1994 07 26 PCol
01Wow
OF Ti�ti
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quints City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
July 26, 1994
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11a00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING
Beginning Resolution 94-019 (022)
Beginning Minute Motion 94-023
CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for citizens to address the Planning Commission on matters
relating to City planning and zoning which are not Agenda items. When addressing the
Planning Commission, please state your name and address.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Item ................ PLOT PLAN 89-413 (EXTENSION OF TIME)
Applicant ......... KSL Recreation Corporation
Location .......... North/south sides of PGA Boulevard at Jack Nicklaus within
PGA West
Request ........... One year extension of time for a previously approved hotel
on ±65 acres in an R-3 Zoned area
Action ............. Inadvertently advertised, not eligible for extensions
2. Item ................ PLOT PLAN 94-529
Applicant .......... Century/Crowell Communities
Location ........... South of Fred Waring Drive and east of Adams Street (Tracts
24517 & 25290)
Request ............ Compatibility review of new model homes for the Rancho
Ocotillo project
Action ............. Minute Motion 94-
PC/AGENDA
BUSINESS SESSION
1. Item ................ ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT
23995
Applicant .......... Inco Homes
Location ........... Southwest corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street
Request ............ Approval of architectural plans for use in tract
Action ............. Minute Motion 94-
CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of the Minutes of the ]Planning Commission meeting of July 12, 1994.
OTHER
1. Chair rotation proposal.
2. Commissioner report of City Council meeting.
ADJOURNMENT
----------------- STUDY SESSION
Tuesday, July 26, 1994
Study Session Room
4:00 P.M.
1. All agenda items
PC/AGENDA
DATE:
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
REQUEST:
]LOCATION:
BACKGROUND:
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
JULY 26, 1994
MR. LARRY LICHLITER (EXECUTIVE PRESIDENT)
KSL RECREATION CORPORATION
THIRD EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PLOT PLAN 89-413/PGA
WEST RESORT HOTEL AND RELATED ANCILLARY HOTEL
USES
WITHIN THE PGA WEST DEVELOPMENT; NORTH AND SOUTH
SIDES OF PGA BOULEVARD AT JACK NICKLAUS
On June 15, 1994, the applicant made application for another one year extension of time for
a previously approved 1,000-room hotel on PGA Boulevard at Jack Nicklaus. On July 6,
1994, the request was published in the Desert Sun newspaper and notices were mailed to the
adjoining property owners.
After reviewing the file and the City Zoning Code, and discussing the matter with legal
counsel, it was determined that the plot plan case has already received the maximum
allowable number of extensions. Therefore, it has been determined that the plot plan
approval cannot be extended.
The applicant has been informed by staff that the City cannot consider the request based on
the current provisions of the Zoning Code. A new application is required.
RECOMMENDATION:
No action is necessary by the Planning Commission.
Attachments:
Public Hearing notice
PCST.185
/Lo W,, N '�-r� 'ITY OF LA QUIh . A
PLANNING COMMISSION
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARIN
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City of La Quinta Planning Commission will hold a PUBLIC
HEARING on July 26, 1994, at 7:00 p.m. in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle
Tampico, on the following item:
ITEM: PLOT PLAN 89-413 (3RD
EXTENSION OF TIME)
APPLICANT: KSL RECREATIONAL
CORPORATION
LOCATION: NORTH/SOUTH SIDES OF PGA
BOULEVARD AT JACK
NICKLAUS (PGA WEST RESORT)
REQUEST: ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME
FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED
SIX STORY (1,006. ROOM) HOTEL
ON +65 ACRES IN AN R-3 ZONED
AREA
LEGAL: APN: 769-730-001, 002, 003, 009,
010, 012 (PORTION), 013, 014,
015, AND 017
The PGA West Resort has been reviewed under CEQA previously. Most of the impacts were
nitigated. For those that could not be mitigated, a statement of overriding consideration was
adopted. The proposed hotel and related facilities have therefore been adequately reviewed and
addressed.
kny person may submit written comments on this case to the Planning and Development
)epartment prior to the hearing and/or may appear and be heard in support of or opposition to
:he project at the time of the hearing. If you challenge the decision of this case in court, you may
)e limited to raising only those issues that you or someone else raised either at the public hearing
)r in written correspondence delivered to the Planning and Development Department at, or prior
:o, the public hearing. The proposed files) may be viewed by the public Monday through Friday
1: 00 a. m . until 5 : 00 p . m . at the Planning and Development Department, La Quinta City Hall, 78-
195 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California.
n the City's efforts to comply with the requirements of Title II of the Americans With Disabilities
ket of 1990, the Administration/Planning & Development Department requires that any person in
seed of any type of special equipment, assistance or accommodations) in order to communicate
A a City public meeting, must inform the City Clerk/Planning & Development Department a
ninimum of 72 hours prior to the scheduled meeting.
--------------------------------------------
)UBLISH ONCE ON JULY 6, 1994
--------------------------------------------
HNPC.053
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JULY 26, 1994
CASE NO.: PLOT PLAN 94-529
REQUEST: COMPATIBILITY REVIEW OF NEW MODEL HOMES FOR THE
RANCHO OCOTILLO PROJECT SOUTH OF FRED WARING
DRIVE AND EAST OF ADAMS STREET (TRACTS 24517
AND 25290)
APPLICANT: CENTURY/CROWELL COMMUNITIES (CENTURY HOMES)
REPRESENTATIVE: DENNIS CUNNINGHAM, PROJECT MANAGER
ARCHITECT: FRANK GONZALES AND ASSOCIATES
PROPERTY OWNER: COMMUNITY BANK
BACKGROUND:
In 1989 and 1990, the City approved Tracts 246517 and 25290 which consisted of 122
single family lots on a 37 acres site located south of Fred Waring Drive and east of
Adams Street (Attachment 1) .
In 1989 and 1991, the Planning Commission approved Plans 1 through 4 for the
Williams Company which allowed units ranging in size from 1,951 square feet to 2,480
square feet. In 1992, the Planning Commission also approved Plans 5 and 6 allowing
two additional plans of 1,737 square feet and 1,848 square feet respectively. The
following table details the approved plans for area:
Plan Types
1 2 3 4 5 6
# Sq. Footage 2164 2334 2480 1951 1737 1848
# Stories 1 1 1 1 1 1
# Different
Elevations 3 3 3 3 3 3
# Bedrooms 4 4 4 3 3 4
# Bathrooms 2 2 2 2 a 2 2 2
# Car Garages 3 3 3 3 3 3
Our research reveals that approximately 36 homes exist in the project at this time,
ranging in size from +2,164 to +2,550 square feet. Plans 4, 5 and 6 were not built
before the previous builder lost the property and it reverted to the lending
institution. The property is currently owned by the Community Bank with an option
to purchase by Century Homes (Attachment 2) .
PCST.007
Submittal
On July 8, 1994,
new plans were submitted to the Planning Department for review
and final consideration
by the Planning
Director.
The following table details the
proposed plans:
Plan Types
ix
2X
3X 3L
4
4L
4G
# Square feet 1,804 1,906
2,216 2,466
2,436
2,818
2,728
# Stories 1
1
1 2
1
2
1
# Different
Elevations 3
3
2 1
2
1
2
# Bedrooms 4+
4++
4+++ 3/4+++ 4**
4
5
# Bathrooms 2
2
2/3 2/3
2/3
2/3
2/3
# Garage Spaces
3 3
3 3
3
3
3
Total 8
25
11 8
14
5
12 = 83
Notes: L = Loft
G = Guest Cottage/Teen Room
X = Finished Bedroom/Guest Cottage
+ = Bedroom can be den
++ = Bedroom can be enlarged family room
+++ = Bedroom can be enlarged master suite
** = Bedroom can be den or study
Four plans are available (Plans 1 through 4) . The plans range in size from 1,804 to
2,818 square feet. Plans 3L and 4L are two story plans. The homes have two or
three bathrooms depending on which plan is used, and the number of bedrooms vary
depending on if it is counted as a bedroom or den. The proposed homes are
compatible with the architectural style of existing homes in this area.
Compatibility Ordinance
In March 1994, the City's Compatibility Ordinance went into effect. The ordinance
pertains to subdivisions which are partially built -out and a new developer is involved
with finishing the tract improvements and/or phases . Century -Crowell Communities
has purchased the remaining portions of the Rancho Ocotillo project. At the present
time, there are +36 single family homes built in Phase I; therefore, +83 lots remain
to be developed by the applicant independent of the three lots devoted to on -site
water retention (Lots 6, 78 and 89) .
The Compatibility Ordinance states:
The Planning and Development Department shall make the determination of whether
a design deviation is major or minor using the following criteria:
PCST.007
A. A minor design deviation can be approved by the Planning and Development
Department without a public hearing using the precise plan process ( Section
9.42.110) . Minor design deviation means a modification of an approved
architectural unit within a subdivision that involves items such as, but not
limited to, less than five percent (5%) change in square footage of existing
constructed or approved units; columns, dormer vents, window size changes,
plant -on locations, color, and stucco texture changes. The Planning and
Development Director may refer the minor design deviation to the Planning
Commission for a non -hearing compatibility review.
B . A major design deviation is subject to the review and approval process of
Chapter 9.25 Compatibility Review Process. A major design deviation means,
a five percent (5%) or more change in square footage of existing constructed
or approved units; any exterior architectural modification not defined as a
minor design deviation.
In this case, the Planning Director requests that the Planning Commission examine
the plans and determine if the plans are architecturally compatible with the existing
Rancho Ocotillo units . Staff believes the architecture characteristics are a major
deviation from the existing units because 1) two story homes are being offered, 2)
larger homes are proposed, and 3) architectural changes are also proposed.
Therefore, a public hearing has been scheduled.
The City's current R-1 Zoning provisions mandate that the applicant provide a
minimum house size of 1,400 square feet and meet the Compatibility Ordinance
requirements. The sizing issue is based on the smallest plan (1, 737 square feet) to
the largest (2,550 square feet) of the original Rancho Ocotillo units. Therefore, the
minimum house size allowed in the tract is 1,565 square feet and the largest house
size is 2,802 square feet based on Ordinance 242.
The Planning Commission must evaluate the compatibility issue in terms of:
a.
Architectural material such as
and garage door style
b .
Colors
c .
Roof lines
d .
Fencing
e .
Landscaping
f .
Two story vs. one story
g.
On -site Parking
roof and exterior material, window treatment
The Planning Commission when approving compatibility units may limit the type and
the number of a particular unit to be constructed within the phase or subdivision.
Existing Rancho Ocotillo Unit Mix
Staff has examined the building permit information on the existing homes within the
subdivision and our summation of the housing mix is as follows:
Square Footage Percentage of Total*
+2,175 16%
+2,344 40%
+2,550 44%
Note: *Rounded
PCST.007
All existing homes are one story and have a three car garage. All homes have stucco
exteriors with various reveals or architectural pop -outs. The roofing material for
the homes consists of a slight barrel brown concrete tile. The perimeter walls are
slumpstone masonry and each home has a wrought iron pedestrian gate facing the
public street.
Public Notice
Public notices were mailed as required by Section 9.25.050 of Ordinance 242. The
case was also advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 16, 1994.
Staff Comments:
The applicant has provided a number of single family home plans for the expansion
of the Rancho Ocotillo project. The project cannot be considered a "minor deviation"
because the plans exceed the 5 o square footage size level. However, from an
architectural standpoint, staff believes the plans would be a major deviation from the
existing units because two story homes are proposed and for the following reasons.
(1) Roof Eaves - The existing homes have a two layer wood eave fascia which
accents the horizontal banding of the original architectural theme. The
applicants plans do not have this design feature (e.g. 2" X 8" without trim)
but do have a slight eave overhang. Staff does not support the single 2" X
8" fascia without the 1" X 4" trim ( Condition 24) .
(2) Housing Mix - Staff supports limiting the number of units which can be built
in the future phases of each tract in order to be consistent with Phase I. We
request that the Planning Commission either consider creating a buffer around
the initial phase or limit by a percentage the type of unit which could be built
in the new phase (s) . The primary reason for this request is in the applicant's
plans, 10% of the future homes will be the Plan 1X (1,804 square feet) . Staff
believes this is an acceptable approach to finishing the tract (s) but no more
than 10 0 of the smaller homes should be built with the smallest plan even
though it is larger than the 1,518 square feet permitted by the Compatibility
Ordinance ( Condition 21) .
(3) Architectural Plant-ons - The existing homes have stucco banding around
each side of the home pursuant to the requirements of the Design Review
Board and Planning Commission. The applicants plans are architecturally
appealing from the street, but are lacking in their appeal on the other three
sides. Staff would request that the Planning Commission require upgrades to
the other elevations as required in the initial Rancho Ocotillo approvals
( Condition 20) .
(4) Trellis Shading - The initial Rancho Ocotillo homes were required to have
trellis shade structures on the rear building elevations which have exposure
to the west and south. Staff requests that the Planning Commission require
covered patios on each home where the rear cf the home faces a south or west
property line ( Condition 19) as depicted in the attached preliminary plans.
PCST.007
(5) Landscaping, Fencing, Roofing, etc. - The existing homes are nicely designed
with front yard landscaping and perimeter stucco walls on all homes. The
applicant states that they will match these architectural amenities in their
development. Staff recommends Conditions 1 through 17 to ensure that
architectural compatibility is maintained.
(6) Two Story Homes - Two story homes have been proposed by the applicant
(Plans 3L and 4L) . The "loft" plan is an upstairs area (±382 square feet or
more) which can be used as a bedroom or office/game room. The upstairs lofts
have been a design element in the La Quinta Vistas and Topaz projects.
However, two story homes were not part of the initial development of Rancho
Ocotillo. Therefore, based on the provisions of the Compatibility Ordinance,
a "...two story house cannot be constructed adjacent to or abutting a lot line
of an existing single story home constructed in a prior phase of the same
subdivision unless proof can be provided showing that a two story unit was
proposed for the lot by the prior builder." In the developer's plotting
schedule, the loft or two story plan(s) has been interspersed within the new
phase(s) and approximately +15% of the new homes will have lofts provided all
the remaining lots are built on by the applicant. The developer has been made
aware that he cannot have loft homes on Camino Lavanda which back up to
homes on Ocotillo Drive, north of Camino Del Oro pursuant to Ordinance 242
requirements even though the original tract conditions for each tract allowed
two story homes based on the R-1 Zoning Code standards (Condition 18) .
Staff does not believe the loft homes will impact this area of the City because the
second story views are to the front of the house versus the backyard in a typical two
story design. Staff is not opposed to the loft plan(s) being proposed along the
easterly side of Tract 25290.
Neighborhood Letters
Attached are various letters from the existing Rancho Ocotillo homeowners. The
Planning Commission should review the letters from the existing residents plus the
staff comments noted above when examining this application. Many of the concerns
of the residents are proposed as Conditions of Approval (Attachments 3a through) .
Also received was a letter from the La Quinta Palms Homeowners Association
(Attachment 3G) .
Letter from Developer
Mr. Cunningham has prepared a letter for the Planning Commission which outlines
the project's background and other pertinent information on their project
(Attachment 4) .
Road Closure
In the initial development of the Rancho Ocotillo tract, the City permitted Ocotillo
Drive to connect with Fred Waring Drive on a temporary basis because the previous
developer had her model complex on Ocotillo and Camino Del Oro. This connection
shall be eliminated during the future on -site construction activities by Century -
Crowell pursuant to the requirements of the Engineering Department ( Condition 29) .
PCST.007
Circular Driveways
The applicant has talked with staff about allowing, as an option, circular driveways
for their homes in the Rancho Ocotillo subdivision. Staff would request that the
Planning Commission review the design prior to its usage in the project since specific
information was not received prior to the meeting. Condition 28 is proposed to
remedy this outstanding design issue.
Appeal Hearing
Pursuant to Ordinance 242, either the applicant or an aggrieved party can appeal the
decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council for final consideration. The
appeal must be filed within ten calendar days after the date of the Planning
Commission's decision. The filing fee is $300.00.
CONCLUSION:
Staff supports the applicant's request to build their production units in the Rancho
Ocotillo tract provided the proposed Conditions of Approval are met.
RECOMMENDATION:
By Minute Motion 94-_, approve Plot Plan 94-529 subject to the attached Findings
and Conditions.
Attachments
1. Surrounding Land Use
2. Existing Rancho Ocotillo Tract Map
3. Letters from the Rancho Ocotillo Home Owners and La Quinta Palms
Homeowners Association
4. Letter from Mr. Dennis Cunningham
5. Draft Conditions
6. Large Exhibits (Planning Commission)
PCST.007
r1V/S MAP /S FO#
"S&SMf#r PURPma car
N 2 SEC. 20
ATTACHMENT 1
T.5 S. R.7 F.
(jests
YY
hl Ex. Rancho
Ex. LaQu'nta
Palms
Ex. Cactus
I,
Ocot,,i,�jo
i�
�p
a
Flower Homes
a --
(Condos)
rk
Homes
v,
09 O
Fut Rancho
a
Ex. LaQuinta
Palms
Expansion Area
i
i9
Ocotz to
w
for Cactus Flower
I
Expansion
07�
(Condos)
(under const.)
�si.n
suu PN 74/
Future Expansion
Vacant
Qu i nterra
I
O
I
Vacant
I
�
Vacant �
�
J
I
a
i
Ex. Quinterra
Vacant
$I
��
Homes
o
QI
Vacan
MILES
F
gt
FRED WARING DRIVE
•. •'Z7..•. •... •.'1�.•..'•�4•.• g
.• .. ... .... ... ......
•'•g .•.•Z�• '.•16.'. ...13'.e 87
••
• • . . .
• '.�. .1�. tf • . • • • . . • • . • • . f
• •'.W . .'. SRO'.' '.'..•• .•.•. .•.• •. }•°O•.•
w • • • o • • • • • • o • • • • • • • • •
w ...•. •....
• S ° • •
40
CX
• • • • - —
N .�'t. ..��.• ....*144 .010....�°..
• • • • f • • • • • • • • • • • • • O • •
• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • O • •
'•'a�3•. .•.• •. .•.•.. .•.•.•. .•.•.•. •••••• ••O••'•
Q . . . . . 2• •i. '• • . . . . . . ..�•
. f .. .. a% . .� . .a... V .
... . ..... ...
. . . . . . • . . • . O
....
.. ..s
•
OE
'0 4 two 42 43 44 46 46 47 48
• .• •• .•
. • Project Entry 4/ 54 53 52
51 SO 49
O
37
.ATTACHMENT MENT 2
Tf?mpArary Access
89 6 �� 8
�sw�■
91
4
.... •. ..
3
• • •
61
62
63
64
W
S6 S7 SB 59 60
36 39V.—L-1
wr
N
79 60 81 62 63 84 85
I
Ln
as
Of
C]
67
69
77 76 75 74 73 72 71 7068
.
Tract 24517
Existing Rancho Ocotillo Homes
CASE MAP
CASE Nm Century -Crowell Communities
Compatibility Review
Plot Plan 94-529
Existing Rancho Ocotillo Development
N
10
11
12
13
_
14
o�
31
15
30
to
29
17
28
18
27
19
26
20
25
21
24
22
23
{331.79 -7
Tract 25290
gt
Barbara J. Irwin
44-065 Camino La Cresta
La Quinta, CA 92253-3950
(619) 360-9851
July 18, 1994
Jerry Herman - Director
La Quinta City Planning Department
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Re: Rancho Ocotillo - Century Homes Compatibility
Dear Jerry,
1 rr
JUL 1 8 �94
We have had a chance to review the plans Century Homes filed with your office
last week and their compatibility to existing homes in the Rancho Ocotillo sub -division.
They represent a vast improvement over the plans first presented to the homeowners by
Century. They have chosen not to contact us since that initial (and unsatisfactory)
meeting, and have not discussed these newer plans with us. For that reason we must defer
a final judgement until we have heard the formal presentation by staff and the developer
on July 26th. Notwithstanding that important reservation, we hope that the following
points will make the City's acceptance of those plans possible and in the best interest of
the developer and the residents.
1. CC&Ws in existence for Rancho Ocotillo should be maintained in present
form.
2. We recommend that Ocotillo Drive be closed off and the homes on that cul-de-
sac as well as the homes that will be adjacent to existing homes be built in the first phase
when compatibility and comparability is foremost on the developer's mind.
3. Maintain the present mix of house sizes. Presently we have 19% of the
smaller, 360/a of the middle-sized and 44% of the larger homes in our sub -division. A
comparable mix ought to be maintained throughout the development. The Planning
Commission has this authority under the Compatibility ordinance. We have no two story
houses. We would prefer no two story houses, however, if the two story or loft is to be
built it should not be next to, adjacent or across the street from any existing home.
4. Pay attention to architectural design. Some of the elevations are very plain
with little attention paid to the entry way. Many existing homes have courtyard entry way.
5. Color schemes should be comparable. Roof tile, stucco and trim should be
the same or similar to existing homes.
6. Circular driveways should be limited. If every house had a circular driveway
it would present a boring street scene. Also, the lots are only 85 feet wide, therefore the
appearance would be all concrete and asphalt with little or no space for landscaping. Is
there really enough room for larger automobiles to easily navigate the extended drive?
7. Garage doors should be roll -up and without windows. All existing garage
doors are without windows.
S. Landscape should be similar to existing landscape. Ocotillo and Queen
Palms should be included in but not limited to in the planning. It would be great if the
developer would update existing perimeter landscape.
9. Walls and gates should be of comparable size and material. Wooden gates
should not be permitted.
10. "Optional" should be mandatory. We understand that the developer has
agreed to make the optional room off the garage standard in all models. This should be
confirmed in writing.
This is the first significant development to be considered by the newly constituted
Planning Commission. We believe that there should be ample time for the residents and all
Commission members to consider the matter thoroughly. Due to the season we have been
unable to contact a large number of residents who are away. They have a right to be
heard. Of the seven Commission members, we understand that Chairman Adolph will be
away on the 26th of July as will, possibly, another member. A third member will recuse
himself, presenting the potential of a bare quorum to consider this critical matter. We also
understand that you will not be present that evening. All of these absences are normal and
to be expected at this time of year.
We respectfully request that the Commission members consider the matter as fully
as possible on the 26th but that a final decision be continued until its next regularily
scheduled meeting.
Sincerely,
cc City Manager
Planning Commission Members
79270 Camino del Oro
La Quinta,CA 92253
18 July 1994
Jerry Herman,Planning Director
Planning Comnrission,City of La Quinta
78495 Callle Tampico,La QuintaCA 92253
Re:Century Homes Vis a Vis Rancho Ocotillo
We wish to thank you for your cooperation with the homeowners of Rancho Ocotillo.
The prospective builder (Century Homes) has made no further attempt to contact us or provide
us with re *wd plans etc.. Without your help and that of Barbara & Joe Irwin we would be
completely in the dark.
The "New Plans" are an improvement in that they have increased the minimum square footage
to 1804sq.ft. by enlarging the nook and including the "use option room". We trust that this
1804sq.ft. establishes the true minimum.
We have some further thoughts that we request that you consider:
1. We are concerned about the balance of the different sized homes. We currently have 19%
small,36% medium,and 44% large.This seems to us to be an attractive mix.
2. We purchased our home (which faces the property in question) with verbal assurance that we
would never face a multi -level house to obstruct our mountain view. We frilly realize that the
prospective builder has no obligation to honor this verbal assurance from the previous builder,but
we request that this be taken into consideration as the two story design is not compatible with
existing homes at Rancho Ocotillo.
3. We feel that the architectural detail around the entryway could be enhanced with attractive
"welcoming" gates,courtyard,upgraded front door,and/or ??.
4.The garage doors should be roll up type with opener to promote garage parking.
5.The street known as Ocotillo Dr. should be a cul de sac and closed to Fred Waring by
completing existing wall.
6.The existing concrete paved openings in the curb are designed for a 278. wide concrete
driveway straight into a 3 car garage,to facilitate parking and maximize landscaping.Occasional
circular driveways for the larger homes on the deeper lots would be acceptable,but this should
be minimized to prevent massive paving which is not compatible with existing landscaping.
7.Landscaping should be compatible,with specimen trees such as Queen Pahns,Jacaranda,
Pepper trees etc. An occasional Ocotillo would not be out of order.
8. We assume that exterior colors will be the same as or very similar to existing homes.
9.Rancho Ocotillo has documented "proposed C.C.&R.s" which we assume will be adopted by
the new developer.This will be to our mutual advantage in maintaining an attractive neighborhood
rather than a parking lot.
We hope that you will consider these matters because North La Quinta should be as attractive
and welcoming to prospective neighbors as any of the gated Cove communities. We frilly admit that
our perimeter landscaping is a disaster, and should be upgraded forthwith. We would personally
help pull the existing stuff out. Thank you for your attention and cooperation.
S' erety� y�qurs,
James .&Imogene C. Wells
ATTACHMENT 3cl
July 19, 1994
Craig Trousdale
Associate Planner
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California 92253
Dear Mr. Trousdale:
CITY OF LA oU14 A—
KVINING DEPARTMENT
After receiving the Notice of Public Hearing slated for July 25,
1994 for compatible review of the proposed construction by
Century/Crowell in Rancho Ocotillo, we would appreciate a few
minutes of your time to review our support/opposition comments.
We love our home, enjoy our lovely neighbors and the area we
chose to buy and live in. At the time we contemplated in the
purchase of the house, we lived out of the area. We contacted
the Planning Department twice by telephone, and was assured the
completion of the phases (Rancho Ocotillo) would be compatible in
price, quality and regulations of the existing houses. The
project would not be a problem in the future for compatibility-.
We are not opposed to Century's completion of Rancho Ocotillo 4f
the City will stand behind their commitment to the residents in
keeping La Quinta the "qJewel of the desert", and not allowing a
builder to "hit and run , and build shabby and cheaply
constructed houses. i.e.. Forecast Builders.
There are only a few concerns and questions we would like
clarified, and if necessary put in writing about the NOW PROPOSED
buildiing by the applicant.
1. Roof tile quality
2. Garage doors/all three car roll up type
3. Walls/duplicates of existing, color/quality
4. Gates/no wood
5. Sizes/mixture of houses
6. Loft houses/perimeter (define perimeter)
7. Loft houses/not allowed next to existing houses
S. Circular driveways
These are very important questions to us, and we feel they should
be clarified at the scheduled Hearing by Commission and/or Staff.
Thank you for your understanding and attention to our concerns.
S krcere1y I �K
--lFward ann L�Kuci le Mycek Q
44-060 Camino La testa
ATTACHMENT 3e..
Craig A. Glass
44-150 Camino Azul
La Quinta, CA 92253
(619) 568-0200
July 20, 1994
Mr. Greg Trousdale
Associate Planner
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Century Homes - Rancho Ocotillo Development
Dear Greg:
"r?
JUL 2 0 1994
itY 4F 17 OORTA
PIRt+lNING DEPARTMENT
when the planning commission considers on July 26, 1994
Century Home's proposed building plans at Rancho Ocotillo I will
be out of town on a vacation that I planned many months ago.
Therefore, I am writing to you in the hope that you will consider
my concerns regarding Century's proposed plans. I have three
items that I would like the planning commission to take into
consideration:
First, it is my understanding that Century is planning on
putting in circular driveways with the new homes. I feel that
this will be a big negative for the current residents as this
will visually separate the existing homes from the new phases,
instead of having both sections blend together. If circular
driveways were allowed, someone driving into our development in
the future might say: "Oh, there's the cld section and the new
one, you can tell by the driveways." I feel that this will be a
negative for our resale values.
Second, since all existing homes at Rancho Ocotillo have 3
car garages, I feel that all future homes should have 3 car
garages, and that the developer should not be allowed to convert
one of the garage spaces into a bonus room that may give the
exterior look of a 3 car garage, but in reality only have space
for 2 cars. I could not ascertain from their preliminary plans
whether the homes with bonus rooms also have 3 car garages so I
am bringing this item up only as a point to be clarified.
Third, I am concerned about whether 2 story or loft plans
should be allowed at all as none of the existing homes in Rancho
Ocotillo have 2 story or loft plans.
Thank you for considering these items. If you have any
questions please call me at the phone number above.
Sincerely,
ATTACHMENT 3-F
UU DJUL 10 �p
yr 4, t1(/J(�jh
NN1N� UOTf4eWT
f L_
/ / r
/
1
�
L-
7/7/`3✓
Lamf-,
- L
/1
J �
,
ll�
IL
1
-1-
_/,�)7
OC rYl 7 b7l 4--/
tom--
J
rsv Lr-i
C7
�A7
1 -7
t7--
, ---N &., t
Ai`i`AUMENT 3 �
LA QUINTA PALMS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION
C/o EUCLID MANAGEMENT CO.
P.O. BOX 1510 -- UPLAND, CA 91785
City of La Quinta Planning and Development Dept.
City Hall
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Gentlemen:
Re: Plot Plan 94-529 - Compatibililty Review
Our Association abuts on the eastern border of the proposed
subject project and probably is the most directly affected.
Accordingly, our Board plans to attend the scheduled July
26 meeting to express our concerns.
I attach copies of correspondence with Century Homes
which outlines our position --concerns we expressed four
years ago at a City Council meeting when the Williams Co.
was the developer. To summarize our wishes:
1. Provide for continued maintenance/landscaping
of the slope between La Quinta Palms' west wall
and Century's development.
2. Similar maintenance of the drain area culvert
which begins at Fred Waring.
3. Preservatiom of westward looking sightline from
our project toward Century's five or six most north-
eastern houses.
In case you wish to reach me my 'phone number is 345-3898.
R�'AA 19
J U L *4 1994
+�.ce
h4 1 1.4EINT
Very truly yours,
Frank V.K. Mason
President
Frank V. IL Maa
43421 Cbspefton Drive
Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201
(619)345-3898 `
LA QUINTA PALMS HOMEOWNERS' ASSOCIATION
C/o EUCLID MANAGEMENT CO.
P.O BOX 1510 --UPLAND, CA 91785
July 3, 1994
Dennis Cunningham, Project Director
Century Homes
�� Suite 200
1535 South D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92408
Dear Dennis:
This relates to your May 23 letter and our telephone
conversations (most recently June 30) concerning the common
boundary between your Rancho Ocotillo project and La Quinta
Palms.
During our June 28 Meeting our Board of Directors considered
and rejected the lot line adjustment proposal you advanced.
Our rationale was as I explained during our telephone
conversations.
On May 1, 1990, as a carryover item from a prior session, the
La Quinta City Council heard presentations from representatives
of our association and a small army from your predecessor
developer, the Williams Co., led by Mrs. Williams. The
confrontation had been triggered by our complaint that, near
Fred Waring, grading for Rancho Ocotillo had left a mound
about four or five feet higher than the top of our wall. This,
in effect, made it into a retaining wall, for which it was not
engineered. Several cracks in the wall resulted.
It is the collective recollection of three representatives of
our association who attended this meeting that, after an early
effort to dismiss our concerns, Mrs. Williams performed a
conciliatory about face, saying "we want to be good neighbors."
At the City Council meeting and subsequent sessions involving
two members of our Board, Bob Miller and Fred Mosher, together
with Williams Co. Staff the following agreements were reached.
1. The area adjacent to our wall would be regraded so that
no fill would press against our wall and the areas higher
than our wall would be lowered to our wall's elevation.
2. A concrete culvert drain between the Rancho Ocotillo
fill and our wall would be installed and maintained.
3. Mrs. Williams told the City Council that in Rancho
Ocotillo's development and pre -sales period her firm
would not construct any walls on the eastern end of
the five or six lots nearest Fred Waring. She was
uncertain whether this restriction could be forced
on future buyers. (This issue was further discussed
at the subsequent meetings, looking at the possibility
of imposing a deed restriction on buyers; however,
we find no record of any results of these discussions.)
4. The Williams Co. agreed to create a 2 x 1 slope
between their fill and our wall, landscape the slope
and provide for future landscape maintenance.
5. The Williams Co. agreed to repair the cracks in our
wall and to increase its height at the northern end.
6. The Williams Co. agreed to position the houses on the
five or six northeastern lots as close to the street
as code permits.
It appears that the Williams Co. carried out all their promises
that the incomplete stage of development would permit. Still
to be accomplished are landscaping the slope and provision for
its future maintenance. Also, we fervently hope for avoidance
of any walls on our common boundary for the several northeastern
lots.
In summary, all we seek is carrying out the agreement we had
with the Williams Co. As Mrs. Williams told the City Council,
we desire to be good neighbors and wish you success in your
venture.
Sincerely yours,
Frank V.K. Mason,
President
/ CENTURY HOMES
Century -Crowell Communities
May 23, 1994
Mr. Frank Mason
LA QUINTA PALMS
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
P.O. Box 1510
Upland, CA 91785
Dear Mr. Mason:
Century Homes is currently in the development process on the
adjacent property Rancho Ocotillo. During the process we
discovered a situation involving lots adjacent to your development.
Lots 21 through 23 (see insert) are approximately at the same
elevation as the top of the wall separating the developments. The
end result, if the homes on the respective lots are built in the
present condition will create a scenario where by the homes at
Ocotillo will view directly down on La Quinta Palms having an
adverse effect on privacy for both sides.
After extensive review on this matter we have reached a solution
that will rectify the situation and will be mutually beneficial.
We recommend a lot line adjustment whereby we deed the sloped
section to the top of the slope presently on Ocotillo property to
La Quinta Palms, the existing wall be removed, a new wall be
constructed at the top of the slope and the slope irrigated and
planted.
I am enclosing a diagram showing the proposed solution.
We look forward to your agreement participation.
Sincerely,
CENTURY HOMES
CENT ROWELL COMMUNITIES
ennis Cu m
Project D rector
DC:db
Enclosures
cc: Gary Weintraub, VP Operations, CCC
U\P\D\MASON.1
1535 South "D" Street, Suite 200 • San Bernardino, CA 92408
(909) 381-6007 • FAX (909) 381-0041
La iunltacCollllectaoml
at IRaintcho 0cottitto
PROJECT TRACT MAP / TENTATIVE PHASING
FRED WARING DRIVE
A
D
A
M
S
S
T
E
E
T
79
78
87
42
43
44
45 1
46
47 1 46
41
53
52
S1
50 49
54
G
NO
/LLO
55
39
56
57
58
59
03
1 t�
—
-r
Jai
82
83
84
6:
86
77 / 761 75 I 74 1 73 1 72 I 71 17Z I 69
MODELS - GREEN
PHASE I - YELLOW
PHASE II - VIOLET
PHASE III - ORANGE
PHASE IV - ]BLUE
I
Z
x
vjw
�
61
ssu
�
a
R
AW
62
i
�w,rw
63
t
� �
64
,r.,.
a y
65
a
tAy
66
A
67
Ar~
4
s
68
r+•
e�i:
LoTe;-.
W
�
� n
U7
CENTURY HOMES
Century -Crowell Communities
jq!�,u4 4ye-i
July 14, 1994
Honorable Mayor and Members of
the Planning Commission
CITY OF LA QUINTA
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Rancho Ocotillo - Compatibility Ordinance #242
ATTACHMENT 4
PiP16;1%G DEPJ.TMENT
On June 8, 1994 representatives from Century Homes met with the
Rancho Ocotillo Homeowners. The purpose of the meeting was to introduce
Century's new home series for the balance of lots in the development and
to invite constructive input from the homeowners regarding compatibility
in design.
With combinations including constructive input from the
aforementioned meeting along with the guidelines set forth in
Compatibility Ordinance 1242 and the precedent set with respect to
Topaz, Tract 23935, compatibility requirements as adopted by the
commission on June 14, 1994. The enclosed plans are submitted for your
review along with the following comments:
Square Footage
The existing homes at Rancho Ocotillo range from 2,175 sq ft to
2,550 sq ft. The previous developer submitted and was approved to
construct three additional plans ranging from 1,737 sq ft to 1,951 sq ft
under the Compatibility Ordinance #242 with the 10% variance factor. The
allowable footage at Rancho Ocotillo ranges from 1,564 sq ft to 2,805 sq
ft. Century Homes proposes to construct homes ranging from 1,804 sq ft
to 2,800 sq ft.
Product Mix and Location
Century Homes proposes the following mix:
PLAN
80. FT.
Q Y
PERCENT
Plan 1X
1,804
8
10%
Plan 2X
1,906
25
30%
Plan 3X
2,216
Plan 3L
2,500
Plan 4
2,436
50
60%
Plan 4L
2,800
Plan 4G
2,728
1535 South "D" Street, Suite 200 - San Bernardino, CA 92408
(909) 381-6007 - FAX (909) 381-0041
PAGE 2
July 14, 1994
Rancho Ocotillo
*Note - Total 83 Lots
Lots 87, 88, 90, 91 and lots 42 through 48 are located either
adjacent or across from the existing homes at Rancho Ocotillo. Century
proposes to construct plans 3X, 4 and 4G ONLY as these homes range from
2,215 sq ft through 2,728 sq ft which best compliments the footages of
the existing homes that range from 2,175 sq ft to 2,550 sq ft.
Roof Lines
The existing homes are straight gable roofs paralleling the street
with a mixture of hips and gables on the garage, and in some cases, on
additional projections on the opposite end of the house from the garage.
Century's new home series carries on the same theme. The existing homes
have a variation of walled courtyards at the entry walk adjacent to the
garage, shade cover projections in 2 versions: 1) flat roof box shape
and 2) one gable AIM that connects the house and garage. The new homes
utilize similar shade covers and gated courtyards to compliment the
existing homes.
Roof Material
From the meeting with the existing homeowners, the general
consensus was to have the new homesmatch the existing roof tileSin color
and style. Century is in agreement and will match the existing homes
roof tile and color.
Garages
The existing homes have 3-car garages with roll -up doors. The new
home series will also have all 3-car garages with roll -up doors.
Exterior Stucco and Trim Colors
The existing homes have sand finish stucco with one color. The new
homes will use the same sand finish stucco and match the trim and stucco
colors.
Windows
The new Homes will match the existing homes with metal slider type
with grids on the front elevations and clear glass on side and rear
elevation$•
Privacy Walls and Gates
The new homes will match the existing homes' garden/privacy walls
on the front and corner elevations. The rear and side yard divider walls
will be decorative masonry.
PAGE 3
July 141 1994
Rancho Ocotillo
Landscaping
The existing homes have grass front yards with planter beds
adjacent to the house and additional planted areas adjacent to the city
sidewalks in sculpted beds. The new homes will utilize the theme set
forth by the existing homes.
We look forward to your favorable review.
S i n7m, 7 ,
ATTACHMENT 5
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
CENTURY CROWELL COMMUNITIES
PLOT PLAN 94-529
JULY 26, 1994
FINDINGS:
1. The architectural aspects of the development will be compatible with and not
detrimental to other existing units in Rancho Ocotillo based on the following
conditions.
2. The proposed homes are comparable in size to the existing homes. No impacts
are anticipated provided the minimum house size in the tract is 1,400 square
feet or greater, and the unit mix is regulated by the Planning Commission.
3. No two story homes shall be built next door to any existing single story home
pursuant to the requirements of the Compatibility Ordinance.
GENERAL:
1. The lawn for each front yard shall be either hybrid Bermuda or premium
Perennial Rye depending upon when it is installed. Fescue grass shall not be
used.
2. All plants shall be drought tolerant and either watered with emitters or
bubblers.
3. All trees shall be staked to prevent damage from the wind. Two stakes shall
be used for all 24"-box trees.
4. The concrete driveways shall include expansion joints and a broom finish, (or
better) texture.
5. Final irrigation and landscape plans for the project shall be approved by the
Department of Planning and Development.
6. All trees shall be appropriate for our micro -climate (i.e., Zone 13-Sunset
Book) .
7. The requirements of the R-1 Zone Code shall be met during plan check.
8. The requirements of the Compatibility Ordinance (Ordinance 242) shall be met
during plan check unless otherwise modified herein.
9. The front yard of all lots, and in addition, the street side yard of corner lots,
shall be landscaped to property line, edge of curb, sidewalk, or edge of street
pavement, whichever is furthest from the residence.
10. The landscaping for each lot shall include one 24"-box tree and one 15-gallon
tree on interior lots and one (24"-box) tree and four (15 gallon) trees on
CONAPRVL.045
corner lots, minimum five gallon shrubs, and groundcover and/or hardscape
of sufficient size, spacing and variety to create an attractive and unifying
appearance. Landscaping shall be in substantial compliance with the
standards set forth in the Manual on Architectural Standards and the Manual
on Landscaping Standards as adopted by the Planning Commission.
11. A permanent water -efficient irrigation system shall be provided for all areas
required to be landscaped. The provisions of Ordinance #220 shall be met.
The final landscape plan should be reviewed by the City, the Coachella Valley
Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commission.
12. The landscaping shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and viable
condition by the property owner.
13. All requirements of Tract Maps 24517 and 25290 shall be met during plan
check.
14. The applicant shall provide six foot high walls for all new homes. The front
yard or street side yard and perimeter tract walls shall be slumpstone masonry
block with sack or slurry finish to match the existing Rancho Ocotillo units .
The interior side yard fencing of each home can be either decorative masonry,
or another material as approved by the Director of Planning and Development .
The walls shall be built prior to final occupancy clearance of each dwelling
unit.
15. Sectional metal roll -up garage doors shall be installed on all garages.
16. All concrete roof tiles shall be similar in color and style to the existing homes.
17. Decorative wrought iron gates shall be used for all street facing pedestrian
gates.
18. A two story house cannot be constructed adjacent to or abutting a lot line of
an existing single story home constructed in a. prior phase of the subdivision.
19. A trellis is to be attached to each single family home where the rear of the unit
faces west or south. The trellis shall be a minimum depth of eight feet.
20. All units shall have architectural detailing on each side of the proposed house,
but in no case shall the plant -on feature project less than 2-inches from the
building facade. All gable vents shall include this architectural feature.
21. The developer shall regulate the mixture and/or number of proposed single
family homes so that in no instance shall any :homes smaller than 1, 906 square
feet exceed 10 percent of the homes built on the remaining lots in Tracts 24517
and 25290.
22. The applicant can, as an option, provide gated entry courtyards. The
private entry courts shall include stucco fencing and decorative wrought iron
gates.
23. The garage doors for each home shall be recessed into the building envelope
a minimum distance of two -inches from the building's stucco exterior.
CONAPRVL.045
24. The wood fascia eave shall be constructed by using a 2" X 8" piece of lumber
with 1" X 4" trim to match the existing houses.
25. All gable attic vents shall be decorative (i.e., round, half -circle, etc.) .
26. The parkland fees for Tract 25290 shall be paid prior to a building permit
being issued within this portion of the Rancho Ocotillo Development.
27. The largest house permitted in the tract shall not exceed 2,802 square feet per
Ordinance 242.
28. The Planning Commission shall review and approve the applicant's use of
circular driveways in the project if they are to be sold as an option to the
future homeowners. This review shall be considered a minor design element
not subject to a public hearing (i.e., Business Item) .
29. Access to Fred Waring Drive from Ocotillo Drive shall be eliminated during on -
site construction of any new homes by the applicant. The ultimate
reconstruction of the street improvements shall be done in a timely fashion as
specified by the City Engineer.
Special (Model Complex) :
30. Establishment of the temporary sales office (garage conversion) shall be in
conformance with the exhibits contained in the Planning and Development
Department's file.
31. Plans for any fencing and/or blocking access to the sales area must be
submitted to the Fire Department and Engineering Department for review and
approval.
32. The sales area shall be accessible to the physically challenged (Title 24 and
A.D.A.).
33. A bond in the amount of $2, 000 is required to guarantee the ultimate reversion
of the temporary sales office to a two car garage. Staff will accept a letter of
credit or bond from a bonding company ensuring removal and restoration of
the garage. The fee is based on each garage conversion.
34. Temporary signs or banners shall comply with the requirements of the Sign
Regulations as set out in Chapter 9.212 of the Municipal Code for all proposed
signs.
35. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than
2A10BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper
placement of equipment.
CONAPRVL.045
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DATE: JULY 26, 1994
CASE NO.: TRACT MAP 23995
REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR INCO
SUBDIVISIONHOMES FOR THEIR
SOUTHWEST CORNER OFMILE AVENUE AND ADAMS
STREET
APPLICANT: INCO HOMES (INLAND DIVISION)
REPRESENTATIVE: FREDERICK W. FARR, LAND DEVELOPMENT MANAGER
ARCHITECTS: CSA ARCHITECTS AND B3 ARCHITECTS
Land Use Information
Site: Vacant
North: Acacia subdivision (Tract 23268), Mobile Home Park, Church
South: Vacant
East: Vacant (Approved for residential homes, Tract 27
West • Vacant (planned for an RV park and driving range)
BACKGROUND:
In 1989, the City approved subdivision map 23995 which allowed a mixed use project
on 133 acres. The project boundaries were Washington Street on the west, Miles
Avenue on the north, Adams Street on the east and the Whitewater Wash on the
south. Since o ofB9, the previous Californ a passed SB 428ewhich extended the life of the map to 1995r has been granted time extensions and n
1992 the State
The easterly -half of the project permitted 300 single family lots on ±90 acres. The
applicant has optioned the northerly portion of this part of the tract or 150 lots
(Attachment 1) . At this point, the applicant has submitted plans for use in Phases
I through V which would include:
Phase I = 40 lots
(11.77 acres)
Phase II = 34 lots
(9.74 acres)
Phase III = 28 lots
(7.14 acres)
Phase IV = 27* lots
(8.35 acres)
Phase V = 21 lots
(5.01 acres)
Total 150 lots
(42.01 acres)
*Note: Includes Park site
The original developer did not submit construction plans for this portion of the
project; therefore, no information is available to explain the type of single family
home intended for this tract. Inco's plans must meet the R-1 Zoning Code provisions
and any related tract conditions.
PCST.008
Submittal
The developer, Inco Homes, has been developing homes since 1976. They currently
have 10 single family home neighborhoods throughout Southern California
submittedandlt
year they built +800 homes in California. On July 8, 1994, the applicant
plans to build homes in Phase I (and any future phase) of Tract 23995. Four single
story floor plans are planned:
plan 1-3 bedroom, 2 bath with 2 car garage totaling 1,400 livable sf.
Plan 2-4 bedroom, 2 bath with 2 car garage totaling 1,578 livable sf.
Plan 3-4 bedroom, 2 bath with 2 car garage totaling 1, 700 livable sf .
Plan 4-4 bedroom, 2 bath with 3 car garage totaling 1,988 livable sf .
The lots range in size from simple title. sq The tract will ,00) have tC C1 ,&0R square s but no home
each lot will have fee p
owners association for day-to-day needs.
Plans 2 and 3 offer 3-car garages as an option. Three different elevations will be
offered for each plan, with 6 different color schemes planned. Roof materials will be
flat and low profile concrete tile. Exteriors will be stucco with optional brick or
stone veneers on selected elevations. Covered patios will be available as an option
on all four plans.
The conceptual landscape plan for the models includes pools and hardscape. The
models will be situated on lots 32-35 of Tract 23995-1.
Exteriors feature stucco siding, Spanish style concrete -tile roofs, overhanging
eaves and covered entries.
Front -yard landscaping with automatic irrigation systems and side- and rear -yard
wood fencing with gates is proposed. The homes offer two or three -car garages with
direct home entry and doors to the yard. Master bedrooms include vaulted ceilings,
walk-in closets, oval tubs with showers, and other amenities.
The plans have single -door entries (except Plan 4) and living rooms adjacent to
dining rooms, and kitchens adjacent to family rooms.
Model Complex
The model complex for the sales program will be on lots 32 through 35 which are on
the south side of Sunbrook Lane at Coldbrook Lane. Sunbrook is the first cul-de-
sac street south of Miles Avenue (parallel to Miles) at the Miles Avenue access point.
The large exhibitssmaller homes plotted lwessterly toward the end arger home (Plan 4) is lof the cul-de-sac.
otted on Lot 32 with
the subsequent
The sales office will be on lot 35 (Plan 1 home) . The office will be in the garage until
the model home is sold to a private party.
The models will be fully landscaped and improved with various amenity packages
(i.e. , pools, spa, doll house, etc. ) . The models will be a sampling of the products
PCST.008
provided by Inco for their sales program. Mr. Farr has stated that Inco would like
to begin construction of their models in August .
Staff Comments
The homes are typical in size and design to the other existing developments of this
area (e. g. , Acacia, Century Homes, Cactus Flower, etc. ) as the homes range in size
from 1,400 square feet to +2,000 square feet and include standard
fea ureses such as
fencing, front -yard landscaping, and other optional (upgrade)
Staff requests only minor upgrades to the attached plans.
1, Eave Fascia - The fascia board for each home will be constructed of a 2" X 6"
rough sawn lumber. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission upgrade
this design feature by constructing the fascia of a 2" X 8" rough sawn wood
with 1" X 4" trim ( Condition 21) .
2. Fencing - Wood fencing is proposed by the applicant. Wooden fencing is
permitted in the rear or interior sideyard only when not visible
fromithe
street. This is a requirement of the R-1 Zoning Code. Therefore,
Condit14 and 23 have been proposed to ensure that the provision of the Zoning Code
are met .
3. Stucco Pop -outs - The applicant is proposing stucco pop -outs as an
arcii-itectural feature for each home (i.e., 2" X 4" wood member with stucco) .
The reveal thickness will be approximately 12 inches above the finished stucco
surface of the home. This feature will be used on each front elevation. Staff
requests that the Planning Commission consider adding this architectural
feature to the other sides of each building elevation to improve each plans
overall appearance (i.e., shadow pattern) and to provide a small sunscreen
for each building elevation. This plant -on feature has been a consistent
requirement on many of the developments in the City in the past few years
( Condition 19) .
4. Patio Covers - Patio covers are shown as an optional element for each of the
four housing plans. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission impose
the patio cover or trellis on all homes which the rear yard faces south or west.
Sun exposure on these sides of each future home will be an important element
to protect the sliding glass windows from the summer sun in conjunction with
the State's Energy Code requirements because an 18-inch eave cannot provide
adequate shade of the rear yard elevation (s) when the sun is in a 12 : 00 (noon)
to 6 : 00p . m . setting ( Condition 18) .
CONCLUSION:
Staff supports the applicant's request to
provided the recommended Conditions of
RECOMMENDATION:
By Minute Motion 94--,
the attached Conditions.
PCST.008
build single family homes in Tract 23995
Approval are met (Attachment 2) .
approve the architectural plans for Inco Homes subject to
Attachments:
1. Tract Map Phases
2. Draft Conditions
3. Letter from Mr. Farr
4. Large Exhibits (Planning Commission only)
PCST.008
I
AILES J
Future RV Park
CASE
CASE No.
Inco Homes
Tract 23995
Future Single
Family Homes
Future Single
Family Homes
r---
r
u
SCALE : nts
ATTACHMENT 2
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
INCO HOMES (TRACT 23995)
JULY 26, 1994
GENERAL:
1. The lawn for each front yard shall be either hybrid Bermuda and/or premium
Perennial Rye depending upon when it is installed. Fescue grass shall not be
used.
2. All plants except lawn shall be drought tolerant and either watered with
emitters or bubblers.
3. All trees shall be double staked to prevent damage from the wind.
4. The concrete driveways shall include expansion joints and a broom finish (or
better) texture.
5. The driveway approach for each home shall be a minimum width of 20-feet
unless otherwise approved by the Director of Planning and Development.
6. Final irrigation and landscape plans for the project shall be approved by the
Department of Planning and Development.
7. All trees shall be appropriate for our micro -climate (i.e., Zone 13-Sunset
Book) .
8. The requirements of the R-1 Zone Code shall be met during plan check.
9. The front yard of all lots, and in addition, the street side yard of corner lots,
shall be landscaped to property line, edge of curb, sidewalk, or edge of street
pavement, whichever is furthest from the residence.
10. The landscaping for each lot shall include two 15-gallon trees on interior lots
and five (15 gallon) trees on corner lots (three on side yard), minimum five
gallon shrubs, and groundcover and/or hardscape of sufficient size, spacing
and variety to create an attractive and unifying appearance. Landscaping
shall be in substantial compliance with the standards set forth in the Manual
on Architectural Standards and the Manual on Landscaping Standards as
adopted by the Planning Commission.
11. A permanent water -efficient irrigation system shall be provided for all areas
required to be landscaped. The provisions of Ordinance #220 shall be met.
The final landscape plan shall be reviewed and approved by the City, the
Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural
Commission.
12. The landscaping shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and viable
condition by the property owner.
13. All requirements of Tract Maps 23995 shall be met during plan check.
CONApRVL.049
14. The front yard or street side yard and perimeter tract walls shall be
decorative and subject to final reviewed by the Director of Planning and
Development. The design height of the perimeter tract wall shall be governed
by the future requirements of the on -site noise study.
15. Sectional metal roll -up garage doors shall be installed on all garages.
16. All homes shall have concrete roof tiles per the attached material board on file
with staff .
17. Decorative wrought iron gates shall be used for all street facing pedestrian
gates.
18. A trellis is to be attached to each single family home where the rear of the unit
eight feet and be
faces west or south.11 sliding rellass orlis lfrench door openingsl be a minimum depth . A concrete
porch
constructed over a g
shall be provided under the trellised area.
19. All units shall have architectural detailing on each side of the proposed house
to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Development, but in no case
shall the plant -on feature project less than 2-inches from the building facade.
The plant-ons shall be used on all sides of each building elevation to improve
the architectural characteristics of each plan. All gable vents shall include
this architectural feature.
20. The applicant can, as an option, provide gated entry courtyards. The
private entry courts shall include stucco fencing and decorative wrought iron
gates.
X 811 rough sawn
21. The eave lumber with 1"1X 4" trim onr each op to complement an type shall consist of a ,
lumb omplement the overalldesign program.
22. The roof overhangs shall be a minimum width of 18-inches to provide sun
protection or shade to those areas of the house which do not have a trellis
shade cover.
23. Rear and interior side lot fencing shall be optional; but if installed, the
interior side yard fencing of each home can be either wood, or another
material as approved by the Director of Planning and Development.
24. Final plot plan for residences showing setbacks shall be reviewed and
approved by the Planning and Development Department prior to issuance of
a building permit for affected units.
Special (Model Complex):
25. Establishment of the temporary sales office (garage conversion) shall be in
conformance with the exhibits contained in the Planning and Development
Department's file.
26. Plans for any fencing and/or blocking access to the sales area must be
submitted to the Fire Department and Engineering Department for review and
approval.
CONAPRVL.049
27. The sales area shall be accessible to the physically challenged (Title 24 and
A.D.A.).
28. A bond in the amount of $2, 000 is required to guarantee the ultimate reversion
of the temporary sales office to a two car garage. Staff will accept a letter of
credit or bond from a bonding company ensuring removal and restoration of
the garage. The fee is based on each garage conversion.
29. Temporary signs or banners shall comply with the requirements of the Sign
Regulations as set out in Chapter 9.212 of the Municipal Code for all proposed
signs.
30. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than
2AIOBC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper
placement of equipment.
CONAPRVL.049
^ i e wt..t7mCtV 1
J U l 1118 1994
July 14, 1994
Mr. Greg Trousdell
Assistant Planner
City of La Quinta
78-495 CaIle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Tract 23995-design review
Dear Greg:
I wanted to take this opportunity to provide you with additional information on the homes that we
will be constructing in Tract 23995 in support of our design review package:
Exterior Materials
The exteriors will be three coat stucco with integral color in the final coat. The colors will be per
the color board furnished previously. The stucco popouts will three coat stucco over 2 x 4 trim,
making the reveal thickness approximately 1 1 /2" above the surrounding surface. Popouts are
utilized on the front elevations only and are typically painted with accent colors. Fascia board will
be 2 x 6 rough sawn material.
Certain elevations will have veneers of brick or cultured stone, which would make the reveal
approximately 3 inches above the surrounding surface. Each floor plan will be offered in three
different elevations. A total of 6 color schemes are proposed which will be :nixed throughout the
project to ensure that the street scene is varied. Concrete roof tiles will be both flat and low
profile barrel tile and will be offered in several different colors to enhance the street scene.
Inland Dnuion
Garage Doors 2501. Rincon Avenue, Suite 202
The garage doors will be metal sectional doors with recessed panels
option for the metal sectional doors.
Entry Doors
The entry doors will be metal with recessed panels.
Corona, CA 91719.1341
Lites will be available as an(909) 736,,1700
FAX (909)136--i400
Corporate Office
1282 W. Arrow Highwy
P.O. Box 970
Upland, CA 91785
(909) 981.5989
FAX (909) 982-a784
Page 2
July 14, 1994
Windows/sliding glass doors
The windows will be dual glaze with aluminum frames in white paint finish. Metal grids will be
used on the front elevations only.
Fencing
Lot fencing will be 5'6" high box frame cedar fencing. Palings will be 1" x 4" with 1" x 4" rails.
The top cap will be 2" x 4" cedar. Posts will be 4"x 4" redwood set in concrete approximately 8'
OC. Each home will have a 3' wide pass gate on the garage side.
Front Yard Landscaping
Front yard landscaping will be installed by Inco Homes. Each homes will be planted with one
street tree and one shade tree. Approximately 12 one gallon shrubs and one five gallon vine will
be used per lot. Automatic irrigation will operate anti -siphon electric control valves in the turf
areas. Shrubs will utilize drip irrigation systems.
Please call me if you additional information.
Sincerely,
INCO HOMES CORPORATION
Frederick W. Fan
Land Development Manager
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
75-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California
July 12, 1994 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows.
Commissioner Abels led the flag salute.
II. ROLL CALL
A. Chairwoman Barrows requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Adolph,
Abels, Anderson, Butler, Gardner, and Chairwoman Barrows.
B. Commissioners Abels/Adolph moved and seconded a motion to excuse
Commissioner Newkirk. Unanimously approved.
C. Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell,
Associate Planner Leslie Cherry, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer.
III PRESENTATION:
A. Chairwoman Barrows presented a plaque of appreciation to Commissioner Marrs
and Commissioner Ellson (who was absent). The Commission stated their best
wishes to both Commissioner Marrs and Ellson. Commissions Adolph/Abels
moved to adopt Resolutions 94-020 and 94-021 as presented to Commissioners
Marrs and Ellson, respectively. Commissioner Marrs expressed his appreciation
and enjoyment serving on the Planning Commission.
IV. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR:
A. Chairwoman Barrows opened the nominations for Chair. Commissioner Abels
nominated Don Adolph. Commissioner Anderson seconded the motion. There
being no further nominations, Chairwoman Barrows closed the nominations and
asked for the vote. Commissioner Adolph was elected unanimously.
Pc7-12
Planning Commission Minutes
July 12, 1994
Chairman Adolph asked staff to look into whether their were provisions in the
By-laws for the Chair to serve a rotating six month term in order to give the
entire Commission an opportunity to gain experience as chairman. City Attorney
Dawn Honeywell stated she would review the Ordinance and report back to the
Planning Commission at their next meeting.
B. Chairman Adolph asked for nominations for Vice Chair. Commissioner Gardner
nominated Jacques Abels. Commissioner Barrows seconded the motion. There
being no further nominations, Chairman Adolph closed the nominations and asked
for the vote. Commissioner Abels was elected unanimously.
V. PUBLIC COMMEND' - None
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Commissioners Gardner and Anderson withdrew from the first public hearing due to a possible
conflict of interest with Tentative Tract 27952.
A. TENTATIVE TRACT 27952; a request of John Saier, Jr. (KSL Recreation) for
approval to construct a two level +27,000 square foot golf clubhouse facility for
the Citrus Golf Resort on ±S acres.
1. Planning Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in
the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Adolph opened the public
hearing. Mr. David Erickson, representing the applicant, stated they were
in agreement with all the conditions as submitted by staff.
3. Chairman Adolph asked if the applicant had any plans for signage on
Jefferson Street. Mr. Erickson stated the signage was already there.
4. Chairman Adolph stated he felt the clubhouse looked like an institution as
there was no architectural treatment such as overhangs to dress the
building up. Mr. Erickson stated they were considering adding awnings.
5. Commissioner Barrows asked if the windows on the west elevation could
be screened with landscaping. Mr. Erickson stated this area was planned
to, hold large functions and would have large overhangs with awnings.
6. Chairman Adolph asked if there would be an outdoor eating area. Mr.
Erickson stated they were not shown on the plans, but there were plans
for a 20-foot by 40-foot terrace off the grill area with a grass terrace.
There would be umbrellas and picnic tables.
PC7-12
Planning commission Minutes
July 12, 1994
7. 'There being no further questions, Chairman Adolph closed the public
hearing. Planning Director Jerry Herman clarified the changes to
Conditions of Approval.
a. Condition #2 - add to the last sentence "...unless the Municipal
Code changes."
b. Condition #37 - change "45-days to 90-days".
C. Condition #38 - add new condition "Minor architectural changes
(i.e., awnings, etc.) can be approved by the Director of Planning
and Development provided the changes do not drastically modify
the character of the approved building elevations."
8. There being no further questions, Commissioners Abels/Barrows moved
to adopt Minute Motion 94-020 approving Plot Plan 94-527, subject to the
amended conditions. Unanimously approved.
Commissioners Anderson and Gardner rejoined the Commission.
VII. BUSINESS SESSION:
A. PLOT PLAN 88-398. AMENDMENT #l: a request of Garry Hopkins for
approval to install a golf ball barrier along the south side of the La Quinta Golf
Ranch.
1. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand-Cherry presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning
and Development Department.
2. Commissioner Anderson asked the applicant if the material would stand
up to the environment. Mr. Hopkins stated he had spoken to the
manufacturers and the life of the material is 7-10 years. Commissioner
Anderson asked if staff had reviewed any specifications on the material.
Staff stated they had not.
3. Chairman Adolph asked if the applicant had any objections to the
conditions. Mr. Hopkins stated he had no objections.
4. Chairman Adolph asked if the height of the netting was the same for the
entire length. Mr. Hopkins stated it was as they used the tee in the back.
5. Chairman Adolph asked if the applicant had any problem with the
stipulation of using Oleanders along Westward Ho Drive in place of palm
trees. Mr. Hopkins stated he did not.
PC7-12 3
Planning Commission Minutes
July 12, 1994
6. 'There being no further questions, Commissioners Anderson/Barrows
moved to adopt Minute Motion 94-021 approving Plot Plan 88-398,
Amendment #1, subject to the attached conditions. Unanimously
approved.
B. STREET VACATION 94-026; a request of Fred Wilson for a General Plan
Consistency Finding for a street vacation to vacate a five foot wide public utility
easement along the north side of Lots 15 and 16 of Santa Carmelita at Vale La
Quinta (Ltnit 17).
1. Planning Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in
the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. There being no questions of staff or the applicant, Commissioners
Abets/Barrows moved to adopt Minute Motion 94-022 approving the
Consistency Findings for Street Vacation 94-026 with the General Plan.
Unanimously approved.
VH. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. There being no corrections to the Minutes of June 28, 1994, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Abels to adopt the minutes as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
VHI. OTHER -
A. Staff explained to the new Commissioners the rotation of the required attendance
of the Planning Commissioners at the City Council meetings.
IX. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, a motion was made and seconded by Commissioners
Barrows/Abels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting
of the Planning Commission on July 26, 1994, at 7:00 P.M. at the La Quinta City Hall Council
Chamber. This meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:36 P.M.,
July 12, 1994.
PC7-12 4