1988 12 13 PCA G E N D A
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado,
La Quinta, California
December 13, 1988 - 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Flag Salute
II. ROLL CALL
III,. PUBLIC HEARINGS - None
IV. 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 and not Public
Hearing items.
Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission should
use the form provided. Please complete one form for each
item you intend to address and submit the form to the
Planning Secretary prior to the beginning of the
meeting. Your name will be called at the appropriate
time.
When addressing the Planning Commission, please state
your name and address. The proceedings of the Planning
Commission meeting are recorded on tape and comments of
each person shall be limited.
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
Minutes of the
November 22, 1988.
regular Planning Commission meeting of
BJ/AGENDA 12.13
VI. BUSINESS
A. Item:
B.
C: .
Applicant:
Redevelopment Project Area No. 2
Redevelopment Plan and Associated
Environmental Impact Report (EIR)
Mr. Dave Meyers,
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
City of La Quinta
Location: Avenue 50 on the South, Fred Waring
Drive on the north and generally
between Washington Street and
Jefferson Street.
Project: Review the proposed Redevelopment
Plan and Associated EIR. Adopt
findings and make recommendations.
1. Consultant Report
2. Commission Discussion
3. Motion for Commission Action
Item: Tentative Tract #21555
Applicant: Bar Con Development, Dennis Freeman
Location: Parc La Quinta
Project: Request for a modification of
Condition No. 11, regarding full
turn movement (median break) access
to Washington Street.
1. Staff Report
2. Commission Discussion
3. Motion for Commission Action
Item: Plot Plan #88-403
Setback Adjustment #88-003
Applicant: Palm Royale Development Corporation
Location: Southeast corner of Fred Waring
Drive and Washington Street.
Project: Request for approval of a
Maintenance Building within the
Palm Royale project (formerly
"Reflections"), to be located in
the southeast corner of the project.
Request for a reduction in the
required front yard area setback
from 50 feet to 30 feet.
BJ/AGENDA 12.13
1. Staff Report
2. Commission Discussion
3. Motion for Commission Action
D. Item: Plot Plan #87-386
Variance #87-005
Applicant: Rick Johnson Construction
Location: 77-836 Montezuma
Project: Request for an extension of time
for Variance #87-005 and Plot Plan
#87-386.
1. Staff Report
2. Commission Discussion
3. Motion for Commission Action
VII. OTHER:
A. Discussion: Construction of fences in the Cove
area: receipt of correspondence
from Ann Young, La Quinta Cove
Association.
13. Action on Study Session Item(s).
VIII:. ADJOURNMENT
-------------------
I:TEMS FOR DECEMBER 12, 1988, 4:00 P.M. STUDY SESSION
"DISCUSSION ONLY"
1. Consideration of possible General Plan Amendment,
resulting from the Medium and High Density Residential
Land Use Study - update on City Council discussion and
direction.
2. All Agenda items.
BJ/AGENDA 12.13
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California
November 22, 1988
I.
II.
CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting was called to
Chairman Walling. The
Commissioner Bund.
'Dnr r_ rrar.r.
7:00 p.m.
order at 7:02 P.M. by
Flag Salute was led by
A. Chairman Walling requested the roll call.
Present: Commissioners Steding, Zelles, Moran,
Bund, and Chairman Walling.
13. Staff Present: Planning Director Murrel Crump,
Principal Planner Jerry Herman, and Assistant
Planner Glenda Lainis.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Chairman Walling introduced the Public Hearing
Items as follows:
A. Tentative Tract #23935, a request by Tom Noble to
subdivide a + 50 acre site into 196 single family
lots, located at the southwest corner of Miles
Avenue and Dune Palms Road.
1. Assistant Planner Glenda Lainis presented the
information contained in the Staff Report, a
copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. Chairman Walling opening the Public Hearing.
The Applicant, Mr. Noble addressed the
Commission regarding Conditions #19 and #29.
3. There being no further public comment,
Chairman Walling closed the Hearing and
opened the matter for Commission discussion.
Following discussion regarding Condition #29,
it was recommended that Condition #29 be
revised to read 750 of dwelling units within
150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of
Miles Avenue shall be limited to one story,
not to exceed 20 feet in height.
- 1 -
BJ/MIN:L1/22.DFT
4. A motion was made by Commissioner Zelles to
adopt Resolution No. 88-026 recommending to
the City Council concurrence with the
Environmental Analysis and approval of
Tentative Tract No. 23935 subject to
conditions. Commissioner Bund seconded the
motion. Unanimously approved.
B. Change of Zone No. 88-036, a request by T & S
Development, Inc. for a change from R-3-4000 to
C-P-S for the area west of Adams Street, north of
Highway 111, approximately 600 feet east of
Washington Street, and south of the Whitewater
Storm Channel.
1. Planning Director Murrel Crump presented the
information contained in the Staff Report, a
copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. Chairman Walling opened the Public Hearing.
Mr. John Curts, Vice Chairman of Planning and
Development for T & S Development addressed
the Commission.
3. There being no further public comment,
Chairman Walling closed the Hearing and
opened the matter for Commission discussion.
4. Commissioner
Commission
recommending
with the
approval of
Commissioner
Unanimously
Steding moved that the
adopt Resolution No. 88-027
to the City Council concurrence
Environmental Assessment and
the Change of Zone No. 88-036.
Moran seconded the motion.
approved.
C. Zoning ordinance Amendment No. 88-036, initiated by
the City. An amendment to the Municipal Code to
provide for the regulation of maximum building pad
height and requirement for rain gutter installation
on certain dwellings in the SR Zone.
1. Planning Director Murrel Crump presented the
information contained in the Staff Report, a
copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. Chairman Walling opened the Public Hearing.
There being no comments, Chairman Walling
closed the Hearing and opened the matter for
Commission discussion.
2 -
BJ/MIN11/22.DFT
3. Following discussion, Commissioner Steding
moved to adopt Resolution No. 88-028,
recommending to the City Council concurrence
with the Environmental Assessment and
approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No.
88-006. Commissioner Moran seconded.
Unanimously approved.
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT
Audrey Ostrowski, P. 0. Box 351, La Quinta,
addressed the Commission regarding the high density
apartments on Tampico. Chairman Walling stated
that they could not discuss an item that was not a
subject of the agenda. It can be directed for a
future meeting.
There being no further public comment, Chairman
Walling closed the public comment.
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Commissioner Moran and
seconded by Commissioner Zelles to approve the
minutes of November 8, 1988. Unanimously approved.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS
Chairman Walling brought Business Item "A" before
the Commission at this time. The Business Item is
as follows:
A. Tentative Tract No. 21180, a request by William
Young, Crystal Canyon of La Quinta (known as The
Heritage), located at the southeast corner of
Avenue 52 and Avenida Bermudas. The project is for
a first time extension request.
1. Planning Director Murrel Crump presented the
information contained in the Staff Report, a
copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. Mike Smith, J. F. Davidson, spoke for the
Applicant in regard to street improvements
and commented regarding tree retention. He
stated that his client was very disturbed
when the work being completed for Coachella
Valley Water District, resulted in the
removal of several trees that were
specifically to be retained.
3 -
BJ/MIN].1/22.DFT
3. Commissioner Zelles moved that the Commission
adopt Resolution #88-029 recommending to the
City Council that a one-year time extension
be approved for Tentative Tract No. 21180
subject to the revised conditions.
Commissioner Steding seconded the motion.
Unanimously approved.
B. General Plan Amendments stemming from the City-wide
analysis of Medium and High Density Residential
Land Uses.
1. Planning Director Murrel Cramp presented the
information contained in the Staff Report, a
copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. Commissioner Steding asked why property
directly to the north and south of Westward
Ho and generally east of Adams was
recommended Medium Density; did we consider
redesignating the property Low Density and if
not why not? Also questioned was the
provision of the High Density when we are not
ready to generate a General Plan that
includes an area for High Density in light of
our Market Absorption Study.
3. Planning Director Murrel Crump stated that,
a.) the property identified was so designated
to meet the absorption study demand for
multi -family designated property, the
currently designated Medium Density property
was addressed as such in the study, and b.)
that Council wishes to answer the question of
High Density, relating to Highway 111 in the
new Specific Plan.
4. Commissioner Moran stated that she would not
like to see all the High Density in one area
so as to create a slum. Recommended that the
High Density be eliminated and that a project
would have to show merit as to why it should
be allowed High Density; or a method be
worked out to accommodate a project that
would need to be larger.
5. Commissioner Bund stated that the Medium/High
Density should be the cap, but, to provide an
incentive for exceptionally creative
projects, offer to double the density. The
idea being to give bonuses to the developer
in order to create an environment to attract
better developments.
4 -
BJ/MIN]_l/22.DFT
6. Discussion continued regarding changes to
High Density, Medium/High, and Medium
Density. Evaluating the changes in relation
to the traffic study and incentives for
developers.
7. Discussion continued regarding bonuses and
areas that should be designated for High
Density in the Village area. Concurrence by
all commissioners was expressed for the
suggestions in the Staff report.
8. The Commission concurred with the Highway 111
recommendations.
9. Commissioner Steding stated that the there is
no position taken on the Spanos project in
the Staff Report, and therefore is not part
of the Commission's recommendation to the
City Council unless that item is specifically
addressed. Discussion concerning this
property followed.
10. Commissioner Moran moved to adopt Staff
recommendations with the modifications to
Item #1 to cap the density at 12 du/ac for
High Density with consideration being given
for density bonuses, as much as double; the
Medium Density at 8 du/ac, with certain
criteria, bonuses, the High Density as much
as double; and item #5, the Spanos project
would not be consistent with what the
Planning Commission is recommending to the
Council. Commissioner Bund seconded the
motion. Unanimously approved.
VII. OTHER - None
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made by Commissioner Steding and
seconded by Commissioner Moran to adjourn to a
regular meeting on December 13, 1988, at 7:00 P.M.,
in the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La
Quinta, California. This meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:37 P.M.,
November 22, 1988.
5 -
BJ/MIN1.1/22.DFT
CITY OF LA CUINTA
Staff Report and Recommendation
TO: Planning Commission
DATE: December 13, 1988
SUBJECT: PROPOSED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 2
- RESOLUTION:
o RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT
o RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
o MAKING FINDINGS RELATIVE TO CONFORMANCE WITH THE
GENERAL PLAN
BACKGROUND
On August 2, 1988, the Redevelopment Agency authorized the transmittal of the
Redevelopment Plan, Preliminary Report and the Draft Environmental Impact Report
(EIR) for Project Area No. 2, to all affected agencies.
The primary purpose of the Preliminary Report is to provide taxing entities with
information on the proposed Redevelopment Plan to allow them to analyze any fiscal
impact the establishment of the Project Area may cause to their entity. The Preliminary
Report generally discusses those items required by law. It identifies the general
conditions which exist in the Project Area which necessitate the use of redevelopment in
order to remedy. The Report cites the existence of economic blight in the form of
inadequate improvements, facilities, utilities, impaired investments, irregularly formed or
shaped lots and lots laid out in disregard to physical characteristics as the basis for
creation of the Project Area.
Approximately $78 million of project costs have been identified in the Preliminary Report.
This estimate includes the cost of public improvements and all other potential costs
which can now be identified as maybe needed in the Area. It does not include the 20
percent housing set -a -side funding requirements.
The Draft EIR presented information relative to the environmental effects expected to
occur as a result of establishing the Project Area No. 2. The EIR may best be referred to
as a "Program EIR" which will serve as the primary environmental documentation for the
Project Area. It is anticipated that when subsequent implementation activities involve site
specific operations, further environmental evaluation of such projects will be made on a
case by case basis.
The Draft EIR was circulated and comments were received. The Agency consultants
have prepared responses to the comments and the Final EIR is included for your review.
\laqufnta\pcstaff
The Redevelopment Plan provides the legal and financial framework for redevelopment
implementation activities. The Plan conforms to the General Plan in that it does not
modify the City's adopted General Plan. Throughout Section 600, USES PERMITTED IN
THE PROJECT AREA of the Plan, it is referenced that the General Plan, local codes and
ordinances shall establish the uses and development standards in the Project Area. All
proposed development within the Project Area must comply with the City's zoning and
development standards. The Plan does not change General Plan Goals and Policies.
DISCUSSION
Pursuant to Section 33346 of the Health and Safety Code, the Redevelopment Agency is
required to submit the Redevelopment Plan to the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission shall make recommendations concerning the Redevelopment Plan and its
conformance to the General Plan.
The contents of the Redevelopment Plan are specifically outlined by State Law. The Plan
is purposely general in nature (due to its 40 year duration) and provides the basic
framework to guide the Redevelopment Agency in implementing the proposed
redevelopment program. The Plan does not propose any changes to the land use or
street system as shown in the General Plan. Uses permitted in the Project Area shall be
those presented in the City of La Quinta's General Plan, zoning and building codes as
they now exist or are hereinafter amended. The Redevelopment Plan provides a new
vehicle (-tax increment financing) to fund economic development and public
facility/infrastructure projects.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution, which
finds that the Redevelopment Plan for Project Area No. 2 is consistent with the General
Plan and recommends approval of the Redevelopment Plan and certification of the EIR.
�luawnta\ pcstett
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING APPROVAL
OF THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE LA QUINTA
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA NO. 2, MAKING A
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AS TO CONFORMITY
WITH THE GENERAL PLAN, RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR AND TRANSMITTING THE
REPORT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE
CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS, the La Quinta City Planning Commission held a public meeting
December 13, 1988 to consider the Redevelopment Plan, to make a report and
recommendations as to its conformity with the General Plan and to transmit the report to
the Redevelopment Agency and the Qty council and;
WHEREAS, proceedings have been initiated for the adoption of the La Quinta
Redevelopment Plan for the La Quinta Redevelopment Project Area No. 2 (the
"Redevelopment Plan") and;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has reviewed the Redevelopment Plan with
particular regard to its conformity with the General Plan of the City of La Quinta and the
associated EIR; and
WHEREAS, the following findings of fact have been made in regard to the
Redevelopment Plan and its conformity with the General Plan:
1. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the
Redevelopment Plan is in conformity with the General Plan of the City of La
Quinta.
2. The Planning Commission hereby finds and determines that the location,
purpose and extent of any acquisition or disposition of real property for
street, park, public space, or other public purpose by the Redevelopment
Agency for the purposes of carrying out the Redevelopment Plan conforms
to the General Plan of the City of La Quinta.
3. The Planning Commission hereby recommends the approval of the
Redevelopment Plan.
4. This Resolution shall constitute the reports and recommendation of the
Planning Commission to the City Council pursuant to Section 33346 of the
Health and Safety Code.
5. The Environmental Impact Report has been prepared in accordance with
the provisions of CEQA.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that based upon said findings of fact, the
La Quinta City Planning Commission hereby recommends to the Redevelopment
Agency and the City Council APPROVAL of the Redevelopment Plan, and
CERTIFICATION OF THE EIR.
I. The Director of Planning and Development wily' submit the Redevelopment
Plan and the Planning Commission's report and recommendations to the
Redevelopment Agency and City Council.
2. The Secretary to the Planning Commission shall certify to the adoption of
this Resolution and transmit a copy to the Redevelopment Agency and the
City Council.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the La Quinta City Planning Commission at a regular
meeting held December 13, 1988 by the following vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
, Secretary
, Chairman
\laqulnte \lrnnrew
V1.
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: DECEMBER 13, 1988
SUBJECT: BAR CON DEVELOPMENT, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP, REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION OF
CONDITION NO. 11 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 21555,
PARC LA QUINTA, REGARDING FULL TURN MOVEMENT
(MEDIAN BREAK) ACCESS TO WASHINGTON STREET.
BACKGROUND
Tentative Tract #21555 received approval from the City subject
to conditions, in particular, Condition No. 11 states:
"11. A median break shall not be permitted at the
northerly tract entry, but rather shall be allowed
at Sagebrush Avenue." (Note: Permanent right -in
and right -out access to Washington Street is
permitted.)
The Washington Street Specific Plan does not specifically
prohibit left turn access points along Washington Street; page
43 of the Specific Plan, the third paragraph states,
"Roadway access for new development proposals shall be
based upon applicable standards within the La Quinta
General Plan and requirements of the City Engineer, as
they relate to a specific project. Proposals shall be
reviewed on a case -by -case basis with respect to the
guidelines of the study and its standards indicated
a.bove."
ANALYSIS:
1. In the recent past, conditions of approval for tentative
tracts along major arterials have been granted temporary
median breaks for home sales which is eliminated within a
given time frame. The access then becomes a permanent
right -in, right -out access.
2. The Applicants request was transmitted to the Public
Works Department for comment. The Department supports a
temporary median break :but not on a permanent basis.
- 1 -
BJ/MEMOJH.034
RECOMMENDATION:
By minute motion, recommend to the City Council that Condition
#11 be modified to permit a temporary median break for
Tentative Tract No. 21555 as follows:
"11. A permanent median break shall not be permitted
along Washington Street. A temporary median break
may be permitted. This temporary median break
approval shall expire at the end of two years, or
approval terminates upon which ever occurs first:
A. Completion of model complex; or
B. Construction of Sagebrush; or
C. At the time a raised median is installed.
Prior to the end of two years, the Applicant/
Developer may request a time extension from the
Planning Commission (if approval has not otherwise
terminated pursuant to "A" to "C" above) for
continued use of the temporary median break.
- 2 -
BJ/MEMOJH.034
BaRCN
O t V[ L O P U ■ N 7
December 2, 1988 ** HAND DELIVERED **
Mr. Jerry Herman
City of La Quinta
78-10si Calle Estado
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Tract 21555; ParcLaQuinta
Dear Jerry:
Per your conversation this date with Dennis Freeman, and in regard to
Condition of Approval No. 11 for Tract 21555, this correspondence shall
constitute the formal request of ParcLaQuinta, a California Joint Venture,
the developer of Tract 21555, for a median break in Washington Street to
allow left -turn access into the Washington Street (northerly) entrance of
the Tract from the southbound traffic lanes of Washington Street.
Your cooperation in placing our request before the Planning Commission
at its meeting of December 13 is most appreciated.
Very truly yours,
BARCON DEVELOPMENT,
a California Limited Partnership
1 ,1
Irwin L. Colds,
general partner
ILClbw
DEC 21"
CITY OF LA QUINTA
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
41-625 Eclectic, Suite H-1, Palm Desert, CA 92260, (619) 773-9024, Fax (619) 773-9065
To:
TRANSMTTAL MEMO
�! saim R CITY MA iw
FIRE MARSHAL -
--- MWWITY SAFM -
--- BUILDING DIVISION —
From : PLANNW & DEV&OPMEff
Subject: PROECT REVM
Case:
Pate:
PLEASE REVIEW AND PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS YO
MAY HAVE 'ON THE ATTACHED ITEM BY 3�
COMMENTS `.e Y94 Wll
r s / v / / • _
/
e
. - _
/r
n
Ll i I ul m
CJ
N
Q
<
W
w
ugn
• r
�c
z
Lam—'%✓ 2��
►r IG;LL� Lam=
w I
Y—
i
s
'— =� IP
= r r
Li
IV
I
\Vi
d� ��\ �_ a wl M � I ✓✓
1 w I /g •
o+
-+.Q.-� 1 Mfg N I/ I � � °I — �•
w_—�--- _ If•Of: BS 8 W
VI.
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DATE: DECEMBER 13, 1988
OWNER: PALM ROYALE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION
PROJECT: PLOT PLAN #88-403, REQUEST FOR APPROVAL OF A
MAINTENANCE BUILDING WITHIN THE PALM ROYALE
PROJECT (FORMERLY KNOWN AS "REFLECTIONS"),
TO BE LOCATED IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE
PROJECT. (SEE ATTACHMENT #1)
SETBACK ADJUSTMENT #88-003, REQUESTING A
REDUCTION OF THE REQUIRED FRONT YARD AREA
SETBACK IN THE R-5 ZONING DISTRICT FROM 50
FEET TO 30 FEET.
LOCATION: PALM ROYALE PROJECT IS LOCATED AT THE
SOUTHEAST CORNER OF FRED WARING DRIVE AND
WASHINGTON STREET.
GENERAL PLAN: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4-8 UNITS PER
ACRE).
EXISTING ZONING: R-5 (OPEN AREA COMBINING ZONE -RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENTS (SEE ATTACHMENT #2)•
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THIS PROPOSAL IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW UNDER CEQA.
PROJEC',
DESCRIPTION: THE REQUEST IS FOR APPROVAL TO DEVELOP A
+.5 ACRE SITE AS A GOLF COURSE AND
LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE FACILITY. THIS SITE
WAS NOTED AS A MAINTENANCE LOCATION AT THE
TIME THE TENTATIVE MAP WAS APPROVED FOR THE
OVERALL PROJECT. THE FACILITY CONSISTS OF A
925 SQUARE FOOT STRUCTURE, WITH THREE GARAGE
BAYS, A RESTROOM, AND A SMALL OFFICE (SEE
ATTACHMENTS #3 AND 4).
A SETBACK ADJUSTMENT REQUEST IS ALSO BEING
PROCESSED ALONG WITH THIS PLOT PLAN. THIS
REQUEST IS FOR A REDUCTION IN THE REQUIRED
50 FOOT SETBACK AT THE FRONT AREA OF THE
BUILDING. THE R-5 ZONE REQUIRES A 50 FOOT
SETBACK FOR FRONT, SIDE AND REAR YARDS.
- 1 -
BJ/STAFFRPT.023
ANALYSIS: SETBACK ADJUSTMENT #88-003
1. The required rear and sideyard setbacks of 50 feet have
been complied with.
2. The orientation of the structure is such that the north
westerly portion of the building does not meet the
setback requirement of 50 feet (see Attachment #5).
3. The triangular shape and relatively small size of the
property makes it difficult to site even a minimally
seized maintenance building, while complying with all
setbacks.
4. Two access points are shown on the Plot Plan. The access
layout proposed does not efficiently use the limited size
and shape of the property. The southerly access is
unnecessary and should be deleted to allow additional
area for storage, as well as to eliminate potential
conflict at Magenta Drive. That portion along Emerald
Drive should be landscaped and/or sited with a decorative
:screening wall to further reduce the visual impact of the
maintenance area.
5. Siting of the building mitigates the effect of the
activity on the interior portions of the overall
residential project. The subject front yard area is
located across Emerald Drive, (a 36 foot wide loop
street). The opposite side of Emerald Drive will be
developed as a future recreation area (refer to
Attachment #1); therefore, noise impacts to residences
would not be significant, with or without a reduction in
the setback.
ANALYSIS: PLOT PLAN #88-403
1. Parking: The proposed parking area should be adjusted
and built to reflect City standards. The number of
spaces are anticipated to be sufficient for this use.
Other than the described access issue, the parking layout
is acceptable.
2. The site shows two access points. The amount of traffic
movement associated with the contemplated maintenance use
would not warrant two access points. A redesign of the
parking area should be based on elimination of the
southerly access point. A redesign would also have the
positive benefit of shifting the access point further
from Magenta Drive.
- 2 -
BJ/STA:EFRPT.023
3. The proposed building height is approximately 11 feet.
The building should not visually impact the interior
residential uses to any significance degree. Proposed
landscaping should adequately provide screening for the
adjacent properties to the south and east, once the
landscaping matures.
4. Landscaping: A landscape plan has been submitted. Plant
material selections will require approval from the
Riverside County Agricultural Commission office. Also,
an irrigation plan accepted by Coachella Valley Water
District will be necessary. These requirements are
recommended in the conditions for approval.
5. Building Design: The submitted design is a flat roof
structure, with minimal design treatment or detailing.
However, as this is an ancillary structure for a use
which will not be highly visible, an elaborate design is
riot deemed necessary. Color scheme and materials will be
required to be the same as that used for the residential
structures.
FINDINGS: SETBACK ADJUSTMENT.#88-003:
1. Setback Adjustment #88-003 is consistent with the intent
and purposes of Title 9 of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
2. Setback Adjustment #88-003 qualifies as categorical
exempt under CEQA Guidelines Section 15305(a), and is
therefore exempt from further environmental review under
C:EQA .
3. The factors of size and shape of the subject property
create special circumstances to justify the approval of
Setback Adjustment #88-003.
4. Approval of Setback Adjustment #88-003 will not be
detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of
the community or be detrimental to property in the
vicinity of this parcel.
FINDINGS: PLOT PLAN #88-403:
1. Plot Plan #88-403 is consistent with the La Quinta
General Plan, the approval for Tentative Tract 18915 and
the requirements of the La Quinta Municipal Code, subject
to specific conditions.
2. Plot Plan #88-403 qualifies as a categorical exemption
under CEQA Guidelines Section 15303(c), and is therefore
exempt from further environmental review.
3. :Plot Plan #88-403 is consistent with the requirements of
-the R-5 zone district, in conjunction with the approval
of Setback Adjustment #88-003.
3 -
BJ/STA:FFRPT.023
RECOMMENDATION:
Authority for setback adjustment approvals lies with the
Planning Director; however, due to the association of the
adjustment request and the Plot Plan, both are brought before
the Planning Commission for Consideration. Action on these
items should be taken separately as follows:
1. By minute motion, approve Setback Adjustment #88-003, in
accordance with the findings contained in the Staff
Report and subject to conditions; and
2. By minute motion, approve Plot Plan #88-403, in
accordance with the findings contained in the Staff
Report and subject to conditions.
Attachments: 1. Site Location Map
2. Existing Zoning
3. Plot Plan
4. Elevation
5. Setback Exhibit
- 4 -
BJ/STAFFRPT.023
�"g»'„ YYY YYYYY
III Hill
0
r
F—
i
Z
LU
O
Z
T
p
Q
U
O
.i_
U
H
F-
�
co
Co
a
W
F—
CO
W
'= « •
J
I
_ co--, Lo ix
r
QCQ_•
t _
�' ,
CM
•
Q
I
•
r A_
• w
w
j
• �
ci..•
w
LOw
w .wo•7¢
•: 2Sam
c
V
c
'C
1•
a i
M
W
kz�LO
co« �_
j
m
Q
a
E
Y
N
c
v
m
Co
O
Uco
v
N
�
� i w
���
i•w
• •T, •
w •
••0
0
0
a
co
+w
0
a
w-
N
cm0
M
cv)
11�
•
�
p
w � =
O
co
• N
W
p
1
:
1
,•
•
N
N
• ±±
o �..
'
«
®
w
• /ff�, • w
o/OD •
r«.
cc
♦
•
cr
'
�
� •
w N
r
1
1
w
o
w
cr
s
E# 1N31NHOdlla
iN3AdOTIA30ci
dd
1181HX3 NIVId 311S
1
tJ� _ vc1
O
c
N 44
WN
m
�o
J
1�
a
W 7�Y
t23
a
I
�
n
a
IN
Li
1
C
-0
O
Q
>
w
_I
�t w
Z j
w O
...E ca
= 06
U
Q F-
F- <C
Q w
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED
SETBACK. ADJUSTMENT NO. 88-003
PLOT PLAN NO. 88-403
DECEMBE,R 13, 1988
SETBACK. ADJUSTMENT #88-003
1. Development associated with the use of Setback Adjustment
#88-003 (SBA #88-003) shall be in conformance with
Exhibit "A" of Plot Plan #88-403 and these conditions,
which shall prevail in the event of any conflict(s).
Approval of SBA #88-003 shall expire in accordance with
the time limits set forth in the approval for Plot Plan
#88-403.
2. The southerly access point shall be deleted. The
landscaping plan shall be modified to incorporate
landscape and/or other materials which will minimize
views into the maintenance area. This revision shall be
subject to final approval by the Planning and Development
Department, along with the final parking and access
layout, as required by the approval for Plot Plan #88-403.
3. Development associated with the use of SBA #88-003 shall
be in conformance with all applicable conditions of
approval for Plot Plan #88-403. Any conflicts between
approval conditions, or their meaning, shall be resolved
by the Planning Director.
PLOT PLAN #88-403
Genera].
1. Plot Plan #88-403 shall be developed in conformance with
Exhibits "A" and 1°B", as contained in the Planning and
Development Department file, and as set forth in these
conditions, which shall prevail in the event of any
conflicts with the approved Exhibits.
2. Development of Plot Plan #88-403 shall be in compliance
with the approval for SBA #88-003.
3. Plot Plan #88-403 shall be used with the time limits and
constraints specified in Chapter 9.182 of the La Quinta
Municipal Code.
Parking/Grading
4. ''he parking layout shall be revised to show the deletion
of the southerly access point on the landscape and site
plans. Appropriate landscaping shall be employed in this
area, in order to screen views of the facility from
interior project areas.
- 1 -
BJ/CONAPRVL.013
5. Development of the parking area shall be in conformance
with City standards and subject to the approval of the
Planning Director and City Engineer. The plan submitted
shall show that dimensions, entrance radii, access drive
dimensions, etc., comply with the standards of Chapter
9.160 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, the .Manning
Director and City Engineer.
6. A grading plan shall be submitted, to be prepared by a
registered Civil Engineer, and subject to the approval of
the City Engineer.
7. The access drive shall be a minimum 24 feet wide.
8. Prior to issuance of any grading or other site
disturbance permit, the Applicant shall pay the required
mitigation fee for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed
Lizard, in effect, at time of payment.
Public Services
9. Fire and Life Safety systems and appliances shall be
provided in accordance with the requirements of the
Uniform Fire Code and the La Quinta Municipal Code in
effect at the time of construction.
10. A fire hydrant shall be located within 165 feet of the
building.
11. Any fueling facilities shall be subject to review and
approval by the City Fire Marshal as to location
capacity, etc., prior to issuance of any permits.
Landscaping
12. The Applicant shall obtain approval of the landscape plan
plant selection (Exhibit "B") from the Riverside County
Agricultural Commissioner's office, prior to submittal to
the Planning and Development Department.
13. 'Che Applicant shall prepare an irrigation plan to
accompany the proposed landscape plan. Both the
:Landscaping and irrigation plans shall be reviewed by the
Coachella Valley Water District and submitted to the
Planning and Development Department for final approval,
prior to building permit issuance.
14. '.rhe Applicant shall submit a lighting plan showing all
proposed lighting, including security, landscape and
other illumination, along with fixture details, prior to
building permit issuance.
- 2 -
BJ/CONAPRVL.013
15. Any contemplated trash collection areas shall be
approved, as to location and design, by the Palm Desert
Disposal Company prior to issuance of a building permit.
Trash collection area(s) shall be enclosed with a minimum
six foot high wall to match the building color scheme.
16. Future outside storage areas shall be reviewed by the
Planning and Development Department Director, who may
approve said location, subject to further conditions
where necessary.
- 3 -
BJ/CONAPRVL.013
W 1.
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DATE: DECEMBER 13, 1987
APPLICANT: RICK JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION
PROJECT: AN EXTENSION OF TIME FOR VARIANCE 487-005
AND PLOT PLAN #87-383
LOCATION: 77-836 MONTEZUMA
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT #87-082 WAS PREPARED
FOR THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE APPLICATION.
IMPACTS OF THE VARIANCE WERE ADDRESSED UNDER
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT #87-082. WITH THE
FINAL ADOPTION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
THE EXEMPTLOFROMLATHE#B7-383 PROVISIONSS OFCATEGORICALLY
ARICEQAUNDER
SECTION 15301(A).
AS NO CHANGES IN THE PROJECT ARE PROPOSED
THERE IS REASONABLE CERTAINTY THAT THE
EXTENSIONS WILL HAVE NO ADVERSE AFFECT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT AND IS THEREFORE EXEMPT FROM
ADDITIONAL REVIEW REQUIREMENTS UNDER CEQA.
BACKGROUND:
On October 13, 1987, the Planning Commission approved Plot Plan
#87-383 which involved the enclosing of an existing covered
walkway area to be used as an interior walkway/?pedestrian
corridor, subject to conditions.
On December 8, 1987, the Applicant sought a parking variance
(Variance #87-005). The Applicant proposed to add
retail/office uses instead of a public corridor. The addition
included 360 square feet for retain uses, 208 square feet for
office use and 198 square feet for public corridor. This
additional office/retail space required three additional
parking spaces with the site currently providing 12. The
Planning Commission granted the Variance subject to mitigating
conditions.
On February 2, 1988, the City Council adopted the "Village at
La Quinta" Specific Plan setting forth design and development
criteria for structures in the Village commercial area. One
key design component deserves highlighting for comparison
purposes, as follows:
- 1 -
BJ/STAFFRPT.022
The draft text of the Village Zoning Ordinance is scheduled for
continued public hearing before the City Council on December
20, 1988. At that time the Council will consider an option to
include: retail uses and personal services as a permitted
activity in the Park Subzone. Ultimate occupancy of any
additional floor space created in the proposed remodel would be
subject: to the adopted zoning regulations.
ANALYIS I S :
1. Variances may be extended for up to two additional years
from the effective date of approval. The expiration date
of the Variance is December 8, 1988.
2. The Plot Plan approval expired on October 11, 1988.
However a request has been received which stayed the
expiration date.
3. Although not provided for in the La Quinta Municipal
Code, the intent of the Variance approval Condition #2
was to allow the Plot Plan to be extended since the
Variance may be extended for two additional years.
4. Changes to the previous approval Conditions may be deemed
necessary at the present time.
5. As previously approved the remodel may be considered
inconsistent with the adopted Village Specific Plan.
6. I:n order to coordinate the expiration date of the two
requests, it would be suggested that the December 8th
date be the expiration date for both applications (if
extended).
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning Commission may take one of the following actions:
A. 1. By minute motion recommend to the City Council
approval of a one year extension of time to
December 8, 1989 for Variance #87-005 as originally
approved; and
2. Approve a 14•-month 3-day extension of time to
December 8, 1989 for Plot Plan #87-386 subject to
the original approval conditions.
B. 1. By minute motion recommend to the City Council
denial of the time extension requested for Variance
No. 87-005.
2. Deny the time extension for Plot Plan No. 87-383 as
inconsistent with the adopted Village Specific Plan.
- 3 -
BJ/STAF'FRPT.022
C. 1. Continue consideration of the extension request to
permit the Applicant the opportunity to design the
building remodel in accordance with the Specific
Plan.
Attachments: 1. Case Map
2. Extension Approval Conditions for
Variance and Plot Plan
4 -
BJ/STAFFRPT.022
ATTACHMENT #1
CASE MAP
CASE No.
VAPs IAgo
40
Rwc�r t:to
NG�-�gy-oosa'
SCALE:
tqoNE
PLANNING COMMISSION
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
OCTOBER 13, 1987
General
ATTACHMENT
*7
1. Remodel of exterior portions of the Miele Building shall confor
substantially with Exhibit A contained in the file for Plot Pla
No. 87-383, as amended by the following conditions.
2. The approved plot plan shall be used within one (1) year of the
approval date, otherwise it shall become null and void and of n
effect whatsoever.
Parking and Refuse Enclosure
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the
Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City
Engineer/Public Works Director and the Planning and Development
Department the following improvement plans:
a. Slurry seal over all paved areas of the site.
b. Striping plan for a minimum of 12 off-street parking spacei
including handicapped parking spaces.
C. Trash enclosure plan - compliance with the City's Refuse
Enclosure Design Guidelines.
Signs
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall
submit for review and approval by the Planning and Development
Department a sign program to include the main Plaza and tenant
directory signage. Signage beyond this program which includes
exterior tenant signs will be referred to the Planning Commissio
for review and approval.
Structural Design
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a revised window detail
for the building front and sides shall be submitted to the
Planning and Development Department for review and approval. Thi
window surfaces shall be recessed to the rear of the columns.
6. The exterior facade shall be continuously maintained and all
material kept in good repair, including the canopy awnings.
MR,/CONAPRVL.012 1
r� W W V ATTACHMENT #
CONDITIONS
VAR 87-005
DECEMBER 8,
OF APPROVAL
1987
EXHIBIT A
1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Property
Owner must either provide: a) 15 permanent parking spaces
as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code; or, b) pay a
cash mitigation payment in the amount -per -space as
determined by the Planning and Development and Public
Works Departments, plus an inflation factor which is to be
calculated at the time of agreement execution, for the
construction of three permanent paved parking spaces and
enter into an irrevocable offer to participate in any
future parking improvement district that may be formed. A
;payment schedule may be established, provided the period
does not exceed four years, and except that if an
assessment/benefit or other parking improvement district
is created the obligation of the property owner shall
become due and payable under the terms of said district or
other parking improvement entity.
The money collected may be released to a City -created
parking district, or, the money collected may be used in
the furtherance of general parking improvements in the
'Village Commercial area, at the option of the City; and,
further, any financial obligation issued against said
property will be reduced accordingly to the amount of
,mitigation money paid at the time.
2. This Variance approval must be used within one year after
the date of approval by the La Quinta Planning Commission,
unless approved for an extension as provided in the La
Quinta Municipal Code. No extension shall be granted
unless Plot Plan 87-383 is also extended. The term "use"
shall mean the beginning of substantial construction of
the addition, which construction must thereafter be
diligently pursued to completion.
3. Any offsite parking contemplated in satisfaction of
Condition 1, above, shall secure City approval through the
plot plan review process.
MR/CONAPRVI, . 015
ATTACHMENT #3
EXHIBIT H REDUCTION
ATTACHMENT #3
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
BACKGROUND:
MEMORANDUM
HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DECEMBER 13, 1988
FENCES IN THE LA QUINTA COVE AREA
The Planning and Development Department has received a letter
from the La Quinta Cove Association President, Ann Young
regarding fences in the Cove area. The concern noted relates
to construction material, location, and height of fencing.
ANALYSIS:
Section 9.42.070 Site Design Standards of the La Quinta
Municipal Code, identifies the fencing requirements within the
Special. Residential (SR) Zone (the "Cove" area is zoned SR).
F. Fencing
1. Rear and sideyards shall be completely
enclosed and screened by view obscuring
fencing, walls, vegetation -planted screens,
or a combination thereof.
2. Fences, walls, and vegetation screen shall
generally conform with the design standards
and typical layouts contained in the Manual
for Architectural Standards.
3. Vegetation screens must consist of planting
materials of a suitable type, size and
spacing so as to provide a view obscuring
barrier within a reasonable time of planting
as set forth in the Landscape Plant approval
and shall be watered by automatic irrigation
system. The planting plan shall be approved
by the Planning and Development Department.
4. All walls and fences shall be continuously
maintained in good repair, and vegetation
screens shall be continuously maintained in a
healthy and viable condition."
BJ/MEMOJH.033
The Manual for Architectural Standards for single family houses
(Page 6), indicates that fences and walls can be a maximum of
six feet in height adjacent to all property lines except in the
corner cutback area on corner lots where the maximum height is
42 inches above the crown of the street. The illustration on
page 6 (attached), identifies the minimum fencing required.
ANALYSIS:
1. Some property owners on corner lots have fenced their
front sideyard or that side parallel with the east/west
street excluding the corner cutoff and the portion of
their front yard parallel with the north/south streets.
This then has in essence completely screened their single
family home.
2. The current ordinance does not provide for types of
construction materials to be used in constructing a fence
except for chain link fences which must have a live
vegetative screen material planted in conjunction with
the fence.
PLANNING COMMISSION OPTIONS:
The Planning Commission, as a matter of policy, may recommend
that the ordinance be amended to include a type of minimum
material to be used, i.e., block wall, masonry wall, stucco
wall, or cedar fencing. The options are open.
In addition, the Commission may limit when wooden fences may be
used, for example, permitted on interior lot lines or rear lot
lines not fronting adjacent to public streets. This then would
require some permanent type of fence, i.e., masonry wall or
stucco wall to be constructed along street frontages. This may
increase the cost of housing, but will enhance the aesthetics
of the Cove. The Planning and Development Department seeks
direction in this matter from the Commission.
BJ/MEMOJH.033
The La Quinta Cove Association
P.O. Box 1384
La Quinta, CA 92253
Nov. 22, 1988
Mr. Murrel Crump
La Quinta City Hall
Calle Estado
La Quinta, Ca. 92253
Re: Fences in La Quinta Cove
Dear Mr. Crump:
As per our conversation on November 15th, I ask yeet you, on behalf
of the La Quinta Cove Association Board of Directors, to kindly look
into the matter of laying the ground work towards the establishment of
ordinances controlling the type and placement of fences around private
homes in the La Quinta Cove area.
At present any material can be used and built around a home -- front - back -
side -- any wood, tree trunks, orange crates, cement, or whatever. New
rouses are being built with six foot high ugly fences on the property line
in t1ae front, and practically every street in La Quinta Cove is quickly
becoming a back yard.
As in other cities where front yard fences are permitted, ours in La Quinta
should also be ornamental and of quality material to maintain beauty in the
area.
In addition the wooden fences being allowed in the front of new homes will
shortly deteriorate and blow over in our hot, dry, windy climate, as is
already indicated by those which were erected as recently as two months
ago and have already faded.
Ile fail to understand how our city can stand by and permit ugliness to
run amok here. Between new homes being built towering above older homes
without consideration to either esthetics or the welfare of our older
home owners, and now creating back yards in the front on any street, this
area. is going deeper and deeper into a state of unsightliness.
We therefore prevail upon you, in view of the fact that this "hodge podge"
is growing daily, to address this matter as quickly as possible so that
the remainder of our area is salvaged and maintained with some semblance
of thoughtful esthetics.
Sincerely yours,
THE LA,QUINTA COVE ,ASSOCIATION
Ann Young, Pres.
cc: Mayor & City Council Members
Ron Keidrowski. Citir Nor.
9.42.080
E. Lighting. A1.1 exterior lighting shall be located
and directed so as not to shine directly on adjacent prop-
erties or otherwise create a nuisance.
F. Fencing.
1. Rear and side yards shall be completely en-
closed and screened by view -obscuring fencing, walls, vege-
tation -planted screens, or combination thereof.
2. Fences, walls, and vegetation screens shall
generally conform with the design standards and typical lay-
outs contained within the Manual on Architectural Standards.
3. Vegetation screens must consist of planting
materials of a suitable type, size and spacing, so as to
provide a view -obscuring barrier within a reasonable time of
planting as set forth in the landscape plan approval, and
shall be watered by an automatic irrigation system. The
planting plan shall be approved by the community development
department.
4. All walls and fences shall be continuously
maintained in good repair, and vegetation screens shall be
continuously maintained in a healthy and viable condition.
(Ord. 95 §1(part), 1986: Ord. 5 §1(part), 1982: county
Ordinance 348 (part))
9 42 080 Building design standards. All single-family
residential uses shall be determined to be in substantial
compliance with building standards set forth in the Manual
on Architectural Standards as adopted by the Planning Com-
mission unless an adjustment is approved pursuant- to Section
9.42.110B.
A. Manual on Architectural Standards. The planning
commission shall, by resolution, adopt a Manual on Architec-
tural Standards to be used as a guideline in reviewing ar-
chitectural style, exterior building materials, colors, and
similar features.
B. Architectural Variety. When houses using similar
architectural styles are located with two hundred fifty feet
of each other, exterior building elevations shall make pro-
vision for architectural variety by using different colors,
styles, roof treatments, window treatments, garage door
treatments, and similar methods.
C. Roof Material. Except for flat roof designs, roof
material shall be limited to clay and/or concrete tile.
D. Adjustment. The planning commission may approve an
adjustment to a precise plan allowing use of architectural
styles, exterior building materials, colors, and similar
features not set forth in the adopted manual when the plan-
ning commission determines that the adjustment will be com-
patible with the surrounding neighborhood. (Ord. 95 §1
(part), 1986: Ord. 5 §1(part), 1982: county Ordinance 348
(part))
186-43 (La Quinta 6/87)
SITE REQUIREMENTS
FENCING
REQUIREMENTS
ZEAR AND SIDE YARDS MUST BE COMPLETELY ENCLOSED AND
;CREENED BY A MINIMUM FIVE (5) FOOT HIGH, VIEW-
ZSCURING FENCE, WALL, VEGETATION SCREEN, OR A
AMBINATION OF THESE.
cRIMETER CHAIN -LINK FENCING IS PROHIBITED UNLESS
IT IS USED PRIMARILY FOR SUPPORT AS A PART OF A
/EGETATION SCREEN.
FHE REQUIRED VEGETATION SCREENS MUST CONSIST OF
'LANTS OF A SUITABLE TYPE, SIZE AND SPACING, SO AS
10 PROVIDE A VIEW -OBSCURING BARRIER WITHIN A
2EASONABLE TIME OF PLANTING, AS SET FORTH IN THE
"SCAPE PLAN APPROVAL, THE SCREEN MUST BE
4ATERED BY AN AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM.
REQUIRED FENCING
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
------------�
FENCES AND WALLS CAN BE A MAXIMUM OF SI
(6) FEET HIGH ADJACENT TO ALL THE
PROPERTY LINES, EXCEPT IN THE CORNER CU
BACK AREA ON CORNER LOTS WHERE THE MAXI
HEIGHT IS IQ INCHES ABOVE THE CROWN OF
STREET.
ALL FENCES AND WALLS MUST BE MAINTAINED
GOOD REPAIR, AND ALL VEGETATION SCREENS
MUST BE CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAINED IN A
HEALTHY AND VIABLE CONDITION.
CORNER CUTBACK AREA
0