Loading...
2006 07 25 PC Minutes,, MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA July 25, 2006 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Quill who asked Commissioner Alderson to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Katie Barrows, Rick Daniels, and Chairman Paul Quill. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Barrows to excuse Commissioner Engle. Unanimously approved. C. Election of Chair. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Barrows to elect Paul Quill as Chair. There being no further nominations, Paul Quill was elected as Chair. D. Election of Vice Chair. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Barrows to elect Ed Alderson as Vice Chair. There being no further nominations, Ed Alderson was elected Vice Chair. E. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Planning Manager Les Johnson, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Quill asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of the July 11, 2006 regular meeting. There being no changes to the minutes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. i I V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. A. Tentative Tract Map 31910, Extension #1; a request of Desert Elite, Inc. for consideration of a one-year extension of time for a subdivision of approximately 38 acres into 130 single-family lots and other common lots for the property located on the west side of Monroe Street, north of Avenue 58. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2006\7-25-06.doc Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2006 i ' 1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Community Development Director Doug Evans presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Daniels asked if time extensions could be streamlined to allow staff to approve them if there are no changes. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston stated the Subdivision Map Act gives the life of a tentative tract a life of two years. It also allows an applicant to seek up to five years. The City's Zoning Code allows one year or more if the decision law so desires. Could this be done administratively, the Map Act could allow it, but the City's Subdivision Ordinance probably requires the Commission to allow the extension, because the Planning Commission and City Council approved it originally. Commissioner Daniels asked if there are no changes, could it be approved administratively. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated there are provisions in the Code for certain permits to be approved administratively. The practice in La Quinta is for them to go before the Commission and Council. Staff will review the Code and report back at the next meeting. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Pedalino, representing the applicant, stated the off-site sewer and water have been completed. The precise grading has been approved and once the extension is approved they are prepared to take the final map forward for approval. 4. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 5. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006-027, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 31910, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Barrows, Daniels, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner j Engle. ABSTAIN: None. I 2 Planning Commission Minutes ~ July 25, 2006 B. Specific Plan 99-035, Amendment #1; a request of East of Madison, LLC for consideration of standard perimeter wall and planting plans for the property located south of Avenue 52 and east of Madison Street in the Madison Club. 1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted the change to the conditions that staff made regarding the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee recommendation. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Daniels asked how the height of this berm compares with the berm height along Avenue 52. Staff stated it is slightly higher. Community Development Director Doug Evans explained it was approved with a higher berm that the one on Avenue 52, but not as high as the berm for the Hideaway on Avenue 54. Commissioner Daniels stated he has a problem with the berm being this high. Staff clarified the height differences. 3. Commissioner Barrows asked if the berm height has been approved. Staff stated yes and the height is 16 feet at the westerly end along Avenue 52 at Madison Street. Easterly it will go down in height. Commissioner Barrows clarified the approval before them is only the landscaping and perimeter wall for that section along Avenue 52. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated the height of the berm has been approved and only the perimeter wall is back before the Commission. Staff has had extensive conversations with the applicant and adjacent property owners, but staff is working within the approved Specific Plan to reach a solution for everyone. Commissioner Barrows asked if the wall would be similar to what has been built on the Hideaway project. Discussion followed regarding the berm height and the location of the wall in relation to the berm. 4. Commissioner Alderson asked where the trees would be planted. Staff clarified the ALRC agreed with the trees being on top of the berm; however, staff is asking that they not be at the top but that ~ large trees be planted near the toe of the berm. Commissioner Alderson asked staff to define what the "view corridors" were. Staff stated the area where the trees were not so thick that you could see the mountains through some of the open spaces. 3 Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2006 5. Commissioner Barrows stated she took a tour of the City where the berm treatment has been used and does not believe it is effective in regard to drainage and erosion. Staff stated the berm is a maximum 3:1 slope, and at that grade it is a challenge. They will use drip irrigation for the plants. Commissioner Barrows asked if it will meet the City's Landscape Ordinance. Staff stated they will have to meet the requirements. , 6. Commissioner Daniels asked when Madison Street would be completed. Staff asked that the applicant answer this question. 7. Chairman Quill noted there is significant turf at the entrance. Staff stated it is extensive, but for the overall project it is minimal. 8. Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Jeff Provost, Madison LLC, stated the height of the berm has been engineered and they are working with staff to accomplish the undulation. In regard to the Conditions, they have a concern with Condition Nos. 7 and 8. They are trying to make a distinction between this project and the Hideaway. The view corridor issue to them seems unimportant due to the speed at which you would be traveling along the street. As the trees grow there will be openings between the trees to give the view corridor wanted by staff. In regard to the height limitation for the trees, how are you able to measure the trees and who will cut the top off of the trees when they exceed the height. They do anticipate starting construction along Madison Street within the next four to six months. The wall and berm will undulate and there are very few instances where the wall will be right at the top of the berm. 9. Commissioner Alderson asked if a different variety would be used to reach the desired height. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated that in the design aspect of the planting, if the proposed tree will reach a height of over 30 feet, staff will ask that a different species be used. Discussion followed regarding the location and height of the trees in relation to the berm. 10. Commissioner Daniels asked if the Commission added a condition that the average height of the wall would not exceed the height of the berm, would this be an issue. Mr. Provost stated they would have to look at the plans, but he believes they could do this. 11. Chairman Quill stated this may bring the wall into the setback area. He asked if the wall landscaping and wall would be done in advance of the sidewalk. Mr. Provost stated he is not aware of 4 Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2006 the construction schedule, but he does not believe they would want to do this before that street improvements are completed on Avenue 52. Chairman Quill asked if there was amulti-purpose trail on Madison Street between Avenue 52 and Avenue 54. Staff stated they believe there is a trail on one side of the street. Chairman Quill asked if the landscaping for Madison Street will be submitted in conjunction with the Hideaway side of Madison Street. Staff stated the Commission could request to have the Madison Street landscaping plans for the east side or both set could be brought back. Chairman Quill stated he is not necessarily interested in seeing the entire length of the street, but he would like to see the multi-purpose trail and how it fits in and how it relates to both sides. He is very concerned about the Hideaway side because he has never seen those plans. He does not want to create a tunnel. Mr. Provost stated their berm on Madison Street is not even half the height of the Hideaway project. Staff stated there is a multi-purpose trail on the east side of Madison Street. Staff reviewed the setbacks as they relate to where the wall can be constructed. Chairman Quill asked about the plans for Monroe Street that were included in their packet. Staff stated they are concepts and are not before the Commission for approval. 12. Commissioner Barrows asked for clarification that the plan before them will be repeated on Avenue 52 and Monroe Street. Mr. Provost stated it will have undulation but, it is not completed. Community Development Director Doug Evans drew a diagram on the plans to explain the setback, building envelope, berm, and wall design. 13. Commissioner Daniels stated his concern was to not have a tunnel effect as you drive down Madison Street between Avenue 52 and Avenue 54. Staff suggested those plans be brought back to the Commission. 14. Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment. Dr. Tim Vail, property owner across the street, stated this is going to appear to be the wall of "King Kong". He was not notified of this public hearing and would ask that this hearing be continued until the berm issue has been resolved. It appears the wall is at the top of the berm for the entire length of the street. Why can the wall not be closer to the street for security. The current height limits the views for the neighbors to the north. They are working to have assurance the berm does not exceed the height that was approved. 5 Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2006 15. Staff requested a five minute recess. Chairman Quill recessed the meeting at 8:18 p.m. and reconvened at 8:28 p.m. 16. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 17. Community Development Director Doug Evans clarified that the item on the agenda is listed as an amendment to the Specific Plan and that is not the case. The request is for review of the perimeter wall and landscaping. It should have been listed as a business item and not a public hearing which does not require notification of the surrounding property owners. Staff believes the berms comply with the Specific Plan with some minor increases that are minor design changes. From the standpoint of whether notices should have been mailed, they would not have been mailed. The project was heard as a public hearing with public testimony the same as it would have been if it were listed as a Business Item. A complete set of the plans, agenda, and staff report were sent to the attorney that represents Dr. Vail. The proceeding would have occurred exactly as they have occurred. 18. Commissioner Daniels asked where the berm is measured from along Avenue 52. Staff stated the intent, and it was checked, was from the top of the curb. Commissioner Daniels noted the berm at 16 feet has been approved, but he does not want to take any action that would increase the height. He would want to limit the wall to not exceed the height of the berm. He agrees with the taller vegetation and trees being lowered off the top of the berm. For clarification, this Commission is not only concerned with the driving public but, also the neighbor to the project. 19. Commissioner Barrows stated her concurrence with Commissioner Daniels suggestions. 20. Chairman Quill stated the limiting of the height of the berm is negligent when you consider when the landscaping reaches maturity as it will exceed the height of the berm and wall. ~ , 21. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 2006- 1 018, approving Specific Plan 99-035 Amendment No. 1, as recommended and amended including 7 and 8: 6 ~. , Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2006 ' a. Condition added: At no place shall the top of the wall exceed the 16 foot height limit of the berm even if it extends into the setback area. The details of the perimeter plans for Madison Street be brought back to the Commission. b. Condition added: Multi-use trail design and materials along Madison Street shall be brought back to the Commission. Motion carried with Commissioner Barrows voting no. C. Site Development Permit 2006-864; a request of Tahiti Partners Real Esate Development Corporation for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for two prototypical residential plans for use in Tract 24890-1 located on the east side of Mandarins south of Pomelo in the citrus project. 1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Phil Larson, representing the applicant, stated he was available to answer any questions. 3. Commissioner Alderson asked if the roof material would be mudded and boosted for the roof. Mr. Larson stated yes and the walls would be a slick smooth trowel finish. He did ask that Condition No. 9 for no turf be removed as they have been requested by the Homeowners' Association to maintain continuity with the front yard landscaping for the remainder of the Citrus. 4. Mr. Robert Crowell, 79-890 Citrus Street, president of HOA stated they support the project and the removal of Condition No. 9. They have been working with the applicant but, have not seen the landscaping plans. Also, they did not receive any notification of the public hearing. Staff noted it is a normal process of staff to ask the applicant to obtain approval of the HOA before staff renders their approval. 5. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 7 Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2006 ~ ' 6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Alderson ' to adopt Minute Motion 2006-019, approving Site Development Permit 2006-864, as recommended and amended: a. Condition added: The applicant shall submit HOA comments on the landscaping plans to staff prior to final approval. b. Condition No. 9: add: "artificial turf can be used." Unanimously approved. D. Site Development Permit 2006-863; a request of Innovative Communities for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for three prototypical residential plans for use in Tract 34243 located on the north side of Avenue 58 west of Madison Street. 1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the staff report, a , copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff asked that a condition be added to require , boulders and shrub material be added to the retention basin. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Barrows asked if there was a gate from the homes to the area. Staff stated no. Commissioner Barrows asked if the pathways were wide enough for pedestrian and bicycle use. Staff stated it is a tight sidewalk. A pedestrian would have to step out of the way of the bicycle rider. 3. Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Brad Foman, Innovative Communities, stated there is access from the north and south and east and west of the project but, not from the individual homes. The walkway is not intended for bicyclists, but pedestrian. They would be sensitive to benches and clustering as suggested by staff. They are prepared to cluster the plant material as requested by the ALRC. 4. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 8 Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2006 5. Commissioner Daniels agrees with staff's suggestions for boulders and benches in the retention basin. 6. Chairman Quill stated his concern that the last time this project was before them, the Commission asked for more innovation and again the Commission is asking for additional treatment. 7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Alderson to adopt Minute Motion 2006-020, approving Site Development Permit 2006-863, as recommended and amended: a. Condition added: Enhancement of landscaping area including boulders, shrub material, benches, etc., shall be added to the retention basin as recommended by staff. b . Condition added: An option shall be offered for no turf landscaping. c. Condition added: There shall be adequate nuisance water drainage so there are no muck basins in the recreation basin. Motion carried with Chairman Quill voting no. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Staff informed the Commission they were working on standard programs for the City for walls and berms. This will also be tied into the Vista Santa Rosa area as well. Staff is preparing a Request for Proposals to draft a set of standard. B. Staff informed the Commission that in a quick review, it appears time extensions, which no changes to the conditions, can be approved by staff. Staff will review past practice to see if there is a reason for bringing them before the Commission. C. Commissioners reviewed the City Council meeting of July 18, 2006. 9 Planning Commission Minutes July 25, 2006 X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Barrows to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on August 8, 2006. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:30 p.m. on July 25, 2006. Respectfully submitted, ~`~ y . S yer, Executive Secretary City o a Quinta, California 10