by ttee Motion 2000 001 Members ingham/Iteynolds to adopt recomm ding approval of Site Development Permit 99-664, subject to condit ns as amended: Condition #1: modified to stated prior to approval of ALRC and Planning Commission before final inspection of the first residential unit. Unanimously approved. B. c;te Development Permit 99-665; a request of Steven Walker Homes for approval of architectural plans for three newprototype Street withial in thetNoocated on the rman Golf Course side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison 1, 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. Mr. Hans Anderle of Bassenian Lagoni Architects, went over the design elevations for the Committee. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated that the rear elevation did not have much architectural detail, but, in his opinion, that is better. He approved of the designs as submitted and stated that being on the Norman Course it allows the architect more freedom for design by not having to meet the compatibility issue. 2 AAALRCI-5-00.w+pd DRAFT Architectural & Landscape Review Committee January 5, 2000 would be 4. Committee Member Bobbit asked if the rear landscaping maintained by Homeowners' Association (HOA) or homeowners. Mr. Dan Beil stated it would be the responsibility of the homeowner. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the sideyard had landscaping or was it drainage purposes. Mr. Beil stated if would be landscaped and a five foot high wall between units. 6. Committee Member Cunningham asked the depth of the lots. Mr. Beil stated they were 170 feet. They will be offering a rear yard pool as more than 80% of the homebuyers were requesting the pool. 7. Committee Member Reynolds asked the location of the lots in comparison to the Tiburon houses. Mr. Beil identified the location on the map. g. There being no further discussioldit wo mptd minute Motion C20 0 OOZ Members Cummngham/Reyn approving Site Development Permit 99-665, as amended: a. Condition #1: landscaping submitted to ALRC and Planning Commission for approval prior to final inspection of the first residential unit. �Unimously approved. VI CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None V. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEM, None VI. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved Cunningham/Bobne toy adjourn this regular be held on Fel Committee to the at 10:27 a.m. on January 5, 2000. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California 3 A:\ALRCI-5-00.wPd seconded by Committee Members schitectural and Landscaping Review n. 2000. This meeting was adjourned PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JANUARY 11, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-665 APPLICANT: STEVEN WALKER HOMES ARCHITECTS: BASSENIAN LAGONI REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR THREE NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD, EAST OF MADISON STREET BACKGROUND: The property is located in the Norman Golf Course on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of PGA West. These units are proposed for Tract 29348-1, 39 lots. Specific Plan 90-015, Amendment #1 for the Norman Course, approved under Resolution 99-112, provides the Community Design Guidelines for the residentia0 units. PME_C_T_R_OQOSAL: Proposed are three floor plans as follows: Plan 1 Plan 2 Pla-n 3 size- # of bedrooms- bathrooms - garage spaces - size- # of bedrooms - bathrooms garage spaces- size- # of bedrooms - bathrooms garage spaces- 3,995 square feet three three and one-half two with space for a golf cart 3,563 square feet three three and one-half two with space for a golf cart 3,743 square feet three three and one-half two and space for a golf cart P:\CHRISTI\PC SDP 99-665.wpd Each of the three proposed prototypes has three facade alternatives. All three building elevations propose "S" the roofs with varied roof styles. The walls are all clad with smooth trowel plaster. Proposed architectural features consist of tower entries, arched inset windows, multi pane windows, shutters, decorative wrought iron and exposed rafter tails, plaster molded soffits and decorative chimneys. Maximum building heights of the one story structures vary from 20 feet to 21 feet. The exterior plaster colors will be in the range beige to light tan, with darker earth tone accent colors and red blended tile roofs. Approximately three color combinations are proposed. Landscaping plans will be submitted separately at a later time. ARCHITECTURAL_ AND IANQSCAP-LNG REVIE Al COMMITTEE (ALRCI REVIEW: The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of January 5, 2000, and determined the project was acceptable as presented. The applicant requested that rather than prior to issuance of building permits, the landscaping plans be approved by the ALRC and Planning Commission prior to their first building final inspection. The Committee unanimously (3-0) adopted Minute Motion 2000-002, recommending approval, with the requested landscaping plan approval revision. FINDLUGS: As required by Section 9.210.010 Site Development Permits of the Zoning Ordinance, the Committee is required to review and comment on the following findings: 1. The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code. RESPONSE The proposal includes three facade design alternatives where the Zoning Code requires a minimum of two alternatives. Each of the prototypes proposes the use of a variety of roof heights and styles. Lastly, only one of the two side elevations propose a single wall plane. A variety of window sizes and shapes with surrounds are proposed to provide design interest. 2. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. The Specific Plan design guidelines also specify that the design of the residential units address the same issues. PACHRISTITC SDP 99-665.wpd RESPOND The proposed building design and materials are compatible with the Specific Plan design guidelines in that a simplistic color scheme consisting of an earth tone palette, variety of roof styles, walls clad in smooth trowel stucco and wood and wrought iron used as accents are proposed. Additionally, the proposed scale and massing create an interesting street scene to avoid visual monotony. RE-C-MI LLENDATIG Approval of Site Development Permit 99-665, subject to the following conditions: 1. Prior to issuance of final inspection, detailed frontyard landscaping plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission. 2. Prior to issuance of building permits, final working drawings shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Attachments: 1. Excerpt from ALRC (Draft) minutes - 1 /5/2000 2. Plan exhibits Prepared and Submitted by: hristin di lorio, Pla ing Manager PACHRIST \PC SDP 99-665.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THREE NEW PROTOTYPE PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE (TRACT 29848-1) CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-665 APPLICANT: STEVEN WALKER HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 11 th day of January, 2000, hold a Public Meeting to consider the request of STEVEN WALKER HOMES for approval of three new prototype plans in the Norman Golf Course, located on Royal St. George, more particularly described as: Portions of Tract 29848-1 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be categorically exempt From California Environmental Quality Act Requirements under Section 15303, Class 3(A) of the Guidelines for Implementation; and, WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, at its meeting of January 5, 2000, did review the architecture for the proposed prototype units and recommended approval, subject to conditions. WHEREAS, at said Public Meeting, said Planning Commission did make the following findings for said Site Development Permit: 1. This project is consistent with the General Plan in that the proposed single family residences are allowed within the General Plan designation of low density single family residential. 2. The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code and Architectural Guidelines of applicable Specific Plan 90-015, Amendment #2 in that the design guidelines require a minimum of two different front elevations, varied roof heights, and window and door surrounds for flat elevation planes. The proposed units comply with these requirements in that two facades per plan are proposed, roof heights are varied with the combination of different roofs, and plaster surrounds are provided where required. The Specific Plan guidelines dictate architectural themes, exterior color ranges and materials, and design criteria. The proposed plans are in compliance with these items. 3. This project has been determined to be categorically exempt from California Environmental Quality Act Requirements pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3(a) of the Guidelines for Implementation. p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- January 11, 2000 4. The architectural design of the project, including but not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, is compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City in that the units are compatible with surrounding development to the south and west. 5. The proposed lots for these plans are sufficient in size to accommodate the prototype units. 6. The prototypical landscaping plans are conditioned to be reviewed and approved by the ALRC and Planning Commission to ensure they are of high quality and are consistent with surrounding development. 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 99-664 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto;. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 11 th day of January, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- January 11, 2000 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California p:\stan\sdp 99-664 pc res.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- EXHIBIT "A" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-665 STEVEN WALKER HOMES JANUARY 11, 2000 1. This approval is for three prototype units (3,994; 4,375; and 4,716 square feet), for which plans are on file in the Community Development Department. 2. The perimeter walls around lots shall be of masonry construction. 3. Detailed front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted for review and approval by the ALRC and Planning Commission prior to final inspection of the residences. The plans require Community Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, and Riverside County Agricultural Commission approval before they will be considered final. 4. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this approval, final architectural working drawings shall be approved by the Community Development Department. p:\stan\sdp 99-644 pc coa.wpd DRAFT Architectural & Landscape Review Committee January 5, 2000 condition be reworded to be required prior to Certificate of Occupancy. Their landscaping plans had not been drawn as of yet and would have to go the approval process with KSL, the Homeowners' Association, ALRC, and Planning Commission and they could not do this prior to pulling building permits. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no objection and asked staff if there was any internal check system to monitor this. Staff stated it would be better to require the approval prior to final inspections. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no problem as long as the landscaping plans were approved prior to installation. Staff stated that requiring them to submit their plans prior to final inspection of the first residential unit would meet that requirement. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2000-001 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 99-664, subject to conditions as amended: a. Condition #l: modified to stated prior to approval of ALRC and Planning Commission before final inspection of the first residential unit. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 99-665; a request of Steven Walker Homes for approval of architectural plans for three new prototype residential units located on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street within the Norman Golf Course. 1. 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. Mr. Hans Anderle of Bassenian Lagoni Architects, went over the design elevations for the Committee. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated that the rear elevation did not have much architectural detail, but, in his opinion, that is better. He approved of the designs as submitted and stated that being on the Norman Course it allows the architect more freedom for design by not having to meet the compatibility issue. AAALRCI-5-00.wpd 2 DRAFT Architectural & Landscape Review Committee January 5, 2000 4. Committee Member Bobbit asked if the rear landscaping would be maintained by Homeowners' Association (HOA) or homeowners. Mr. Dan Beil stated it would be the responsibility of the homeowner. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the sideyard had landscaping or was it drainage purposes. Mr. Beil stated if would be landscaped and a five foot high wall between units. 6. Committee Member Cunningham asked the depth of the lots. Mr. Beil stated they were 170 feet. They will be offering a rear yard pool as more than 80% of the homebuyers were requesting the pool. 7. Committee Member Reynolds asked the location of the lots in comparison to the Tiburon houses. Mr. Beil identified the location on the map. 8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Reynolds to adopt Minute Motion 2000-OOL approving Site Development Permit 99-665, as amended: a. Condition # 1: landscaping submitted to ALRC and Planning Commission for approval prior to final inspection of the first residential unit. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None V. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None VI. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to the next regular meeting to be held on February 2, 2000. This meeting was adjourned at 10:27 a.m. on January 5, 2000. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California A:\ALRCI-5-00.wpd 3 T4ht 4 4 Q" MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: DECEMBER 21, 1999 SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER Attached please find a copy of the Community Development Report which outlines the current cases processed by staff for the month of November. ':Monthly Department Report.wpd 1 Z W Q W 0 Z W 5 IL O W W F- c� G O U W W O Z z O C� Q .— N .- +r c o U ` N U v a� > = o > Q Q Q. Q a• Q � N O ` N O r IL) rr Q CL U E CD oU -C v a�C N w- cu 0 a oaQ o o o v�Ec ai t° o Q >cn vn E� o a) ►-+j 0 00 o o 3 (n rn ,�. c •�- cu o c o y 0) cu Z cu c o c o o l O a o " ai (n 0 a� oO co cn 6 O a. CU U C > :/a Cca a o W a a°i a� :c- ° c o �i E c a > 5 mo s a Co'_o s > X m �I �- p +' fl n v v cncu c -o .+, o cu p L7CD 4- c cu c o 0 4— c o o o y cu o 0 CDcm E E E E E E a E U ,� ° N CD C CD a S] m m m m to n E to � �. CU to E cn w cn cn cn a °' �' Q t° U CN r Lo N ' t' O r- N Cn CC a o a) s `o •- °o U) 0 co c N co o F- cn CD M U U ui en c ai p C o N m v 2 cn CD 2 cu w cn CD jE cn c N ~ CL ttl OL CL a`) I +, : :.0 m w� c >, cn t LO 00 LQ CoLOcD CD�° Q �� >p E I ono Q c cn aQ U a n. o) C� CD c >p 2 � f-- Co 2 U LL o _T to U (n O a- 0 to !n = Cn to W CL _J 0 U C4 a rn c co > D a� v o > a) > D. CL L .00 aO- Q aCL +_ O- a Q Q C to ca O ! Q , Q O N r _ vCN Oi-0 �-N _ .- (N N o� r U W w o nv.0 QaV nUU to o O a) O O> O a)c OC M. O_ NE F.O 0 O JQo 0 CM O � 4-It?t4 O U) Oo O `►' O LA , Q— O Z C a' O to p > C L > - C� > 0 `- a. cC (n a) O ca W L O 3 N D) a) 0 a Q C: Q U C 'D cc n -_ �O �- - a. to Ri U r= Q� C Ry) 0 0 d O O cri C -O O +-' Vj '� O O >• 0 0) O 0 -0 >0 rr Co "o -0 N > ca N c0 00 4- cd p ? j � E `+- co y >O Q N � .M- N r C e- vU-- C ° O W 4 n A "j O° tC �- a� n- t o r O E cC o C V T3 CD C O t 0 a) E o> L 0 O O O pm a +, ►- —0°— C u- += 00 O E Iwo n o>- M w N .- 0 o c c .� O a O -0 o c0i c a cs c a) v_ O° a) ca ° C— Oa C 0 m 0 O C N O C° c�� O� U 0 *' `� Q °)� �� �� rn° t cOn :p N'�NN (n O T7 = O �L a)-°,C� +r cCa C N E L w a) p? cCp D `- O G r QCL aa) 0)�y=0 >p ° caUa >NC ca- > 0 t o a) o > ro o > =. a)00 .: U) y p° >C w' "O a) CL o CU�C- C Sa N eo— 7 LL Mai ° r +r to +- -C (n O ' p- w o = Q N 0 - o y ° cn = > ' CL a) ''- a) OC �+- v cn o, = o �o E,� cn cn� Ry�yO- . c'> *' a0i aNi >' 0� *= CD (.0 0 c0 co a) O E a) C LO cli'� .0 CL •�? C a) >� 6 C O cr O N` ca N cr .. N o 0 O .N O N a w O "a W O O � Z Ll L a a) ` 0 rr w - L7 U 0 0 ,, . Q CA to v7 E- ►- ii cU0 N ._ U) AO N J � cu 00 pMj � M a .- :3 a. p a� CDa p cl O) O W Op+, 0 E I.n —CD , M �M c 3: rno rn a �� c E o EU U 0 N +4 co Q Q CD ri °� ' CO a, CflV- +r Oa),C N _ O c QM 0 ° My 0)rno0a rnM a.Nl- cCN ant00C� CAN I C7 U z O d U a a .O 'L3 C O 0 > a) > ° 0 p O > O �N a a o a °° OL Q o a a Q Q QQ � Q , O co ' �c0 0) p + N0 NN NN a) N 0) N VLN -• `� n e- N N N E U CL nv...v av aU a. CL 5 w ° 0 t++ �C; Q -0 c p D 'D O cc O co 0 L o NUw +� rn n N >. o° c ° G cm cn E a� o L- C C cn >- U p tm cn° co '° '= CC %+- `�" N '. O �O C , 0 a `� (� m co E 0 0 co c p �O 'c C cn cc +4 070 o p � C O C �. a) a CL J co r C co U 0- N cn 0 M a) x E 4, a� to CD t° c 4- E aoC aCO C a) p+-C° c� O i °co U CV) O o ° +, -m co O a)tOO CO C ►�. Q .r O 0 �' a) L co t' CL occ 'cn Q i ++ O a) C fl..A. C U U - co co C ? I� O N 00 +1 v_) ca � � � 0 +' •O :3 CDcn O is a) ° a) 0 U � 0� C c C O C O C '— Cn � 0 t0 O C v co 0 Q� C O cc CD 0� O O 0 C 0 ,C a) (M CO a) co cr co C r- NO O _O O o O n O C O U D O aC- O N co o CoA a)�C >>-p +1 � a) +, > co > 0 Q CL � CU © $- CN Oco O�N o > � 0 C C � CQO `> C) cn N ca C O j° C L cn C: CL 0 rOU 0 0U� O 00 co 4o oC 0 c4� cc aN° °n°�n E0 0coUM 0a) ° E�oo Q o Q �n E °° c +LO cnN 0 ° cn co 0 cn in 0 cn 0 N O WCOaO ° a) t a) L•y O°-i :+-°ocEa._ °ccrNa)s-nrN a ca �a07 ) -0 ° 0)) O ° a) ac�co Q o oC U 0) CC o n cr U ._ J cA _ N co LO e— O o O E N cn c� N ° o > J >0 U M N 0 o M O �o (o o C O (p +M co to Co U � � � ,�„ rn rn A �- A M 00 , N N 00 o d) cA � LC)3 N C] cn 0 ++ °) CL C t— D F- U F- U U cn cn U U a co -° c ca _0 .CD o > ma) O O O N U a 0 a C. Q 1 00 04 CN m JU Qa o O 0 N V— U a 0 a C. Q 1 0o N d CN m -jU Qa a) o vI m >, aI c — � ns c a� +� ca .c > cn ca o c Q aI m� c . aci o Co � a) ca > 0 C. " C > O O Q M LL U tm 2 0 r� O ca J (D N --� ca v sm > cn C - O Q le •0 C cu '� C a) a) U S] .J O CU N D �'o c c � a m � ca +' ° ca cu O ca }' aI .0 ++ O j 4" > R3 cn OIL 1� U C C CL •o ° 0 REf U�caE C° E ��O ` a�co nE +1 �a � C O +° v o ota Z p V pp cn 0 O C_ °poE C-e— N o � co aIo tiQ cu c n. fd ca w- co CL m e c 3 0 E ca T7 (� vlv� O L aD Q %+— ca oa a) o> �+- O C °oE':3 `m > `n o > O o o d > (D >� Q, O o a) V O 'C ca O ca J C ;= (n C U C• m O "- a. aI •° c) O. r O `= ED cu ca a>i aI o co cn ca to ccaa > C L +• .. p ° ° o° -*- c�CO o o - � Q}oo N E oc :roc° + N� CD —1 > o u of ooN =E -p � p Qc '0 OO or Ocn +Coc' — 0 C O E aI a CL aI a +, V C rn aca CD Q m 0_ m o� u- o o U pE c L co C ai °C o?S = o 0 00 O > co m a. rn rn Op c 0 N ..o ca cn c N a CL rn•C E a) c Ecc Ua <p u 0to -C N ca M r F— y c LOc '+- rn� C6> m rn N rn C7 0 1 cn = to 0- CL < cn p O a w w Q V W 7 O cc a Q W a cn S •a O O c � O O a 0 0) N N O E D M O O r O t� O O V 00 0� C1 Qf y M LO c° N n u) L co d m CL ° .e 8p, 0 O th r l0 LO Oi LO O O 0 r a o ; o -Op, o 3° C E O to W t0 M LO O vH Op,� LO O N O O = LO nde O C r O C p c 0 O O p LO C +`+ O 'o y UQE +^iJ tMrt +Oit d: W Y v 4 c W N O y t d W O J OC CLCL O N C V W v as C v0 o ° c _ O "a® W N d' d •• c d C eo O s 'o E o O m H >+ 63 O m a N c •o o. .. ° a O ° w mECL uj uj Vi C C7 W coCC t O = CL O V C C V1 4, c �e m d d H d V a LL c O > Z W 'J U. N O C� Q! C Y v c o �+ v r v 'c w 'c O 0 °' 0 E E FL a 0