Loading...
1985 10 10 PCAGENDA PLANNING OQMy1ISSION - CITY OF IA QUINPA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California October 10, 1985 7:00 p.m. A. Flag Salute 2. ROLL CALL 3. HEARINGS A. La Quinta General Plan and Environmental Impact Report/Master Environmental Assessment, to consider the Hazards, Cultural Resources, Natural Resources, Ccmcaumity Development, Infrastructure and Housing Elements of the proposed General Plan. (Continued) 1. Report from Staff. 2. Motion for Adoption. 4. CCNSENT CALENDAR A. Minutes of the Regular Meeting of September 24, 1985. 5. BUSINESS NOTE: The regularly scheduled meeting of the Planning Commission would normally be held on October 8th, 1985; however, a number of City Staff will be at the California League of Cities Conference in San Francisco that date, so the meeting has been moved to the October loth time. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING Items for Discussion October 10, 1985 I. Chris Clark Miles near Washington and Adams Carl Meisterlin .Washington and Miles Don Young Dune Palm and Whitewater Indian Springs Jeff Decker, Protect Jefferson Earl Ellison 5 Units per/acre Marion Ellison Low Density Sue DeGasperin Traffic Washington not Jefferson CONCLUSIONS 2. Larry Spector Avenue 50 and Jefferson Planning Commission Jefferson West, 50th to 52nd Landmark Oak Tree West Bill Carver — Vl�') �"`� G"(JCl • $ e s 2 Jefferson and Avenue 52 CONCLUSIONS:, 3. Joe Hammer Dune Palm and Hwy 111 Frank Murphy Jefferson and Avenue 48 CONCLUSIONS: 4. Downtown Plan: 4 Bob Cunard Bruce Cathcart Bermudas & Barcelona Z Desert Club & Tampico Audrey Ostrowsky Market Study Pearl Knight Desert Club & La Fonda J ? Tom Thornburgh Bermudas & Avenue 52 Lee Brandt Tampico, East of Desert Club Francis Hack Tampico & Bermudas Jim Altman Tampico & Bermudas J CONCLUSIONS: z 0 5. Louie Campagna Mini Park Stan Sniff Mini Park CONCLUSION 7, 6. John Kwake Foothills Lake Cahuilla 7. Drew Wright Washington and Sagebrush 8. Point Happy Ranch Misc. Items: Richard Roamer Atty. CITY COUNCIL: Concerns Oct. 1 Meetina. Larry Allen Jefferson Commerical Dale Bohenberger Tampico Business Corridor/High Density John Pena Arch. Review/Downtown Fred Wolff Sun Bus/Covered Bus Stops Mini Parks at Bus Stops in Cove Walls in Community in year 2000 Judy Cox Mini Park/Jack Able's opinion Concern Jefferson Indian Springs Jefferson Commercial Ave. 50 to 52 Downtown/need expansion now Lots east side of Desert Club Drive (Dr. Knight) Zoning Lake Cahilla/Hillside (Mr. Knight) MARKET ANALYSIS - LA QUINTA TOWN CENTER Prepared by: T.H.K. Associates Inc. 9/27/84 The following is from the Executive Summary: Shopping Center Professional Offices Hotel To Accommodate Private Sector Hospital/Nursing Care Facilities City Hall, Police Station, Library, Postoffice and other Community Facilities 1p yja-- 30 Acres 27 Acres 8 Acres 65 Acres 15 Acres 15 Acres Total per study 95 Acres ITEM NO. .. DATE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MOTION BY: BRANDY DE GA.SPERIN MORAN ING THORNBURGH �� SECOND BY: BRAAIIYJ'�DE MORAN WALLING THORNBURGH DISCUSSION: ROLL CALLAMEW- CO=SIONERS: to / AYE NO ABSTAIN ABSENT PRESENT v UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED: YES NO ITEM NO. DATE Q b p 1 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RE: MOTION BY: BRANDT DE CASPERIN MDRAN ViALLING THORNBURGH SECOND BY: BRANDT DE GASPERIN NDRAN VaUING THORNBURO3 DISCUSSION: ROLL CALL VOTE: COINISSIONERS: AYE NO ABSTAIN ABSENT PRESENT BRANDT — DE GASPERIN — MORAN — WILLING — THORNBURGH — UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED: YES NO ITEM NO. / DATE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING RE: MOTION BY: BRAN T DE GASPERIN MDRAN 6�aLLII4G THORNBURGH SECOND DE MORAN ING THORNBURGH BY � GASP DISCUSSION: ROLL CALL VOTE: COP2SI S S IONERS : AYE NO ABSTAIN ABSENT PRESENT UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED: YES NO Ir M I N U T E S PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A Regular Meeting Held at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California September 24, 1985 7:00 p.m. • •*&2r A. Chairman Thornburgh called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Thornburgh led the flag salute. 2. ROLL CALL A. Chairman Thornburgh requested the roll call. The Secretary called the roll: Present: Conmissioners Brandt, De Gasperin, Moran, Walling and Chairman Thornburgh Absent: None Also present were Community Development Director Lawrence L. Stevens, Principal Planner Sandra L. Bonner, Councilmen Pena, Wolff, Bohnenberger, City Manager Frank Usher, and Secretary Donna Velotta. UNKINFORILM Chairman Thornburgh introduced the first item of hearing as follows: A. La Quinta General Plan and Environmental Impact Report/Master Environmental Assessment, to consider the Hazards, Cultural Resources, Natural Resources, Ccnmmity Development, Infrastructure and Housing Elements of the proposed General Plan. (Continued) He called for the report from Staff. 1. Cormunity Development Director Lawrence L. Stevens explained that the purpose of continuing the General Plan hearing to this date was to review the text changes in final form. However, Staff has not had the opportunity to complete that work due to the press of other work. Therefore, Staff is recommending that this matter be continued to a special meeting, possibly October 2 or October 3, and in addition, that the CPAC be invited to that meeting. Another option would be to continue the matter to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 8th. After a brief discussion period, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion. 2. Comdssicne:r Walling moved to continue the General Plan hearing to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission on October 8, 1985. Commissioner Brandt seconded the motion. Unanimously adopted. Chairman Thornburgh introduced the next three items hearing items to be heard, concurrently as follows: B. General Plan Amemhnent No. 85-006, a request for an amendment to the current Land Use Element of the La Quinta General Plan from Very Low Density Residential (3 or less dwellings/acre) to Low Density Residential (3-5 dwellings/acre) on 849 acres and to General Commercial on 40 acres; Landmark Land Carnpa ny ("Oak Tree West"), Applicant. C. Specific Plan No. 85-006, for a total site of 1020 acres, a proposal for 2245 dwellings on 44:3 acres, a 27-hole golf course and a 18-hole golf course on a total of 400 acres; a 26,000 Sq.Ft. office complex on 3.5 acres; a 36.5-acre site with a 200--room hotel, 25,000 Sq.Ft. golf clubhouse facilities (size unknown); and 115 acres of the site which are undevelopable and will remain in Natural Open Space; Landmark Land Company ('Oak Tree West"), Applicant. D. Change of Zone No. 85-016, a request for a zone change to implement the pro- posed specific plan from A-1-10 (Light Agriculture, 10-Acre Minimum Parcel Size), W-2-20 (Controlled Development, 20-Acre Minimum Parcel Size), N-A (Natural Assets), R-1-1 (One Family Dwellings, 1-Acre Minimum Lot Size), R-1-12,000 (One -Family Dwellings, 12,000 Sq.Ft. Minimum Lot Size), R-1-10,000 (One -Family Dwellings, 10,000 Sq.Ft. Minimum Lot Size), to R-2 (Multiple Family Residential) on 849 acres, R-5 (Open Space Combining Zone - Residential Developments) on 115 acres, and C-P-S (Scenic Highway Conmercial) on 40 acres; Landmark Land Comipany ('Oak Tree West"), Applicant. MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION September 24, 1985 Page 2. Chairman 'Thornburgh called for the Staff report. 1. Community Development Director Stevens explained that the three applications being jointly considered are for the same project. First, is the request to amend the General Plan and the Applicant's request in that regard is to designate the property Very Low Density Residential on 849 acres and General Commercial on approximately 40 acres. The remaining land use designation of Open Space -Planned Development on 115 acres of mountain would be unchanged. The second portion of the request is a Change of Zone to remove various existing zones •- Agricultural, Controlled Development, Natural Assets, and various R-1 Zones in favor of R-2 zoning on 849 acres of residential and golf course property;, R-5 on the mountain area and C-P-S on the conmercial requested in the General Plan Amendment. The remaining component of the application is the Specific Plan for the 1020 acre site for 2245 dwellings on 449 acres, a 27-hole and a 18-hole golf course on approximately 400 acres; 26,000 Sq.Ft. office complex on 3.5 acres and a 36.5 acre commercial site with a hotel, golf clubhouse facilities and office retail facilities, totalling approximately 200,000 Sq.Ft. Director Stevens explained that normally Staff would give a detailed description of the project itself at this time, but would defer this to the Applicant's representative at this time and at the conclusion of their presentation requested the Applicant to refer the hearing back to Staff to discuss and make their recommendations. Then the hearing could be opened for any comment from the Applicant and the public. Kay Chandler, representative of rand=k Land Company, gave a detailed report on the proposed project covering the following topics: ° Demographics ° Existing Conditions and Constraints ° Existing General Plan Designations ° Public Services and Utilities ° Circulation ° Fire Station Response Time ° Street Concepts ° Architectural Character ° Land Use Plan ° Phasing Plan ° Proposed Zoning ° Typical Housing ° The 3.5 Acre Office Commercial ° The Golf Clubhouse ° The Hotel Commercial Site ° Hotel/Golf Club Elevations ° Hotel/Golf Clubhouse ° Hotel/Commercial Center At the ooirmpletion of the Applicant's presentation, he turned the meeting back to Staff for the completion of their report to the Planning Commission. Director Stevens advised that Principal Planner Sandra Bonner would present the Staff recommendations. Addressing the General Plan Amendment request, Ms. Bonner advised that Staff is recommending that the Planning Commission be consistent with their previous recommendations for the new proposed La Quinta General Plan for this area. Those reconmendations forwarded to the City Council are as follows: ° The majority of the site, with the exception of the northeast corner, be designated Low Density Residential with the density range of 2-4 units, which is consistent with the Applicant's proposal, which has an average density of approximately 2.7 units per acre. ° Only the extreme northeast corner be designated as resort commercial consistent with the Planning Cormission's previous approval, which would allow the Applicant to construct his hotel and accessory commercial uses and the golf clubhouse. In conjunction with this, Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission not approve the Applicant's request for commercial at the corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street or for the complete 40-acre parcel shown at the northeast corner of the site. ° Staff concurs with the Applicant's request to leave the mountain areas Open Space. 0 EENUTM - PLANNING CCMISSION eptember 24, 1985 age 3. Addressing the CRuange of Zone request, Ms. Bonner advised that Staff is recommending that the change of zoning be consistent with their reccnuenda- tions for the General Plan. First, portions of the residential project be zoned R-2; second, the 20-acre site at the northeast corner of the project be designated C-T (Resort Commercial), which would allow the uses the Applicant is proposing that we are recamiending in the Specific Plan report; and lastly, Staff is recomnending R-5 zoning, which is Open Space Residential Combining Zone, for the mountainous area for which the Applicant is not proposing any development. Ms. Bonner addressed the Specific Plan application next stating that the Applicant had covered most of the areas regarding the Specific Plan in his presentation so she would just briefly cover Staff's areas of concern. ° Land Use and Circulation - Staff is proposing to ensure conpatibility with adjacent property through two means - first, by regulating density and second, by regulating height. Referring to the Applicant's wall rendering (Exhibit "B" in the application packet) Ms. Bonner addressed the areas of concern as the existing single-family area and the Calle Rondo area, the undeveloped, 40-acre parcels adjacent to Avenue 50 and the Kennedy Reach property on Avenue 52. Staff is proposing, since the Applicant is proposing a variety of housing styles with a variety of densities ranging from estate lots to cluster housing, that density restrictions be placed only in those areas shown in yellow on the wall rendering. Staff recommends that the density of these areas should be limited to 5 units per acre. Ms. Bonner advised that the reason Staff is using the word "should" is that the plans are tentative - there will be changes as far as circulation, layout of the golf course and Tentative Tract Maps we will be getting will be crossing over the lines. With regard to height, Staff is concerned with height along public thoroughfares in addition to the areas shown in yellow on the wall rendering; therefore, it is requested that height limits in the "yellow" areas and also within 200' of the public thoroughfares (Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street) be limited to a height of one story or 20'. The Applicant has agreed to this. Comnissicner Walling interjected at this point to ask the height limit for the Resort Commercial zoning. Director Stevens explained that the Resort Commercial zoning world be excluded fran the height limit and the exhibit shown in the Specific Plan docurmnt would be the controlling height in the commercial area. 'Therefore, the four stories requested for the hotel would be allowable in the commercial area. Commissioner Walling then asked if the setback on the hotel height is not that 1320' distance, will there be a height setback from the north property line? Director Stevens answered that Staff does not recommend one because there is a proposal from the property owner to the north to construct a commercial hotel of a similar intensity. In addition, he noted that the exhibits that the Applicant has presented show the hotel on the southerly portion of the site with the lower level shopping center closer to the Avenue 50 parcel. Therefore, Staff feels, with. those controls, if the Commission approves it as the Applicant has requested, that- they would be sufficient. If the Commission approves the request as Staff has reconmended, then Staff does not feel that the hotel develop- ment will proceed, mach, if any further, west than the 200-300 roan hotel that Rufus Associates is proposing. Principal Planner Bonner continued with the Staff report by citing two more points of concern regarding land use. She noted that a convent had been made at the Study Session about perimeter treatment along streets, such as providing openings. The Applicant has agreed, conceptionally, to that and the conditions of approval require the Applicant to provide plans for openings and to balance it out with noise protection for residents. WINES - PLANNING COMMISSION September 24, 1985 Page 4. Ms. Bonner stated that the Applicant has agreed, conceptionally, to the provision of a park. The General Plan designates a neighborhood park in the vicinity of this project. A change to Condition No. 34 regarding the park site adds an additional clause stating that the Applicant will provide for a site for a neighborhood park or "provide for alternative methods to secure park land in the general vicinity of the project". With regard to txaffic, Ms. Bonner stated that the Applicant has agreed to provide for an alternative local street route to the school site, which will give us an all-ureather crossing from Washington Street to the school and also provide for emergency access. In conclusion, Nfs. Bonner stated that based upon the findings in the Staff Reports for the General Plan Amendment No. 85-006, Change of Zone 85-016 and Specific Plan No. 85-006, Staff is recommending to the Planning Commission that they recommend approval to the City Council of this applications, subject to the conditions and, in addition, that the Specific Plan's approval be subject to the conditions presented to you. Chairman Thornburgh requested that Ms. Bonner explain to all those present what Staff means when they denote the 5 units per acre and the 2.7 units per acre, etc. Ms. Bonner advised that the 2.7 is overall density. Overall density is only that portion of the site that can be developed. In this case, it excludes the 115 acres of hillside and also excludes 16 acres of roadway. So, overall, including the golf course and everything that is not proposed for commercial, the overall density is 2.7 units per acre. She went on to explain that the 5 units per acre are just the areas proposed for residential development. If you only consider those areas and exclude the golfcourse, the hillside, etc., the average density for the entire project is the 5 units per acre. At this point, Director Stevens reiterated to the Commission that at the Study Session he had advised then that Staff and the Applicant had an agreement on 57 of the 59 conditions that were recommended and the two with which there was a difference related to the amount of commercial (Conditions Nos. 28 and 29). There is still a. disagreement, of which the Planning Commission is aware, of the two points of view with regard to the Jefferson commercial corridor and going with conditions that compliment that decision. Director Stevens explained the second issue with which there was disagreement (Condition No. 46.a.) was the requirement to prepay fire mitigation fees of $232,000 with appropriate credits, etc. He stated that after discussion with the Fire Marshal and the Applicant, all are in concurrence that the revised subcondition (46.a.) would be more appropriate given our current state of knowledge. That. condition essentially says that the infrastructure fee program is the primary method for the City to secure funding for Fire Station facilities. The City may, however, in conjunction with reviewing tentative maps and related zoning applications, request prepayment of fire facilities fees on an "as warranted" basis if those funds are determined to be necessary to facilitate needed construction. We have generally asked for prepayment in cases where we had specific needs. In this case, the issue relates to the potential relocation of the Avenue 52 Fire Station, whether that will occur as part of Crystal Canyon and whether any funds need to be forthcoming as a prepayment from this project to facilitate that movement. Director Stevens cent on to state that Staff does, however, think the decision as to amount and need can be deferred to such time as actual development is beginning to occur and tract applications are requested. Staff feels that will give them reasonable opportunity to solicit any prepayment fees that are necessary and still allows then to proceed with the City's capital programs. Staff thinks this is a reasonable compromise and the Fire Department and Applicant are in agreement with it. Therefore, Director Stevens informed. the Corwdssion that there is only one issue in disagreement with regard to this project. MINUTES - PLANNING COWESSION September 24, 1985 Page 5. Commissioner Walling requested to know if any park locations had been discussed with the Applicant. Director Stevens replied that park locations have been discussed with the Applicant, some of which are within the project area and some are near to, but outside the project area. Director Stevens stated he thinks there is a consensus that land rather than fees are necessary and that there are several reasonable alternatives available, and we have an understanding that we can, before they get very far in their land planning, come to an agreement as to a particular site and size and then, as the condition is written, we would bring it back to the Planning Commission and City Council for affirmation„ Commissioner De Gasperin requested to know if the PGA West approval included a hotel. Director Stevens replied that it was his understanding that a hotel developer has an option and has maintained, to date, in effect, that option. They do not have a specific starting date nor do they have a detailed plan approval prepared. Based on discussions with the Applicant, it may be as much as a year or two away from a formal commitment and then there would be an 18-month construction period. Therefore, Director Stevens stated he sees a hotel as being several years away from happening. Commissioner De Gasperin asked if there is the possibility of there not being a hotel here. Director Stevens replied that he believed there would be a hotel. Commissioner De Gasperin asked if The orchard project also had a specific plan approval for a hotel development. Director Stevens replied that The Orchard project did have approval for a hotel of a slightly different concept because of its very low density. Commissioner De Gasperin asked if a convention center on this piece of property would be consistent with the Planning Commission's present recommendation to the City Council. Director Stevens answered that he thought a convention center would fall within the general definition of Touris Commercial, although the current zoning text that would subsequently apply does not make provision for that. We would have to make a text amendment to our zoning code, but he believes the General Plan category that we talked about of Tourist Cam ercial could reasonably accommodate a convention center type of use. There being no further questions of Staff, Chairman Thornburgh opened the public hearing at 8:05 p.m. Kaye Chandler, representative for the Applicant, Landmark Land Company, P. O. Box 1578, La Quinta, CA, spoke again stating that when discussing the open space or greenbelt windows along Jefferson, he forgot to mention that one of the 18-holes of the public golf course has been lined up against Jefferson Street. He pointed out on the wall rendering that they have designated breaks in the wall where there are view corridors off of Jefferson that would look over the golf course with views to the mountain. He noted they were also looking at the course further south on Jefferson where they could place open - type materials in wall breaks so there would be views into the project. Lawrence Spector, Rufus Associates, P. 0. Box 867, La Quinta, CA, (The Orchard at La Quinta project) spoke having concerns about the height and closeness of the four-story hotel to their approved project. He also requested that the Landmark Land Company keep them advised of the progress of the project as it is on property adjacent to The Orchard development. There being no further public comment, Chairman Thornburg closed the public hearing at 8:15 p.m. MINUTES - PLANNING COMM-SSION September 24, 1985 Page 6. At this time there was discussion clarifying previously discussed issues such as emergency accesses, the Jefferson Street Parkway concept, traffic estimates, compatibility of the project with adjacent property proposals, etc. The Comcrdssion discussed the conditions that the Applicant did not agree on as follows: Commissioner Moran - If we place commercial at the proposed site, it will take away from the downtown area. Then again, the hotel guests would neet convenient shopping. She feels that perhaps if the commercial area could be moved closer to Avenue 52, the impact would be only to the owner. She also feels if left in its current location, the commercial use would present a problem to The Orchard project which will be on adjacent property. CcmTdssioner Brandt - Looking at the City's traffic concerns and the protection of downtown commmercial, she does not feel she could be in favor of additional commercial along Jefferson Street. Conmissioner Walling - Feels commercial should be restricted along Jefferson Street. Chairman Thornburgh - Feels that the Tourist Connercial on Jefferson Street is adequate as presented on the General Plan. There being no further discussion, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion. 2. Commissioner De Gasperin made the following motions: To approve General Plan Amendment No. 85-006 as recommended and directed Staff to prepare a Resolution using the findings contained in the Staff Report and the Exhibit contained in the Staff Report. To approve Specific Plan No. 85-006 and directed Staff to prepare a Resolution containing the findings in the Staff Report and referencing the conditions, as modified by the Planning Commission, including the 200' buffer request, which should be worked into Condition No. 31. ° To approve Change of Zone No. 85-016 as recommended, including the findings and exhibits contained in the Staff Report, which also includes those findings that: support a determination of a mitigated negative declaration both in terms of the findings , the environmental document and the asterisked conditions, the Commission supports the mitigated environmental document. Commissioner Walling Seconded the motions. Unanimously Adopted. Director Stevens informed those present that the City Council hearing for these applications is scheduled for October 15, 1985. A. Commissioner De Gasperin made a motion to approve the minutes from the regular meeting of September 10, 1985, as amended. Commissioner Moran seconded the motion. 1. The minutes of the regular meeting of September 10, 1985, were approved, as amended. Unanimously Adopted. 5. BUSINESS Chairman Thornburgh introduced the first item of business as follows: A. Public Use Permit No. 84-002, a request by Desert Sands Unified School District for review of landscaping and off -site improvement plans; Desert Sands Unified School District„ Applicant. Chairman Thornburgh called for the report from Staff. MINUTES - PLANNING CQVISSION September 24, 1985 Page 7. 1. Director Stevens advised the Commission that Staff has been reviewing more detailed plans prepared by the school district for the elementary school site, which is the K-2 and 3-5 schools, which will be constructed on the front 18 acres of their 36 acre parcel. This report evaluates the off -site improvement and landscape plans as they relate to the conditions of approval established for Conditional Use Permit No. 84-002. Within the report, Staff has noted some concerns with regard to perimeter sidewalks, particularly along Avenue 50. The current plans did not show a sidewalk. Staff has suggested that it be a meandering sidewalk typical of our standards elsewhere in the City. Staff has also expressed concern for the use of chainlink fencing along the Avenue 50 frontage and the lack of setback, which we require on normal development, along Avenue 52. Staff has also made a list of detailed comments with regard to the landscaping plan and suggested that there be some adjustment in locations of trees to improve the frontage appearance along Avenue 50 and we recommend that the exhibit submitted by the school district be approved with certain revisions which are summarized in the eight conditions attached to the Staff Report, which reinforce a number of our standards. The Comnission should be aware that, with regard to sane of these standards, our best effort is to encourage modifications rather than require them. There are limitations to our legal authority to impose certain standards or requirements on the school district. That basically relates to some of the on -site improvements like landscaping and fencing. It is clear that off -site improvements must satisfy our stan- dards. It is our intention and the reason we use the words "is encouraged" and "should" and "shall" on several of the conditions to work in our best effort to maintain those standards we have imposed on other developments, but Staff cannot assure the Planning Commission of our success in obtaining that compliance. Richard Beck, Facilities Planner, Desert Sands Unified School District, spoke as representative of the Applicant. He noted that the school is trying to complete the final phases of the plans to go to the State. The State has all the basic plans and off -site improvement plans; however, they are waiting for a few final decisions based on property deeds and a few final improvement drawings. He stated they expect plans to be approved to go to bid for the site development work probably the first of next month. Construction for the buildings should be approved by late October and should go to bid in November. This is for the front portion of the parcel which will have two elementary schools able to hold 1200 students. Mr. Beck stated that the Staff Report was very well written and the conditions were very reasonable. He went on to reiterate what Mr. Stevens had noted earlier that the school district is immune to requirements of local governments. Some school districts do not even bring plans to the City Staff. He felt, however, that it was beneficial to both parties to bring the plans before the Planning Commission for review and comment. Mr. Beck then gave a more detailed explanation of the project being proposed. In conclusion, he stated that the district is agreeable to the majority of the conditions recatmended by Staff. They had concerns with Conditions Nos. 3 and 7, relating to fencing and having the landscaping plans reviewed and approved by the County of Riverside, Office of Agricultural Commission. Commissioner Walling suggested the possibility of using vines to cover the chainlink fence, rather than just leave it bare. Mr. Beck advised that could be a possibility and, if requested, he would discuss it with the district. Commissioner Moran requested that the district be cautious of what types of plants are used because of so many of the children having allergies. There beingno further discussion, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion. 2. Chairman Thornburgh made a motion to conceptually approve the landscape plans and off -site improvement plans relative to Public Use Permit No. 84-002, in accordance with Exhibits "B-1" and "B-2", and subject to the revisions recommended in the eight conditions of approval. Commissioner De Gasperin seconded the motion. Unanimously Adopted. 0 MINUTES - PLANNING COMMIJSSION September 24, 1985 Page 8. Chairman 'Thornburgh introduced the next two items of business as follows: B. Plot Plan No. 85-198, a request to construct a single-family dwelling on the west side of Avenida Carranza, 150' north of Calle Temecula; Rick Johnson Construction, Applicant. C. Plot Plan No. 85-199, a request to construct a single-family dwelling on the west side of Avenida Carranza, 100' north of Calle Temecula; Rick Johnson Construction, Applicant. Chairman Thornburgh called for the Staff Report. 1. Director Stevens advised the Commission that neither of the projects will have a significant adverse impact on the environment, the requests are consistent with the requirements of the R-1*++ Zone and goals and objectives of the La Quinta General Plan, and the building designs are compatible with the area development contingent upon the conditions of approval. Therefore, based on findings, Staff is recommending the Planning Commission approve both requests. There was some discussion as to whether this Applicant could cane up with a different house plan as he has been using the same plan for the 31 previous approvals given him. Director Stevens stated that on future submittals by Mr. Johnson, he would direct this information to him in an advisory capacity to see what his reaction would be. Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion. 2. Chairman Thornburgh made a motion, based on findings in the Staff Reports, approving Plot Plans Nos. 85-198 and 85-199, in accordance with Exhibits A, B and C and subject to the attached conditions. Commissioner Moran seconded the motion. Unanimously Adopted. • • • • i TU -IN I There being no further items of agenda to come before the Commission, Chairman Thornburgh called for a motion to adjourn. Chairman Thornburgh made a motion to adjourn to the next regular meeting of the Planning Cbmndssion on October 8, 1985, at 7:00 p.m., to be held in the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 G3Llle Estado, La Quinta, CA. Commissioner Walling seconded the motion. Unanimously Adopted. The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, was adjourned at 9:54 p.m., September 24, 1985, in the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California. ce,t,/ 4 4 Q" 78-105 CALLE ESTADO - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 N 0 T I C E (619) 564-2246 THE REGULARLY SCHEDULED PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, OCTOBER 8, 1985, HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO THURSDAY, OCTOBER 10, 1985, AT 7:00 P.M. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING DIVISION MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253