Loading...
1987 11 10 PCA G E N D A 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 November 10, 1987 - 7:00 p.m. I. CALL TO ORDER Flag Salute II. ROLL CALL III. HEARINGS A. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 87-009, VILLAGE AT LA QUINTA APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA LOCATION: GENERALLY BOUNDED BY DESERT CLUB TO THE EAST, EISENHOWER TO THE WEST, REALIGNMENT OF AVENUE 52 TO THE SOUTH AND THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY BEING APPROXIMATELY 750 FEET NORTH OF CALLE TAMPICO. PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT GUIDE TO THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL AREA FOR REGULATION OF LAND USES, LANDSCAPE, CIRCULATION, BUILDING DESIGN, PUBLIC PARKING, AND OTHER PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS. 1. Staff Report 2. Public Comment 3. Commission Discussion 4. Hearing Closed 5. Motion for Commission Action 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 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. MR/WS19.DOC 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 regular Planning Commission meeting of October 27, 1987. VI. BUSINESS A. Item: General Plan policy direction on averaging residential densities involving more than one land use category. Applicant: City of La Quinta Location: City -Wide '.a 1. Staff Report 2. Commission Discussion 3. Motion for Commission Action Item: Urgency Ordinance establishing Planning Commission review for multi -family projects Applicant: City of La Quinta Location: City -Wide Project: Establishes the Planning Commission as the review authority for multi -family projects. 1. Staff Report 2. Commission Discussion 3. Motion for Commission Action Commission Agenda Items: Identification of future discussion items VII. OTHER - None VIII. ADJOURNMENT - ------------------------------------------------- ITEMS FOR NOVEMBER 9, 1987, 3:00 P.M. STUDY SESSION *** DISCUSSION ONLY *** 1. Monroe Building - Plot Plan 87-380, review of site and landscape plans 2. All agenda items MR/WS19.DOC MEMORANDUM CITY OF LA OUINTA vi 13 TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 1987 SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW PROCESS FOR MULTI -FAMILY PROJECTS BACKGROUND The recent concern of citizens in the Westward Ho/Indian Springs area, as well as that of the Planning Commission, relative to the proposed 472-unit La Quinta Dunes apartment project, has prompted the Commission to request Planning Staff to review the current authority for processing and approval of residential projects. At present, the only major development approval function of the zoning and subdivision ordinances which is not required to go before the Planning Commission at either the public hearing, business or consent calendar level is the residential plot plan. The Planning Director has the sole approval authority on these cases, holding a Director's Hearing when the proposal requires public hearing, pursuant to Chapter 9.180 of the La Quinta Municipal Code governing plot plans. URGENCY ORDINANCE As was the case concerning commercial plot plans, an urgency ordinance has been drafted, in accordance wtih California Government Code Section 65858, for the Commission's review. Due to the fact that some smaller projects may not necessitate Planning Commission review, a threshold number could be.incorporated into the ordinance as provided for in the draft. In accordance with California Government Code Section 65858, an urgency ordinance is effective immediately upon its adoption by City Council for 45 days, after which time it expires unless extended by City Council. This extension must be accomplished via a noticed public hearing and, upon its adoption, is effective for 10 months and 15 days. Two additional one-year extensions are permitted after this. mr/wsl2.doc 1 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION Should the Commission determine that an urgency ordinance is appropriate and necessary, it may, by Minute Motion, recommend to the City Council adoption of the draft provided in the attachment. Attachment: Draft Urgency Ordinance mr/wsl2.doc 2 0 0 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AS AN URGENCY MEASURE, CERTAIN REGULATIONS CHANGING THE APPROVAL PROCEDURE FOR CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS WHICH MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH A CONTEMPLATED ZONING PROPOSAL, SAID REGULATIONS TO BE IN EFFECT ON AN INTERIM STUDY BASIS PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65858. The City Council of the City of La Quinta does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. From and after the effective date of this ordinance, and for the period during which this ordinance remains in effect, and notwithstanding any other ordinance, resolution or regulation of the City to the contrary, no officer, employee or department admisistering City business shall accept or process any application for a building permit for certain residential development projects, as defined within this ordinance, regardless of zoning district, unless and until the Planning Commission has granted a plot plan approval for such residential development project, utilizing in general the procedures and criteria set forth in Chapter 9.180 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. SECTION 2. DEFINITIONS. For the purposes of this ordinance, the following words or phrases shall have the following definitions: A. "Certain Residential Development Projects" means any development intended primarily for multiple -family residential occupancy, including, but not limited to, apartments, statutory and airspace condominium projects, congregate care facilities, group living quarters, etc., in which the total number of proposed or projected units (1) exceeds 50, 100, 200; (2) is 200, 250, 300 or more. SECTION 3. EXCEPTIONS. Section 1 of this ordinance shall not apply to: (a) Time extension requests for any previously approved residential development project. SECTION 4. URGENCY. This ordinance is adopted as an urgency measure pursuant to the authority of Section 65858 of the Government Code of the State of California, for the immediate preservation and protection of the public safety, health and welfare, and shall take effect immediately upon its adoption and passage by at least four - fifths vote of the City Council. The City Council finds and determines that there is a current threat to the public health, MR/WS1I.DOC safety and welfare in that the City of La Quinta has adopted a new General Plan and because a number of residential development proposals are expected in the immediate future, the public interest now requires a systematic review and comprehensive analysis of ordinances designed to implement that plan. It is contemplated that from such studies, which are soon to be conducted by the City, there will emerge new zoning regulations and development standards for residential development projects, and during the interim period while this can be accomplished, it is essential that controls imposed by this ordinance be maintained, so that residential uses which would otherwise be established and developed during the interim period will not thereafter be in conflict with the contemplated zoning regulations and development standards. SECTION 5. EFFECTIVE PERIOD OF ORDINANCE. This ordinance shall remain in effect for a 45-day period, pursuant to Section 65858 of the Government Code of the State of California, unless sooner repealed or otherwise modified, and subject to any extension of the effective period duly enacted pursuant to and in accordance with said Section 65858. SECTION 6. POSTING. The City Clerk shall, within 15 day after the passage of this ordinance, cause it to be posted in at least the three public places designated by Resolution of the City Council; shall certify as to the adopting and posting of this ordinance; and shall cause this ordinance and its certification, together with proof of posting, to be entered in the Book of Ordinances of this City. APPROVED and ADOPTED by the La Quinta City Council at a regular meeting held this day of 1987, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: MAYOR ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: CITY MANAGER/CLERK CITY ATTORNEY MR/WS1I.DOC 2 ® � v MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A special meeting of the City Council and a regular meeting of the Planning Commission held at the La Quinta Community Center 77-861 Avenida Montezuma, La Quinta, California October 27, 1987 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:30 p.m. A. The meeting was called to order at 7:30 p.m. by Mayor Hoyle. The Flag Salute was led by Mayor Hoyle. II. ROLL CALL IV. A. Present: Council Members Bohnenberger, Pena, Cox, Sniff, and Mayor Hoyle; Planning Commissioners Steding, Bund, Zelles, Moran, and Chairman Walling. B. Also Present: City Clerk Saundra Juhola, Planning Director Murrel Crump, and Principal Planner Jerry Herman. it Mayor Hoyle indicated that this is a general information presentation and not a public hearing, and then introduced Planning Director Murrel Crump. B. Mr. Crump introduced Susan Fox, a principal in the firm of Smith, Peroni & Fox. Ms. Fox presented background on the plan, reviewed illustrations and the text of the document. A slide presentation followed. C. Mayor Hoyle thanked the general public for attending and Susan Fox for the fine presentation. ADJOURNMENT OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEETING A. Moved by Council Member Sniff, seconded by Council Member Pena, to adjourn to the next regular meeting of November 3, 1987. Unanimously adopted. B. The special meeting of the La Quinta City Council held Tuesday, October 27, 1987, was adjourned at 9:28 p.m. at the La Quinta Community Center, 77-861 Avenida Montezuma, La Quinta, California. MR/WS14.MIN I V. 1IAO VII VIII. -- CONTINUATION OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING -- HEARINGS - None PUBLIC COMMENT - None CONSENT CALENDAR Motion was made by Commissioner Moran, seconded by Commissioner Bund to approve the Planning Commission minutes of August 25, 1987, and October 13, 1987. Commissioner Steding abstained from voting on the August 25th minutes. The minutes were approved as presented. BUSINESS Chairman Walling introduced the business item as follows: A. A request from the City Council to evaluate the appropriateness of the High Density land use designation for a 32-acre site located southwest of the intersection of Dune Palms Road and Westward Ho Drive. The Commission is to consider such items as: access road system, proximity to shopping, surrounding development proposals; and to initiate any General Plan Amendment deemed necessary. 1. Principal Planner Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. Chairman Walling opened the matter for public comments. The following individuals presented information/comments: Lester Larson - questioned the need for all of the High Density Residential designated property; opposed. Bob Krouse - compatible project and should be approved. Marion Ellson - questioned the High Density Residential property as being an adequate buffer, Mixed Commercial has adequate provisions for High Density development, will require more City services, don't have economic base to support, agreement to annexation was for Low Density Residential land uses in area, more traffic. Betty Myll - the wash is adequate buffer, don't need High Density. wally Reynolds - agreement to annexation was for Low Density Residential in area, 12 units per acre is okay. Cliff Myll - opposes High Density, not needed. Tom Thornburgh - this High Density area does not affect the Westward Ho area, gave history of how property was designated. Anna Hassel - identified the following development standards for MR/WS14.MIN 3 IX. 441 the project: 400-foot setback along Dune Palms Road, units along street frontage one-story, 100- 150-foot setback along Westward Ho Drive, walled development, rents $600 - $700 per month, landscape along walls. Martin Cameron, attorney for Ms. Hassel, - proposed zoning conforms with General Plan. Bob Lotito, engineer for project, - power lines along west side of Dune Palms to be put underground, project on sewer and water, all- weather crossing over channel, improve City streets, pay portion of traffic signal at Westward Ho and Dune Palms Road, spend about $1-1/2 million on improvements, project cost about $15 million. 3. Chairman Walling closed the public comment portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Planning Commission discussion. Each of the four major points were individually reviewed by the Commission members. 4. A motion was made by Commissioner Zelles, seconded by Commissioner Moran, to recommend to the City Council that the existing High Density Residential land use allocation for this area remain in the General Plan. Commissioner Steding voted no, with all other Commissioners voting yes. For the benefit of the public and Commissioners, Planning Director Crump indicated that review of any project for the site would be deferred to the Commission. Commission Agenda Items: request preparation of an emergency ordinance, for Commission review at the next meeting, on review of apartment projects by Planning Commission. OTHER - None ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner Moran and seconded by Commissioner Zelles to adjourn to a regular meeting on November 10, 1987, 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 11:10 p.m., October 27, 1987. MR/WS14.MIN 3 ® 0 MEMORANDUM CITY OF LA OUINTA UI A TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 1987 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN POLICY DIRECTION - AVERAGING RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES WITHIN PROJECTS INVOLVING MORE THAN ONE LAND USE CATEGORY (COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT). BACKGROUND During a General Plan Scoping Series on September 9, 1986, the Planning Commission reviewed an application by J.C.C. Enterprises to average nine dwellings per acre over 251.5 acres designated with Low, Medium, and High Density Residential General Plan land use categories (refer to Exhibit A). The Commission, during the scoping meeting, determined to evaluate the implications of this project relative to the broader General Plan subject of establishing a policy regarding dwelling unit density averaging among differing residential land use categories. The first issue concerns whether land should be allowed to be assembled into a single development project, consisting of properties within (for example) the low, medium and high density residential land use categories; and, rather than designing the project to have a low density product (2-4 dwelling units per acre) or a medium density component (4-8 dwelling units per acre), or devoting the appropriately designated area to high density (8-16 dwelling units per acre), to arrive at a combined unit count which does not exceed the maximum number allowed within each land use category, but which has a hybrid average density of (for example) nine units per acre. The argument for this approach is that within a given area the total number of dwelling units to be build would not exceed the cumulative total otherwise allowed by the General Plan. The flaw to this argument is that it defeats the ability of the City to precisely establish relationships among land uses and arrange decreasing orders of residential densities. So, where the City may want to structure in its General Plan a low density residential area (2-4 dwelling units per acre) next to a very low density area (0-2 dwelling units per acre), in the preceding example a nine dwelling unit per acre project would be allowed to abut a two unit per acre development. MR/WS10.doc The other importance of density ranges are that they invoke a certain range of dwelling types, lifestyles and tenure of occupants. There may be a situation where it is believed to be inappropriate to have conventional single-family detached dwellings next to, say, a heavy commercial use, where it may be the desire of the City to provide the density range for apartments. If the J.C.C. Enterprises proposal were to be followed, the City should decide the maximum number of dwelling units it will allow in the City and do away with all residential land use category distinctions. There is one other development situation which should not be confused with the above discussion. Within a given residential land use designation, it is an acceptable practice to design a project (for this example we will use high density residential, 8-16 dwelling units per acre) which has as its dwelling product components duplexes (which average around 5-6 dwelling units per acre) and apartments (at 10-16 dwelling units per acre). The relationships between product types and their compatibility is established internal to the project; an ability which does not present itself when the issue concerns different (or multiple) property owners and abutting land development projects. Therefore, to compare the just -described practice to the merging of land use designations would be a comparision of oranges to apples. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Commission determine that averaging of densities among differing land use categories is inconsistent with the purposes and intent of the City General Plan; and, to instruct Staff to communicate this finding to prospective development applicants. The effect of this action would cause J.C.C. Enterprises to seek a General Plan Amendment to combine lands with different designations into one land use category whose density range allowed their contemplated project density. The action of the Commission may be taken by minute motion. MR/WS10.doc 2 z-%n1n1T "A" Owners: TTP Ltd., 119 Ltd., 1925 Century Park East. Suite 650, Los Angeles, CA. 90067 Applicant: JCC Enterprises, Inc., 22330 Hawthorne Blvd. Suite 212, Torrence, CA 90505 PROPOSAL North Phase: Top 70 acres - 276 units within the Low Density Residential (2-4 dwellings per acre) General Plan Land Use Category. Project proposes 3.94 dwellings per acre in this area. Bottom 49 acres - 394 units within the Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwellings per acre) General Plan land Use Category). Project proposes an excess density of 8.04 dwellings per acre. South Phase: Spread density on the entire 132.5 acres. 1,590 units with 51.5 acres designated for Medium Density Residential (4-8 dwellings per acre) and 81 acres High Density Residential (8-16 dwellings per acre). Project proposes 12 units per acre on this site. STAFFRPT . 082 NORTH PHASE TLP.R9LTO PROPERTIES B. —• �•• 119 ACRES rirw� NOTF! NOT TO MAU ) PARCEL Na 613-0- OSII NV2 SECTION 19.T5SRTE MEMORANDUM CITY OF LA QUINTA STU %b'r SEssio►J one Ly TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: NOVEMBER 10, 1987 SUBJECT: REVIEW OF THE SITE/LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THE MONROE BUILDING ON CALLE ESTADO BACKGROUND On May 26, 1987, the Planning Commission approved Plot Plan 87-380 for the construction of a two-story office/retail building. Conditions of approval required the site/landscape plans to be reviewed by the Commission at a Study Session. ANALYSIS The site/landscape plan has been reviewed for consistency with the approval conditions and Village Specific Plan. Minor modifications are suggested and illustrated on the plan. The plan was found to be consistent with incorporation of the noted changes. RECOMMENDATIONS Accept the site/landscape plan (revised), dated November 4, 1987, as satisfying condition 4b and the first two paragraphs of 4c. Attachments: Conditions of Approval MR/WS17.DOC CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL May 26,1987 PLOT PLAN NO. 87-380 1. Plot Plan No. 87-380 shall comply with the standards and requirements of the City of La Quinta Land Use Ordinance and all other applicable City, County and State laws and ordinances, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. The approved Plot Plan shall approval date; otherwise, it effect whatsoever. By "use" substantial construction, no this approval which is begun thereafter diligently pursue d be used within two (2) years of the shall become null and void and of no it is meant the beginning of t including grading, contemplated by within the two-year period and is to completion. 3. Development of the project shall be in conformance with Exhibits A, B and C, as contained in the file for Plot Plan No. 87-378, unless otherwise amended by the following conditions. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant/Developer shall: a. Dedicate a sidewalk easement along the frontage of Calle Estado as required by the City Engineer. b. Submit to the Planning Commission for Study Session review and to the Planning Director for approval, a revised landscape plan which identifies appropriate canopy -type shade tree forms for the street trees and other major trees within the parking area. The shade trees within the parking area (including the alley parking spaces) may be substituted with an architecturally complementary shade structure. The hardscape plan must conform with the adopted Village at La Quinta Specific Plan. C. Submit to the Planning Commission for Study Session review and to the Planning Director for approval, a revised site plan which eliminates the first three parking spaces on the west side and the first parking space on the east side of the parking area adjacent to Calle Estado. The additional area must be replaced with suitable landscaping and hardscape, which might include special paving, fountain/water element, shade structure, seating facilities, etc. Also, a garden wall must be provided between the parking area and Calle Estado (the access to Calle Estado is eliminated). A temporary access may be permitted from Calle Estado until such time as redesign of Calle Estado occurs, based upon the Village Specific Plan. -1- fF e. Prior to the issuance of an encroachment permit, an irrevocable bond in the amount of 150 percent of the estimated cost of removing the temporary driveway, installation of the remaining portion of the wall, and installation of the landscape/hardscape as delineated on the approved landscape plan shall be provided to the City. .The City shall be noted as the beneficiary. The bond shall not be released without written authorization by the Planning Director. In any case, the bond is to remain in effect until the required improvements have been installed and are accepted by the City. Further, within 60 days after written notice is given by the City, the Developer/Applicant shall remove the temporary driveway, install the remaining portion of the wall, and install the remaining landscaping as delineated in the approved landscape plan. Provide revised window and door treatment and a heavy texture stucco exterior wall finish, all in keeping with a Spanish/Mediterranean building design. Secure Agricultural Commission approval for landscape material to be used for the development. 5. Prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the Applicant/Developer shall: a. Have entered into an agreement with the U.S. Postal Service for the installation and use of a central mail delivery station along Calle Estado, in a location approved by the Planning Department. b. Complied with all requirements of the City Engineer, Fire Marshal, Coachella Valley Water District, and Planning Department. MOM