2010 06 08 PCT
ok�''`Qo City of La Quinta
Planning Commission Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
.� @ www.la-guinta.org
SV
c� OF
9
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
JUNE 8, 2010
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT
REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2010-018
Beginning Minute Motion 2010-004
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
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of May 25, 2010.
V. 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.
There are no Public Hearing Items for this meeting.
VI. BUSINESS ITEM:
A. Item .................. RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION 2010-018
Applicant........... City of La Quinta — Public Works Department
Location............ Portion of Avenida Ultimo East of Washington Street
Request ............. Proposed Right -Of -Way Vacation of a 2,426 Square Foot
Portion of Avenida Ultimo.
Action ................. Staff Recommendation for Adoption of Attached
Resolution Recommending Approval to Council —
Resolution 2010
B. Item .................. CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATE FENCING MATERIALS
Applicant........... City of La Quinta — Planning Department
Location............ City-wide
Request ............. Consideration as to Whether to Allow Sheet Metal
Fencing as an Alternate Material for Residential Fences.
Action ................. Staff Recommendation for Adoption of Minute Motion
2010
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Report on City Council meeting of June 1, 2010, by Commissioner
Barrows
B. Commissioner Quill is scheduled to attend the June 15, 2010, City
Council meeting.
C. New City Council Meeting Attendance List
D. Re -scheduled discussion regarding Commission Summer Meeting Schedule.
IX. DIRECTOR ITEMS:
X. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be
held on June 22, 2010, at 7:00 p.m.
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that
the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, June
8, 2010 was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico
and the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, 51-321 Avenida Bermudas, on
Friday, June 4, 2010.
DATED: June 4, 2010
CARD YN WALKER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
Public Notices
The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is
needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7123, twenty-
four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made.
If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning
Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's
office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required.
If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a Planning
Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits,
etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this
take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00 p.m. meeting.
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
May 25, 2010 7:04 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
A. A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to
order at 7:04 p.m. by Chairman Alderson.
PRESENT: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Weber, Wilkinson, and
Chairman Alderson.
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Les Johnson, Planning Manager
David Sawyer, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer,
PrincipalPlanner Andrew Mogensen, and Executive
Secretary Carolyn Walker.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR`:
There being no comments, or suggestions, it was moved by Commissioners
Barrows/Weber to approve: the minutes of April 27, 2010 as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Environmental Assessment 2006-564, Conditional Use Permit 2006
097, and Site Development Permit 2006-860; a request by Prest-
Vuksic Architects for consideration of development plans for a
proposed church parking lot located on the west side of Washington
Street, between Avenues 47 and 48.
Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the staff report, a copy
of which is on file in the Planning Department.
Planning Commission Minutes
May 25, 2010
Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Weber asked about the retention basin and the City's
role in its maintenance. Staff gave an explanation of stormwater in
the area and the need for the basin.
Principal Engineer Wimmer explained this was a cooperative project
between the City and the church. The basin was sized to handle all
the runoff water from the church and the nearby neighborhood. The
maintenance of the basin itself will be taken over by the Diocese and
the dry wells will be maintained by the City.
Commissioner Weber provided general review comments on the
number of parking spaces. Staff explained the parking ratio formula.
Commissioner Weber provided general review comments about the
variety of lighting fixtures, types of bulbs and color indexes. Staff
explained the information in the report, and said lighting specialist
Ralph Raya was available to provide more detailed information.
Commissioner Weber mentioned his concerns about grading the
mountain area, blow sand, and the differences in elevations. Staff
referenced an aerial photo and then pointed out the mountain in
relation to the parking lot(s), with the explanation there would be a 6
to 8 foot elevation difference between the new and old parking lots.
Commissioner Barrows also had concerns about blow sand generated
from the west of this site. Staff said there was a potential of blow
sand and explained what circumstances could cause that.
Commissioner Barrows had several concerns about turf, including; 1)
the turf at the bottom of the retention basin, 2) maintenance, and 3)
the actual need for turf. She gave the example of the City's retention
basin on Avenue 52 which was not lined with turf. She was
concerned about consistency, and maintenance issues, in allowing turf
in retention basins.
Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer explained that maintenance had more to
do with the functionality of the dry well. He explained that turf acts as
a bioswale and avoids clogging of chambers; thereby causing
expensive repairs. He did explain that the bottom need not be all turf.
-2-
Planning Commission Minutes
May 25, 2010
Commissioner Barrows commented on the Architecture and
Landscaping Review Commission (ALRC) Condition no. 69. Staff
explained the Committee Members were concerned about
maintenance and the possibility of the groundcover being trampled.
Commissioner Wilkinson provided general review comments on sod
issues; especially a compromise of sod allowed in the bottom of the
retention basin. Staff said when the final dry well designs, and
landscaping plans, are submitted they will determine what is needed
to perform the bioswale function.
Chairman Alderson provided general review comments on the
archaeological monitoring; especially the cost. Staff explained how it
would be handled and said the charges would be borne by the
applicant.
There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if
the applicant would like to speak.
Mr. John Vuksic, Prest-Vuksic Architects, 44-530 San Pablo Avenue,
Palm Desert - introduced himself and asked for clarification on
Condition no. 18 — page 59, third paragraph which references the
Secondary Entrance. It mentioned left turn in and right turn out are
restricted, and he asked why there was a restriction on right turns.
He explained they want to be able to turn right and head south on the
Frontage Road back onto Washington and asked for correction of that
condition.
He then referenced condition no. 69, page 70, which referred to
removal of the landscaping. He explained the orientation of the parking
lot and the reasons why they would like to leave the planters as
designed.
Commissioner Wilkinson asked about 1) the possibility of pass-thru
locations, or decomposed granite (dg)„ in the planters; and 2)
rehabilitation of the Type R lamps. Mr. Vuksic said they had no
objections to re -finishing the lamps and adding decomposed granite in
the planters, if those conditions were added.
Commissioner Barrows asked if trees were included in the planters.
Mr. Vuksic said yes.
-3-
Planning Commission Minutes
May 25, 2010
Commissioner Barrows asked for clarification of the ALRC condition
requesting more turf since the applicant would later replace it with
desertscape. Mr. Vuksic said they would prefer not to add the turf as
they would be replacing it later.
Commissioner Barrows asked for more information on the proposed
lighting; including energy efficiency and color. -Mr. Vuksic said Mr.
Raya could address her concerns.
Mr. Ralph Raya, MRC Engineering, 72-880 Fred Waring Drive, Suite C-
11, Palm Desert — explained the three types of lighting and their uses.
He commented that the lamps would be different than those
commonly used in parking lots. He further explained the shielding and
effects on nearby areas and the fact that the lamps were "Dark Sky"
compliant.
Commissioner Quill provided general review comments on the types of
lighting and the length of time each would be in operation. Mr. Raya
provided an explanation of how the controls were set up and how the
lighting would be utilized.
Chairman Alderson was concerned about: the mix of lights and the
differences in the type of light they emitted. Mr. Raya explained the
types of lamps and how they would blend with each other.
Commissioner Weber asked for clarification of the affect of the high
pressure sodium lights, the patina of the Type A lamp, and the color
rendering index. Mr. Raya gave an explanation of the color index of
the various lamps and their temperatures. He also discussed mixed
lights and zones, and the eye's perception of the colors.
Commissioner Barrows suggested the substitution of native shrubs
such as Encilla, Brittle Bush, or Desert Apricot, for those listed.
Mr. Vuksic suggested Mr. Horton, of HSA could talk further on that
subject. He also discussed the entry median and the condition to
enhance that median. He requested it be left alone at this point, and
left open the possibility of later utilizing more desert landscape rather
than turf, which is in the median now.
L!
Planning Commission Minutes
May 25, 2010
Mr. Mike Horton, HSA Design Group, 4-2-635 Melanie Place, Palm
Desert introduced himself and said he didn't have a problem with
substituting some local native plants.
Commissioner Barrows asked if he could comment on the ALRC's
concern about balance and the condition recommending the planting
of palm trees. Mr. Horton discussed the recommendation of adding
some Washingtonia hybrids, or Filiferas at both corners of the project
and said they would also add a few palm trees in the other side to
balance it out.
Commissioner Weber asked Mr. Horton if he was adverse to putting in
the palms per the ALRC's recommendation and how many would be
involved.
Mr. Horton said they were not adverse to the addition. There would
be a total of six (of the same type) at varying heights (12 to 18 feet).
He discussed their reasons for wanting to plant trees which were all of
the same variety.
General discussion followed regarding the types of trees chosen, color
palettes, growth patterns, shade issues, maintenance, and location of
each of the types of trees.
General discussion then followed regarding the amount of turf and the
percentage of sod needed in the retention basin.
Staff's response to the discussion was that they anticipated there
would be a possible 50% reduction in turf; from what was shown on
the exhibits.
Chairman Alderson commented on a portion of turf that could be
utilized as a small entry treatment to the left side of the driveway. He
asked if there would be a problem with that. Mr. Horton responded
there would not.
Chairman Alderson commented on the ALRC's requests for 1) the
planting to be removed, in the planter aisles, and 2) additional palm
trees. Staff responded that the ALRC's concerns were 1) plantings
would get trampled and 2) there was no continuity of planting with
Washington Street. Staff explained there were suggestions of
including decomposed granite (dg) and the use of stepping stones, but
-5-
Planning Commission Minutes
May 25, 2010
it was brought out that the project conditions require that all the
landscaping be maintained whether it got trampled or not.
Chairman Alderson then provided general review comments on
pedestrian traffic flow, the aesthetics of the site from Washington and
his lack of support for the ALRC position.
Mr. Horton agreed with the Chairman's statements, added his
comments on the direction of pedestrian flow, and said he did not feel
maintaining the landscaping was going to be an issue.
Commissioner Weber asked Mr. Vuksic about the ALRC's
recommendation no. 2; shortening the length of the medians at the
end of each row of parking.
Mr. Vuksic said he understood the intent behind that was to make it
easier to turn into the drive aisles. However, he said they were
concerned that it would expose the back of the car that was parked
there, which could increase the possibility a car getting clipped. The
medians were intended to act as a buffer and create a barrier between
that last car and the drive aisle.
Commissioner Weber commented on the width of the parking spaces.
Mr. Vuksic said they were adequate.
Commissioner Weber asked about the grading of the new temporary
parking lot and the blow sand which would be removed. Mr. Vuksic
provided comment on the possibility of a future building on that site
and possible dirt relocation sites.
Chairman Alderson asked if the site would be graded to accommodate
the potential pad height of a future development. Mr. Vuksic said yes.
Chairman Alderson commented on the telephone poles, used for
landscaping purposes in the parking lot, and suggested they be
replaced. Mr. Vuksic agreed.
Planning Director Johnson suggested, while the public hearing was
open, there be discussion of the conditions previously mentioned,
beginning with Condition no. 18 (Secondary Entry); stating it was a
typographical error and should read left turns in and out are permitted.
-6-
Planning Commission Minutes
May 25, 2010
Staff then commented on Condition no. 69; that shrubs could be
included and would function well in the parking area. He then gave
examples of similar planters in the City, which have functioned well.
Staff then commented on the shortening of the length of the end
caps, and said they should be unchanged, as the change could cause
safety concerns. There could be the possibility of softening the
radius, but the length would need to remain at the standard stall
length. Chairman Alderson asked if that adhered to the City standards.
Staff responded it did
There being no further applicant comments, Chairman Alderson asked
if there was any public comment.
There being no public comment, Chairman Alderson opened the matter
for Commission discussion.
Commissioner Quill said he disagreed with the ALRC's
recommendations; except for the suggestion of using Washingtonia
Filifera, or a hybrid variety, if the palm trees were to be added.
Commissioner Barrows reiterated her concerns about the use of native
plants in the landscape proposal.
Commissioner Quill said he agreed with the reduction of the turf in the
retention basin.
Commissioner Weber agreed with Commissioners Barrows and Quill
and requested specificity of tree types be added in Condition no. 71.
There being no further questions or discussion, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Quill/Weber to adopt Resolution 2010-
015 recommending approval of Environmental Assessment 2006-564
as submitted. Unanimously approved.
Therebeing no further questions or discussion, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Quill/Wilkinson to adopt Resolution 2010-
016 recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2006-097 as_
submitted. Unanimously approved.
-7-
Planning Commission Minutes
May 25, 2010
There being no further questions or discussion, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Quill/Barrows to adopt Resolution 2010-
017 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2006-860
with the following modifications:
Condition 18 "Secondary Entry" portion to be modified to read:
Secondary Entry (Frontage Road): Right turn in and
out and left turn out are permitted. Left turn in is
restricted.
The following conditions be added, under Landscaping and Irrigation:
Condition 64 (formerly condition no. 71) The applicant shall
include, in the final landscaping plan, six (6) hybrid
Washingtonia Filiferapalm trees to be planted
along the Washington Street frontage.
Condition 65 The applicant shall work with staff to replace some
shrubbery with native Coachella Valley species.
Conditions 69, 70, 72, 73, and 74 be deleted, under Architecture and
Landscaping Review Commission
Unanimously approved
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Discussion regarding Commission Summer Meeting Schedule, which
was followed by the decision to put this on the agenda for the June 8,
2010, meeting.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
A. Letter from Linda Paul, Real Estate and Zoning Manager for T-mobile,
dated April 28, 2010. (General discussion followed)
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioner Wilkinson gave a report on the City Council Meeting of
May 4, 2010. (A brief summary of the meeting was given followed
by discussion of several items.)
3
Planning Commission Minutes
May 25, 2010
B. Chairman Alderson gave a report on the City Council Meeting of May
18, 2010. (A brief summary of the meeting was given followed by
discussion of several items).
C. Chairman Alderson noted Commissioner Barrows was scheduled to
report back on the June 1, 2010, Council meeting.
IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS:
A. Planning Director Johnson advised the Commission they were invited
to attend the City Council — Special Budget Meeting - on June 3,
2010, at 3:00 p.m.
B. Planning Director Johnson reminded Commission there was a General
Plan Update meeting, focusing on the Highway 111 Business and
Property Owners, on May 26, 2010 at 3:00 p.m. and the public was
invited.
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved by Chairman Alderson to
adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular
meeting to beheld on June 8, 2010.. This regular meeting was adjourned at
8:35 p.m. on May 25, 2010.
Respectfully submitted,
Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
-9-
Fp • i'
DATE:
CASE NO.:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
BACKGROUND:
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
JUNE 8, 2010
RIGHT OF WAY VACATION 2010-018
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION OF A 2,426 SQUARE
FOOT PORTION OF AVENIDA ULTIMO
PORTION OF AVENIDA ULTIMO EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET
CITY OF LA QUINTA.
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65402, the "Planning Agency" (City
of La Quinta Planning Commission) shall make a finding that the proposed vacation is
consistent with the City's General Plan and Circulation Element for any street right of
way or public easement being vacated by the City Council.
The portion of Avenida Ultimo east of Washington Street was dedicated for public use
on the Subdivision Map for Desert Club Tract, Unit No. 5 (Attachment 1) and accepted
by Riverside County as a public street. When the street improvements associated with
Assessment District No. 91-01 Area "B" were completed, this portion of Avenida
Ultimo became a dead end. This portion of right-of-way is specifically described in
Attachment 2 and 3 and is not needed by other property owners for access, or
improved accessibility.
The City of La Quinta wishes to vacate the easement associated with this portion of
Avenida Ultimo as it is no longer needed for public right of way.
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION:
The proposed vacation is exempt under Section 15060 of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) in that the vacation of the subject easement will not result in a
direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment.
PUBLIC AGENCY COMMENTS:
On January 15, 2010 and February 25, 2010, staff mailed notices and/or contacted
(first and second notices) potentially affected public utility agencies, informing them of
the proposed vacation. If a utility company responds to such notice with a request for
an easement to continue operation and maintenance of existing public utilities, a utility
easement will be is to be reserved.
Coachella Valley Water District responded stating it has irrigation, water and sewer
facilities within the proposed vacation area and has requested a utility easement over
the entire easement area. Therefore, a reservation of an easement in favor of the
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) overthe entire proposed vacation for their existing
facilities is needed by CVWD to install, construct, enlarge, survey, reconstruct, remove and
replace, operate, maintain, repair, improve and relocate underground pipeline(s), which
pipeline(s) may be installed at different times, and over a period of time, and necessary
devices and appurtenances thereto in, on over, under, along and across the entire
proposed right of way vacation.
FINDINGS:
The following findings can be made regarding the proposed vacation:
1. The proposed right of way vacation will have no environmental effects that
adversely impact the human population, either directly or indirectly because the
street segment is currently unused by the public and inaccessible to vehicles;
and secondly, the act of vacating the right of way will have no physical
environmental effect.
2. The right of way vacation will not impact public utility agencies, provided
easements are established for the continued maintenance and operation of
existing public utilities.
3. The portion of Avenida Ultimo is no longer needed for public street purposes.
4. Under CGC Section 65402 the proposed Right of Way Vacation of a 2,426 sq.
ft. portion of Avenida Ultimo is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution 2010-_ attached herewith subject to the granting of easement to
the CVWD to install, construct, enlarge, survey, reconstruct, remove and replace, operate,
maintain, repair, improve and relocate underground pipeline(s), which pipeline(s) may be
installed at different times, and over a period of time, and necessary devices and
appurtenances thereto in, on over, under, along and across the entire proposed right of
way vacation
2
Prepared by:
BRIAN CHING, Associate Engineer
Submitted by:
DAVID SAWYER, Planning Manager
Attachments: 1. Desert Club Tract Unit 5 Tract Map
2. Legal Description
3. Plat
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2010-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
VACATION OF A 2,426 SQ. FT. PORTION OF
AVENIDA ULTIMO
CASE NO.: RIGHT OF WAY VACATION 2010-018
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the; City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 8T" day of June, 2010, consider the request for right of way vacation of a
portion of Avenida Ultimo east of Washington Street; and,
WHEREAS. the proposed vacation is exempt under Section 15060 of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in that the vacation of the subject
easement will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change
in the environment.
WHEREAS, State Government Code Section 65402 requires that prior to
streets being vacated by the City Council, the Planning Commission make a finding
that the proposed right of way vacation is consistent with the City's General Plan; and,
WHEREAS, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory
Finding confirming that the proposed street vacation is consistent with the City's
General Plan:
1. The proposed right of way vacation will have no environmental effects that
adversely impact the human population, either directly or indirectly, because the
street segment is currently unused by the public; and inaccessible to vehicles;
and secondly, the act of vacating the right of way will have no physical
environmental effect.
2. The right of way vacation will not impact public utility agencies, provided
easements are retained for the continued maintenance and operation of existing
public utilities. The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) did request
easement over the entire portion to be vacated for existing domestic water,
sanitary sewer and irrigation laterals to install, construct, enlarge, survey,
reconstruct, remove and replace, operate, maintain, repair, improve and relocate
underground pipeline(s), which pipeline(s) may be installed at different times, and
over a period of time, and necessary devices and appurtenances thereto in, on
over, under, along and across the entire proposed right of way vacation.
4
3. The portion of Avenida Ultimo is no longer needed for public street purposes.
4. Under CGC Section 65402 the proposed Right of Way Vacation of a 2,426
sq. ft. portion of Avenida Ultimo is consistent with the La Quinta General
Plan
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
Section 1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission in this case
Section 2. That it does find the proposed Right -of -Way Vacation 2010-018,
as shown on the Exhibits A and B, is consistent with the City's General Plan for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution and recommends to the City Council approval of
the right-of-way vacation provided an easement is granted to CVWD to install,
construct, enlarge, survey, reconstruct, remove and replace, operate, maintain, repair,
improve and relocate underground pipeline(s), which pipeline(s) may be installed at
different times, and over a period of time, and necessary devices and appurtenances
thereto in, on over, under, along and across the entire proposed right of way vacation.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8T" day of June, 2010, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
EDWARD L. ALDERSON, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
LES JOHNSON
Planning Director
City of La Quinta, California
EXHIBIT "A"
AVENIDA ULTIMO STREET VACATION
RW-V 2010-018
IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
THAT PORITON OF LETTERED LOT "B" (AVENIDA ULTIMO) AS SHOWN BY THE DESERT CLUB TRACT,
UNIT NO. 5, AS FILED IN BOOK 21, PAGES 61 AND 62 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, OF THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ALSO
BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF WASHINGTON STREET (FORMERLY MARSHALL STREET)
AND AVENIDA ULTIMO, AS SHOWN BY SAID DESERT CLUB TRACT, UNIT NO. 5;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 6, NORTH 89'48'00" EAST, 30.00 FEET, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
AFOREMENTIONED LOT "B", ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, NORTH 89'48'00" EAST, 78.00 FEET, TO THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA PER QUITCLAIM
DEED RECORDED JANUARY 13, 1992 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 011041 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS;
THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE, SOUTH 00-09'30` EAST, 30.00 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE
SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "B", ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID AVENIDA
ULTIMO;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY, SOUTH 8748'00" WEST, 58.02 FEET, TO
THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE:, ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID
AVENIDE ULTIMO; THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89'57'30", AN ARC LENGTH OF 31.40 FEET, TO A
POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID WASHINGTON STREET;
THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF AFOREMENTIONED LOT "B", NORTH 00'09'30" WEST,
49.99 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 2,426 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
5 J. vGG�
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
u L.S. 65813
Exp. 12-31-11
CHRIS J. BEFOH, P. 6588 DATE: r
J' ov
EXPIRES 12/31/11 FOF CA
EXHIBIT "B"
NW COR.
SW 1 /4,
NE 1/4.
SEC. 6,
T6S, R7E
30'
AVENIDA ULTIMO STREET VACATION
RW-V 2010-018
30' 1
J
30' 1 30'
CVWD
(O.R. 2456846)
-S.W. CORNER OF.R/W PER
QUITCLAIM DEED, O.R. 011041
I R/W PER QUITCLAIM
COR. DEED, O.R. 011041
�g" � REC., 1/13/1992
N 89'48'00" E
569.00'
122.00'
1_3 AVENIDA ULTIMO "LOT, Ir
` L4 1 '—SOUTHERLY R/1
'A=8757'30"
R=20.00'
L=31.40'
13 12
DESERT CLUB TRACT
UNIT NO. 5 1
M.B. 21 /61-62
14
INDICATES EASEMENT AREA
LINE DATA
BEARING
LENGTH
Ll
N
89'48'00"
E
30.00'
L2
N
89'48'00"
E
78.00'
L3
S
00'09'30"
E
30.00'
L4
S
8948'00"
W
58.02'
L5
N
00'09'30"
W
49.99'
15
16
SCALE: 1" = 80'
J.
U
LS. 6588
Exp. 12-31-11
0
M
0
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
_ Y o
CHRIS J. B GH, Itf.S. 6588 DATE:
EXPIRES 12/31/11
ATTACHMENT 1
;cj
41
Iql
I
LO
01
Z�
kAt
1-4
Z.4 lit N
v I
444
q- mi I
t 140 i,
" 7 . VOIN Vb.LV73nN 7f
0
ao :04M
YOW q Tom
t.5
VaNw V'7 0 1 N;Z�
qt
gppuvW k�iMatWYs�. -.__.__._'.tee pgyyi✓arE.u9M�'
I
d 8J ! 0 9
ao L"n
—._- VaNQf Vl--
� a
+ x
° 07IdNVl .esr_.__ $ °ax+r'- .,.a�v— c.mv':Va{N3/N--01
Rw
LO
L, 3A%—
� A
��'Avrm�nv R x
{S g
a
vwu
ON llln....._...�ar_.`.�.._.a ._._._....� - -- _.......y'QiMgn+y.....tl...
KlM >:3i.®v TmPtv1'P�IT
WKW
'J I'
-- air°rrz;
ATTACHMENT 2
AVENIDA ULTIMO STREET VACATION
RW-V-2-01-0-01-8---
IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
THAT PORITON OF LETTERED LOT "B" (AVENIDA ULTIMO) AS SHOWN BY THE DESERT CLUB TRACT,
UNIT NO. 5, AS FILED IN BOOK 21, PAGES 61 AND 62 OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE
COUNTY RECORDER OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, OF THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF SECTION 6, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, ALSO
BEING THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF WASHINGTON STREET (FORMERLY MARSHALL STREET)
AND AVENIDA ULTIMO, AS SHOWN BY SAID DESERT CLUB TRACT, UNIT NO. 5;
THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST
QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 6, NORTH 89'48'00" EAST, 30.00 FEET, TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF
AFOREMENTIONED LOT "B", ALSO BEING THE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, NORTH 89'48'00" EAST, 78.00 FEET, TO THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THAT PARCEL OF LAND GRANTED TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA PER QUITCLAIM
DEED RECORDED JANUARY 13, 1992 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 011041 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS;
THENCE LEAVING SAID NORTHERLY LINE, SOUTH 00'09'30° EAST, 30.00 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE
SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT "B", ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID AVENIDA
ULTIMO;
THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY, SOUTH 8948'W WEST, 58.02 FEET, TO
THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 20.00 FEET;
THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE, ALSO BEING THE SOUTHERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID
AVENIDE ULTIMO; THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 89-57'30", AN ARC LENGTH OF 31.40 FEET, TO A
POINT ON THE EASTERLY RIGHT OF WAY OF SAID WASHINGTON STREET;
THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF AFOREMENTIONED LOT "B", NORTH 00'09130" WEST,
49.99 FEET, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING.
SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 2,426 SQUARE FEET, MORE OR LESS.
ALL AS SHOWN ON EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF
11
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF: �p
aLFxp.
'�*-11
CHRIS J. BE P. 6588 ATE:EXPIRES 12/31/11 FOFCAL�E��P
ATTACHMENT # 3
SW 1 /4,
NE 1/4.
SEC. 6,
T6S, R7E
30,
AVENIDA ULTIMO STREET VACATION
RW-V 2010-018
30' I
J
30' 1 30'
CVWD
(O.R. 2456846)
S.W. CORNER OF R/W PER
QUITCLAIM DEED, O.R. 011041
POB R/W PER QUITCLAIM
NW COR. DEED, O.R. 011041
LOT 6 REC., 1/13/1992
�- N 89'48'00" E 569.00'
SCALE: 1" = 80'
0 40 80 160
L2 122.00' 339.00' A
L3 rL AVENIDA ULTIMO "LOT e"
L4 SOUTHERLY R/W
0=89'57'30"
R=20.00'
L=31.40'
13 12 11
DESERT CLUB TRACT
UNIT NO. 5
M.B. 21 /61-62
14
INDICATES EASEMENT AREA
LINE DATA
BEARING
LENGTH
Li
N
89'48'00"
E
30.00'
L2
N
89'48'00"
E
78.00'
L3
S
0909'30"
E
30,00'
L4
S
89'48'00"
W
58.02'
L5
N
00'09'30"
W
49.99'
15
um.
J.
L.S. 6588
* Exp. 12-31-11
0
0
M
PREPARED UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF:
411110
CHRNS J. 8 GH, S. 6588 DATE:
EXPIRES 12/31/11
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JUNE 8, 2010
APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION AS TO WHETHER TO ALLOW SHEET
METAL FENCING AS AN ALTERNATE MATERIAL FOR
RESIDENTIAL FENCES.
LOCATION: CITY-WIDE
BACKGROUND:
As it is currently provided for in Municipal Code Section 9.60.030E, fencing
materials in the residential districts are limited to wood, vinyl, ornamental iron and
tubular steel, and masonry. Interest has been expressed in allowing sheet metal
fencing material as an alternative to wood fencing (Attachment 1).
Homeowner interest in using metal sheet fencing as a possible fencing material has
increased in the past few years. One homeowner, in the Highland Palms
neighborhood, has installed metal sheet fencing within their front yards and several
residences in the cove have used the material to screen their homes or add
architectural interest (Attachment 2).
ANALYSIS:
Most new residential fencing is a masonry concrete block product. In fact virtually
all of the new residential fencing installed in La Quinta over the past decade or so
has been concrete block. In contrast, there are numerous residences in older
neighborhoods with existing wood fences in the front, rear or side yards. Though it
is the least expensive of the materials currently provided, wood fencing also has
the highest maintenance cost and the shortest life span.
As an alternative to wood fencing, metal sheet fencing has been suggested, and is
in use at some locations in the City. Metal sheet fencing is a higher cost than
wood, but requires less maintenance and has a much longer life span. In addition,
the product provides the privacy that most homeowners want to achieve in their
yards. It is worth noting that wood fencing is limited to rear and interior side yards
and only when not visible from the street. However, the request for metal sheet
fencing is for all yard areas including side and front yards.
Historically, the aesthetic of metal sheet fencing has been of question. Recent
improvements in metal sheet products have increased their aesthetic and design
use and decreased maintenance. Also, several manufacturers are now producing
fencing with a number of design uses and colors allowing for alternatives.
Examples of metal sheet fencing are attached.
Metal sheet fencing material has been used on a few residences in the City, and is
more common in other cities with modern design. Most notably, metal sheeting
has been used on the exterior of the Amore Restaurant: building, along Washington
Street (Attachment 3)• While metal fencing material can be compatible with the
surrounding built environment, a compatibility determination should be made on a
case -by -case basis, with consideration given to the: architectural style of the
individual home in the same manner as other fencing material is currently reviewed.
It is staff's position that sheet metal fencing should be allowed as a permissible
fencing material, subject to all of the applicable fence provisions in LQMC Section
9.60.030.E1 (Attachment 4).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission consider the option of allowing metal
sheet fencing as a permitted fencing material and provide the appropriate direction
to staff.
Prepared by:
Eric Ce-- — ja, Assistant Planner
Attachments:
1. Sheet Metal Samples
2. Sheet Metal Examples
3. Amore Restaurant Elevations
4. LQMC 9.60.030E
2
Ber�rid • e
HR- i f Bane
Horizontal or ertical Wall Panels
Versafite, maintenance -free,
prefi`nshed metal wall panels for open
spans
• Hidden as ene
• gmji - Ri APpe
• utti-purpose Panel
vailable i 2 0 22
N
0
w
4
m
HR-16 Panel Interlock
Berridge Manufacturing Company
6615 Fratt Rd, San Antonio, TX 78218
Local:210-650-3050 800�69-0009
www.berridge.com
HR-16 PANEL a 24 GA.
Neaative Design Loads in PSF
1592 Test Design
.. ... ...
sc,�
2.50
210.00
105.00
3.00
196.00 T
95.00
3.50
170.00t5.00
4.00
150.005.00
450
130.005.00
-C
Notes:
1. Panel Description: HR-16, 24 ga., (2) #10-16 x V Pancake per connection.
2. The above loads were derived from uplift tests done in accordance with ASTM
E-1592 by Force Engineering.
3. All values are interpolated andlor extrapolated from tests performed at spans
of 2'-0" and 5'-01.
4. Test results are highlighted.
5. Design Load contains a 2.0 factor of safety in accordance with AISI'01,
SPIECO(FOCAMONS
(Repast =Mere sv-1 from 18=4
Furnish and install Berridge HR-16 Panel as manufactured by Ber-
ridge Manufacturing Co., Seguin, Texas.
MANUFACTURE: Panels shall be roll -formed in continuous lengths
- ma)c 40'-0". Panel Coverage to be 16-0- with rib sparing of 4" on
center and panel depth of 7/8"
MATERIAL. AND FINISH See web site: www.berridge.com
CONSTRUCTION DETAILS
See web site: wvvw.berridge.com
3
'a'a
WC3
i
1
i Y r4
Fe y.��it^`°�����
\S
e/•n
ty x
fin,
ATTACHMENT #3
ps
t
6 Ny
is
y.ov.vsv rences ana waus.
http://gcode. us/codes/laqu i nta/v i ew. php?topic=9-9_60-9_60_030&fr...
ATTACHMENT # 4
La Quinta Municipal Code
Up Previous Next Main
Title 9 ZONING
Chapter 9.60 SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS
9.60.030 Fences and walls.
Search Print No Frames
A. Definition. For purposes of this section, "fence" or "wall" means any type of fence, wall, retaining wall,
sound attenuation wall, screen or windscreen. The terms "fence" and "wall' are used interchangeably in this
section to mean any or all of the preceding structures.
B. Measurement of Fence Height. Except as otherwise specified in this section, fence heights shall be
measured from finish grade at the base of the fence to the highest point of the fence on the interior or exterior
side, whichever is higher.
Measur at oC Feme 1kirgbt
In addition, the following provisions shall apply to the measurement: of fence height:
1. Open railings, up to forty-eight inches high, placed on top of a retaining or other wall and required for
pedestrian safety shall not be included in the height measurement.
2. Fences less than thirty inches apart (measured between adjoining faces) shall be considered one structure
and fence height shall be measured from the base of the lower fence to the top of the higher fence. Fences thirty
inches or more apart shall be considered separate structures and their heights shall be measured independently.
The director may require that the area between such fences be provided with permanent landscaping and
irrigation.
C. Fence Heights. The construction and installation of fences shall be in compliance with the following
standards:
1. Within Main Building Area. In the area of a lot where amain building maybe constructed, the maximum
freestanding fence height shall be twelve feet.
2. Setback Areas Not Bordering Streets. The maximum fence height shall be six feet within any required
setback area not adjoining a street. Where the elevation of an adjoining building site is higher than the base of
the fence within a side or rear setback area, the height of the fence may be measured from the elevation of the
adjoining building site to the top of the fence. However, fence height shall not exceed eight feet measured from
either side with the exception of the RC district (see Section 9.30.040).
3. Setback Areas Bordering Streets, Alleys and Other Accessway.
a. Within all districts, the maximum fence height shall be five feet within the first ten feet of the required
I of 3 5/26/2010 9:32 AM
-9.ou.usu rences ano waus.
nrtp:ngcoae.usicoaesi iaqumtaiview.pnp'!top tc=9-9_ou-9_eu_us unctr...
front setback area (measured from the street right-of-way) and six feet within any rear or side setback area
adjoining a public street.
b. Notwithstanding other fence height restrictions, where, because of the orientation of the lots, a property
line fence separates a front yard on one lot from a rear yard on an adjacent lot, the maximum fence height shall
be six feet.
c. Arches or trellises up to nine feet in overall height and five feet interior width maybe constructed over a
gate on a lot provided the arch/trellis is integrated into the fence/gate design.
d. Any portion of a building site where vehicular access is taken shall conform to the access intersection
requirements of subsection (C)(4) of this section.
e. City- or state -required sound attenuation walls bordering freeways or arterial highways may exceed six
feet in height if so recommended by a noise attenuation study and approved by the director.
4. Adjacent to a nonresidential zone or use. The maximum fence height between a residential zone or use
and a nonresidential zone or use shall be eight feet.
a. The height of fences, trees, shrubs and other visual obstructions shall be limited to a maximum height of
thirty inches within the triangular area formed by drawing a straight line:
i. Between two points located on and twenty feet distant from the point of intersection of two ultimate
street right-of-way lines.
ii. Between two points located on and five feet distant from the point of intersection of an ultimate street or
alley right-of-way on one hand and the edge of a driveway or another alley right-of-way on the other if parkway
width is less than twelve feet wide.
b. For purposes of this code, "point of intersection" means the intersection of the prolongation of the
right-of-way lines, excluding any curved portion joining the two lines.
c. The height restrictions of this subdivision shall apply to fences, walls, trees, shrubs, vegetation, or any
other material which obstructs or may obstruct visibility.
D. Gates.
1. Materials. Gates shall be constructed of ornamental iron/tubular steel and/or wood. Such gates may be
placed in any location provided they meet the requirements of this section and provided any wood used is not
less than a grade of construction heart or merchantable and better redwood or No. 2 and better (no holes)
western red cedar, stained or painted to match or complement the adjacent wall or structure. Alternatively, if left
in natural color, all wood shall be treated with a water -repellant material. Wood gates over thirty-six inches wide
shall have a metal frame. Chain link gates are prohibited. Vehicular driveway gates shall be constructed of
ornamental iron/tubular steel and metal if solid. If screening an RV, the gate shall be constructed of a solid
opaque material.
2. Width. Pedestrian gates shall not exceed five feet in width, except that gates may be any width within
sideyard setbacks of at least twelve feet.
E. Fence Construction and Materials. All fencing in residential districts shall conform to the following
construction and material standards:
1. Wood and Vinyl Fencing.
a. Except for gates, split two rail fencing, and for equestrian fencing regulated by Section 9.140.060, wood
and vinyl or similar recycled fencing materials are permitted in rear or interior side yards only, and only if not
visible from the street. Gates may be of wood in any location provided they comply with the standards of this
section.
b. All wood fencing shall be constructed of not less than a grade of construction heart or merchantable and
2 of 3 5/26/2010 9:32 AM
y.ou.u3u Peaces ana waits.
http://qcode.us/codes/laquinta/view.php?topic=9-9_60-9_60 030&fr...
better redwood or No. 2 and better (no holes) western red cedar, stained or painted to match or complement the
adjacent wall or structure. Alternatively, if left in natural color, all wood shall be treated with a water -repellant
material.
c. All vinyl or similar recycled fencing material shall be constructed of an aluminum -reinforced
non -reflective material that contains antistatic and UV -radiation inhibiting additives.
d. Fence boards maybe horizontal or vertical. Support posts shall be a minimum of nominal four inches by
four inches redwood, pressure -treated lumber, tubular steel or block and installed per the Uniform Building
Code.
e. Split Rail Fencing. Split two rail fencing shall be allowed in the front yard or along the front property
line with columns a maximum height of four feet and three feet for the top rail. All columns shall be cemented
with footings. Materials for the columns shall be wood, brick, or block. The rails may be either wood or other
non -wood products that have the appearance of split rail. A building permit shall be obtained prior to
construction.
2. Ornamental Iron and Tubular Steel Fencing. Ornamental iron or tubular steel fencing may be used along
the front or street side yards only. The iron or steel shall be painted to match or complement the adjacent wall or
structure.
3. Masonry Fencing. Solid masonry fencing (i.e., block, rock, brick, with or without stucco covering) is
permitted in any location on the lot provided the color of the masonry or stucco matches or complements the
adjacent wall or structure. Precision concrete block shall not be used unless all exterior surfaces visible from
outside the property are covered with stucco, paint, texture coating, or other comparable coating approved by the
director.
4. Material Combinations. Combinations of two or more of the preceding materials may be used provided
that the bottom one-half of the fence is constructed of a masonry material. Combinations incorporating wood
materials shall only be used for the rear and interior side yards and only when not visible from the street.
F. Fence Landscaping and Maintenance.
1. Landscaping. The area between the back of curb and any fencing; shall be landscaped, have a suitable
permanent irrigation system, and be continuously maintained by the property owner.
2. Maintenance. All walls and fences shall be continuously maintained in good repair. The property owner
shall be provided thirty days after receiving notice from the city to repair a wall or fence. The building official
may grant an extension to such time period not to exceed sixty days.
G. Prohibited Fence Materials and Construction Fences. The use of barbed wire, razor wire, chain link, or
similar materials in or on fences is prohibited in all residential districts. Chain link fencing is permitted for
temporary construction fences when authorized by a minor use permit issued in accordance with Section
9.210.020. Said minor use permit shall not be approved until a permit for grading, or construction, has been filed
for, whichever comes first.
H. Equestrian Fencing. Notwithstanding any other requirements of this section, fencing shall be regulated
by the provisions of Section 9.140.060 (Equestrian overlay regulations) where the keeping of horses is
permitted.
I. Nonconforming Fences. Any fence which does not meet the standards of this section but which was
legally established prior to the adoption of these standards may be maintained provided such fence is not
expanded nor its nonconformance with these standards otherwise increased. Any fence which is destroyed or
damaged to the extent of more than fifty percent of its total replacement value shall not be repaired, rebuilt, or
reconstructed except in conformance with these standards. (Ord. 466 § 1, 2009; Ord. 378 § 1 (Exh. A), 2002;
Ord. 361 § 1 (Exh. A) (part), 2001; Ord. 325 § 1 (Exh. A) (part), 1998; Ord. 299 § 1 (part), 1997; Ord. 284 § 1
(Exhs. A, B) (part), 1996)
3 of 3 5/26/2010 9:32 AM
CI #C
2010
July
6
20
August
3
17
September
7
21
October
5
19
November
2
16
December
7
21
2011
January
4
18
February
1
15
March
1
15
April
5
19
May
3
17
June
7
21
PLANNING COMMISSIONER ATTENDANCE
AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
JULY 6, 2010 — JUNE 21, 2011
Mark Weber
Robert Wilkinson
Ed Alderson
Council Dark
Council Dark
Katie Barrows
Paul Quill
Mark Weber
Robert Wilkinson
Ed Alderson
Katie Barrows
Paul Quill
Katie Barrows
Paul Quill
Mark Weber
Robert Wilkinson
Ed Alderson
Katie Barrows
Paul Quill
Mark Weber
Robert Wilkinson
Ed Alderson
Katie Barrows
Paul Quill
PAReports - PC\2010\6-8-10\COUNCIL ATTENDANCE LIST.doc