Loading...
2007 01 09 PC ~ City of La ~inta Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-Quinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California JANUARY 9, 2007 7:00 P,M. * *NOTE* * ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11 :00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2007-001 Beginning Minute Motion 2007-001 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR P:\CAROLYN\planning Com\PC AGENDA. doc PUBLIC HEARINGS: For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public hearing. A. Item................... PUBLIC HEARING ON PROPOSED STREET VACATION OF A PORTION OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT LOCATED WITHIN DESERT CLUB TRACT UNIT 4. Applicant............. Nispero Properties Location.............. Main Street North of Avenida La Fonda Request .............. Adopt a Resolution to Vacate a Portion of Public Utility Easement Located Within Desert Club Tract Unit 4. Action................. Request to continue to January 23,2007 B. Item.................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-877 Applicant............. Adobe Holdings, Inc. Location.............. Within Tract 31249; on the South Side of Avenue 58, :!: 1/2 Mile West of Madison Street Request............... Consideration of Architectural and Landscaping Plans for Four Prototypical Residential Plans and Common Areas for the Village at Coral Mountain (TT 31249). Action ................ Resolution 2007-_ BUSINESS ITEM: A. Item.................... IMAGE CORRIDOR DETERMINATION Applicant ............ City of La Quinta Location ............. City-wide Request ............. Discussion and Determination on Applicability of Image Corridor Development Standards in the Special Purpose Districts. Action ........;....... Provide staff with direction. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None P:\CAROLYN\planning Com\PC AGENDA. doc II. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Review of City Council meeting of December 19, 2006. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on January 23, 2007, at 7:00 p.m. DECLARATION OF POSTING Carolyn Walker, Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing lenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, January 9, 2007, 3S posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the IlIetin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, on Friday, January 5, 2007. ~TED: January 5, 2007 (!~'U /JuiVv ~ROL YN ~LKER, Secretary ty of La Quinta, California P:\CAROLYN\planning Com\PC AGENDA.doc PH#A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JANUARY 9, 2007 CASE NO.: STREET VACATION 2006-043 REQUEST: REPORT OF FINDING UNDER CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65402 THAT THE PROPOSED VACATION OF A PORTION OF PUBLIC UTILITY EASEMENT WITHIN DESERT CLUB TRACT, UNIT 41S CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN LOCATION: MAIN STREET NORTH OF AVENIDA LA FONDA APPLICANT: NISPERO PROPERTIES, INC. REQUEST FOR CONTINUANCE: The Public Works Department requests continuance of Case No. Street Vacation 2006-043 to the next Planning Commission Meeting scheduled for January 23,2007. The applicant has not provided labels which are required in order to provide sufficient time for notification of surrounding property owners per LQMC 9.200.110. Prepared by: ;3~~ BRIAN CHING, Associate Engineer Submitted b BAC/bc P:\Reports - PC\2007\1-9-07\$treet Vacation\StaffReport SV 2006-043 continuation.doc DATE: CASE NUMBER: APPLICANT: ARCHITECT: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: REQUEST: LOCATION: GENERAL PLAN: ZONING: ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: SOUTH: EAST: WEST: PH#B PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT JANUARY 9, 2006 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-877 ADOBE HOLDINGS, INC. SOUTH COAST ARCHITECTS HERMANN & ASSOCIATES RESIDENTIAL TRACT DEVELOPMENT REVIEW OF FOUR PROTOTYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PLANS AND COMMON AREAS FOR THE VILLAGE AT CORAL MOUNTAIN WITHIN THE VILLAGE AT CORAL MOUNTAIN (TRACT 31249), ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF AVENUE 58, :l: 1/2 MILE WEST OF MADISON STREET LDR - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL RL - LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-475, FOR TTM 31249, WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 16, 2003 (RESOLUTION 2003-93). NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS EXIST WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE PREPARATION OF ANY SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION. AVENUE 58; STONE CREEK RANCH (TR 30487) ANDALUSIA (TR 31681) VACANT, UNENTITLED LAND COACHELLA VALLEY RECREATION & PARK DISTRICT BACKGROUND Site Background The Village at Coral Mountain (TR 31249) consists of two parcels, which together comprise of an area of approximately 33 acres (Attachment 1). The subdivision map was approved by the City Council on September 16, 2003. A Site Development Permit (SDP 2004-820) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 25, 2005. The Site Development Permit was valid for one year following the approval, and subsequently expired on January 25, 2006. The applicant is now resubmitting the same, previously-approved prototypical plans for four unit types (with some minor changes in architecture and floor plans), new common area concept landscape plans, and detailed entry gate plans. To date, the applicant has obtained a Rough Grading Permit with the Public Works Department and has begun grading the project site. Project Background The applicant has submitted prototypical plans for four unit types and common area landscaping. Units: Each unit plan is designed with three elevation treatments and twelve color and material schemes {Attachment 2). The unit plans utilize a Spanish Vernacular or Mediterranean style of architecture and vary in size from 3,040 to 4,060 square feet in area. Each unit has an optional 467 square foot detached pool house in the rear yard. All units have cedar wood garage doors, clay S-tile roofing, and smooth plaster stucco finish. Plan One and Plan Two are single-story, while Plan Three and Plan Four will be two-story units. Each unit has the following characteristics: Plan One: 3,040 square feet 2 BR with attached casita 2-car garage (1-car side-entry compact garage) Plan Two: 3,230 square feet 3 BR with aftached casita 2-car garage (1-car side-entry compact garage) Plan Three: 3,835 square feet 3 BR with optional den/office Second story casita and sky deck 2-car garage (one tandem space) Plan Four: 4,060 square feet 3 BR with upstairs bonus room and sky deck Optional 4th BR upstairs 3-car garage (1-car side-entry) Preliminary typical front yard landscaping plans have been submitted for each of the four unit types (Attachment 3). Typical front yard landscaping plans include a minimum of two to four trees, a variety of shrubs, and turf. Plant materials identified appear to primarily. be low water users with plants typically used in the desert. Common Area: The common area plans include one large common area, the Avenue 58 perimeter, and two entrances, one primary and one secondary, along Avenue 58 (Attachment 4). The large common area is comprised of dry creek areas surrounded by desert accents, decomposed granite walking paths and bridges, numerous benches and trash receptacles, and a lake with a rock crop waterfall. Both the dry creek area and the desert accent area consist of 3"-6" river cobble with decomposed granite planters. The plant material includes those used in the production home front yards along with a few additional plants. , The perimeter landscaping along Avenue 58 includes a 6-foot high theme wall, a landscape buffer wide enough to accommodate Mexican Fan Palms and additional shrubbery, an equestrian/multi-use trail, and a smaller landscape buffer between the trail and Avenue 58 (Attachment 5). The equestrian trail material consists of decomposed granite, and the city-standard equestrian PVC railing runs adjacent to the trail. The theme wall runs along the perimeter of the project, as well as in the entrance areas, and consists of a white stucco finish with matching pilasters and caps. The primary vehicular entrance on Avenue 58 consists of a roadway flanked on both sides by lakes, both with rock crop waterfalls, the main entry gates, and an unmanned guardhouse (Attachment 6). The primary entry gates are wrought iron, with dark brown, simulated distressed wood. The unmanned guardhouse is approximately 20 feet in height, and consists of two towers, a porte cochere, and a fountain. The guardhouse is constructed of brick veneer and stucco, and has 2-piece clay tile roofing. The guardhouse is non-functional and serves only an aesthetic purpose, as the automatic gate is the main entry into the project. The gates at the secondary entrance on Avenue 58 are constructed of wrought iron. ALRC Action On December 14, 2006, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed these architectural and common area landscaping plans, discussed alternative plant types, locations of the 2-story units related to varying streetscapes, equestrian/multi-use trail design, and unanimously recommended approval of the Site Development Permit. ALRC discussed alternative plant types and ultimately recommended replacing the proposed Chilean Mesquite, Bottle, and California Pepper trees due to. maintenance issues. The possible locations of the 2-story units were discussed and ALRC expressed concern regarding proximity of the 2-story units to neighboring residential developments. It was recommended that staff work with the applicant to diversify the placement of the 2-story units, which would also result in a varying streetscape. The proposed equestrian/multi-use trail on Avenue 58 was also discussed, and ALRC agreed with staff's recommendation that the trail be placed closer to the perimeter wall rather than Avenue 58 in order to create a better trail design. ANALYSIS Units: Staff finds that the overall architectural style and design of the proposed units to be acceptable. The detached pool house in the rear yards are architecturally compatible to the main house, and will not to be used as a separate residence. The garage doors are proposed to be cedar. wood. Wooden garage doors are typically discouraged due to maintenance issues, but these proposed doors are heavily framed and do not present the same issues. In Plan 1 and Plan 2, the independent third-car garage space does not meet the minimum 10-foot x 20-foot interior clear wall separation as required by LQMC Section 9.150.080. For single-family detached homes, two garage parking spaces are required, which the applicant has provided. Subsequently, the third garage space shall be used as a compact garage. Plan 3 provides a "tandem" third-car space ahead of one of the two-car garage stalls, which does not meet the zoning code requirements as a garage space. While the code does not require three-car garages, the plans should not indicate a third car space, and staff has conditioned that reference on the plans be deleted. Section 9.60.310 of the LQMC states that a dwelling located next to a project or tract boundary shall be limited to one story if an existing one story dwelling is within fifty feet of the common property line. If no existing dwelling exists or if there is vacant land, there is no restriction on the placement of two-story units. Staff is recommending that Planning Commission discuss the possible distribution of one and two-story units on all lots adjacent to the eastern and southern project boundaries because adjacent to the eastern boundary of the project is vacant, unentitled land, and adjacent to the southern boundary is the Andalusia residential development, with no unit layout at this time. Adjacent to the western boundary is parkland, and staff does not feel that the same requirement is needed. The applicant has also been reminded of an existing tract condition (TR 31279 Condition #81) that limits building heights to one-story/22 feet for a distance into the site of 150 feet from the Avenue 58 ultimate right-of-way line. Common Area: The architecture and layout of the entry guardhouse and surrounding water features are also acceptable, and comply with Zoning Code requirements. However, staff recommends that an additional turnaround be added closer to the primary entrance gates so that vehicles that cannot gain entry do not have to back up the length of the main driveway to get to the existing turnaround at the simulated bridge. Additionally, due to the amount 'of water being proposed in the common areas, staff recommends that Planning Commission discuss the use of the various water features and any viable alternatives. The common area concept is similar to that employed in design of the Stone Creek project, which is located directly across Avenue 58 from this tract. The landscaping plans call for Chilean Mesquite and Bottle trees, which staff has discouraged use of in past projects. Also, the landscape palette shows the use of California Peppers, which staff has had past concerns related to wind damage and other related maintenance issues. In general, the landscape palettes presented are acceptable. The submitted landscape plan details are not to scale, so the applicant will be required to submit to-scale plans for final review, and also to present water calculations to illustrate compliance with LQMC Chapter 8.13. Staff also recommends that the equestrian/multi-use trail along Avenue 58 be redesigned with the smaller landscaped buffer relocated to be adjacent to the perimeter theme wall, the larger landscaped buffer adjacent to the street, and the trail in between. This minimizes any impact that vehicles traveling on Avenue 58 may have on users of the trail. Residential Tract Development Review Requirements Each prototype plan and elevation meets the standards ,as specified by LQMC Section 9.60.330.D. The landscaping as conditioned is required to be consistent with the requirements specified in LQMC Section 9.60.330.E. Public Notice This project was advertised in The Desert Sun newspaper on December 29, 2006, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. To date, no comments have been received from adjacent property owners. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. FINDINGS As required by LQMC Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits), findings to approve Site Development Permit 2006-877 can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006- ,approving Site Development Permit 2006-877, subject to Findings and Conditions. 1. Location Map 2. Unit/Floor Plans 3. Typical Front Yard Landscaping Plans 4. Conceptual Common Area Landscape Plan 5. Conceptual Common Area Elevations. 6. Unmanned Guardhouse Detail ---~- SIUA STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JANUARY 9, 2007 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA OUINTA REQUEST: DISCUSSION AND DETERMINATION ON APPLICABILITY OF IMAGE CORRIDOR DEVELOPMENT .ST ANDARDS IN THE .SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS BACKGROUND: The La Ouinta General Plan defines and identifies the locations of primary, secondary and. agrarian image corridors. Policy language within the General Plan states that "standards for all Image Corridors shall be maintained in the Development Code." Title 9 of the La Ouinta Municipal Code identifies such criteria for all zoning districts except for the special purpose districts (Parks and Recreation, Golf Course, Open Space, Floodplain, Hillside Conservation Overlay, Sexually Oriented Business Overlay, and Equestrian Overlay). A recent development proposal to reconstruct a clubhouse in the Golf Course special purpose district revealed that this zoning district does not identify any image corridor development standards. In an effort to maintain consistency and verify that the absence of these standards was not an oversight when originally created, staff elected to have this matter brought before the Planning Commission. ANALYSIS: The image corridor development standards listed for all zoning districts other than the special purpose districts consistently identify a maximum structure height of 22 feet within 150 feet of such a designated corridor. This essentially limits all buildings to single story structures. With exception to the special purpose overlay districts, most of the structures that would likely be erected in the special purpose districts would either be less than 22 feet in height or greater than 150 feet from an image corridor. However, the Golf Course District could see golf clubhouses and maintenance facilities proposed within this setback area that could exceed 22 feet in height, though the predominate landscape would be the golf course with a limited need for any structures. Typically, golf clubhouses are not located near image corridor designated streets and are not impacted by the image corridor development standards. Including the image corridor development standards in the special purpose districts would provide consistency with the other residential and non-residential zoning districts. However, there is limited potential for structures to be constructed within the special purpose districts that would exceed the 22-foot maximum height image corridor provision. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission consider the following options and provide appropriate direction to staff: 1. Direct staff to prepare a Zoning Text Amendment to establish the image corridor standards for the special purpose districts, or .. 2. Provide alternative direction as deemed necessary, or 3. Take no action. Attachments: LOMC Chapter 9.130 - Special Purpose Development Standards -..