Loading...
2001 05 22 PC Minutes MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA May 22, 2001 7:OO P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Robbins who asked Commissioner Tyler to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Steve Robbins. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: A. Chairman Robbins stated a request had been received from Country Club of the Desert to reorganize the agenda taking Business Item "A" first. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to take Business Item "A" first on the agenda. Unanimously approved. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of May 8, 2001. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 7, Item 20 be corrected to delete "Abels"; Page 11, Item #36 be corrected to state, "as amended"; and Page 16, Item 2 be corrected by changing "Hastings Day Care" with "First School of the Desert".There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None. V. PRESENTATIONS: None. G :\WPDO C S\PC 5-22-01. wpd Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Tract Map 29894; a request of Country Club of the Desert for a deviation from the Public Works Department approved mass grading plan for the property located on the north side of Avenue 54 between Jefferson Street and Madison Street. 1. Chairman Robbins asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify Attachment 1 as to whether or not it had been approved by Council. Staff stated the design details for the perimeter landscaping were conceptual when approved and the height of the berm was not defined until the mass grading plan was submitted. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify what the Code required in regard to the wall, sidewalk, and height. Staff did so. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if there was a wall proposed. Staff stated it is proposed to be set back a distance ranging 1 5 to 25 feet along Avenue 54. Chairman Robbins questioned the 3:1 slope behind the wall. 4. Commissioner Butler asked how this occurred without staff knowing it. Staff stated that since they have not completed the grading there was no need to inspect it. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that for any project other than a golf course, the pad elevations would be defined and they would have to grade to that plan. During the course of grading for a golf course, the City's inspectors do not check detailed elevations and the developer grades at their own risk. At the completion of the grading they are required to submit a certificate to the City certifying that the grading was completed to the approved plans. In this instance, there is no doubt they have deviated from the approved plan. 5. Commissioner Kirk reviewed the approval process and asked why it was now before the Commission. Staff clarified that when the wall plans were submitted for approval, the grading issue was brought to staff's attention. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff had a recommendation. Staff stated they did not. G:\WPDOCS\PC5-22-O1.wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 6. Chairman Robbins stated it appears the golf course is 20 + feet below the street so the golf course is in a 40 foot hole below the top of the berm. 7. Commissioner Butler asked if there were any City codes that would allow this type of berm to be approved. Staff stated there are some issues in regard to this because in some instances a noise issue may require a higher berms than normal, such as in the case of Rancho La Quinta and Lake La Quinta. Commissioner Butler stated he did not entirely object to the berm. 8. Commissioner Abels asked what the height of the berm would be at its highest point with the wall on top. Staff stated the wall will not be on the top of the berm. It will be near the bottom and six feet in height. 9. Commissioner Tyler asked if there was a site plan for the interior of the project. Staff stated the applicant would address this. 10. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Nancy Aaronson, representing Country Club of the Desert, stated they are trying to find a location for excess dirt on the site. They are trying to balance the dirt out over the entire project. Aesthetically from inside the project the berming is essential to protect the value of the project. They had two different grading plans approved for their project. One was the right of way and the other was for the golf course. Steve Gar¢ia, landscape architect for the project, showed photographs that had been taken of the site. The dirt is stockpiled and will be sculptured at a later date. Within the right of way they have maintained the 3:1 slope with a meandering sidewalk. The wall is set back to be no closer than 15 feet from the right of way. Discussion followed as to the landscaping materials that would be used and the grading elevations on both sides of the berm. 11. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Kirk asked if the Specific Plan required the landscaping to match the other side of Avenue ,54. Staff stated yes. Mr. Garcia stated their plans calls for a maximum 30% turf in the perimeter right of way area. 12. Commissioner Butler asked what type of vegetation would be used on the berm. Mr. Garcia stated desert perennials and drought tolerant shrubs. G :\WPDO CS\PC 5- 22-01. wpd :~ Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 1 3. COmmissioner Tyler stated there would be a fantastic view to the south, but the height of the berm would mask the view of the mountains., Mr. Garcia stated the reason for the height was to hide the view of roof tops at PGA West. 14. Commissioner Kirk asked at what point they were viewing the south view. Mr. Garcia stated at the end of the residential cul-de- sacs. 1 5. There being no further discussion, it was before the Commission for discussion. 16. Commissioner Kirk stated he believes the applicant has made a point in that if houses were built there it would be a hardscape and this softscape is a relief. His concern is that they do not know how the berm will be sculptured. If there is to be no more dirt to be added he would have no objection. 17. Commissioner Abels stated it was a nice presentation and he would have no objections. 18. Commissioner Butler stated he likes the concept of buffering the golf course from the street. He supports the project. 19. Commissioner Tyler stated that driving by presently it is like driving through the Grand Canyon. There has been a lot of concern voiced by the residents of PGA West. He had strong objections and after the presentation his opinion is somewhat tempered. 20. Chairman Robbins stated he too was concerned after driving by, but after hearing the presentation and the intent of the applicant, he does like the concept. 21. Commissioner Tyler asked if this concept would be carried all the way down Avenue 54. Ms. Aaronson stated yes. 22. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Minute Motion 2001-011 approving the deviation to the approved mass grading plan for Tract Map 29894. Unanimously approved. G:\WPDOCS\PC5-22-O1 .wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Site Development Permit 2001-693; a request of JR Properties for The 99¢ Stores, for review of architectural and landscaping plans for a shopping center to include a 23,00 square foot commercial store located at northwest corner of Jefferson Street and Highway 111. 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio and Planning Consultant Nicole Criste presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy. of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler' asked if staff could explain the drive access shared with Home Depot. Staff did so. Commissioner Tyler asked how many phases there were to the project. Staff stated this area is stated in the Specific Plan as Phase II. 3. Commissioner Butler asked about the landscaping on the north side of the property and the bikepath. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the General Plan has the bikepath on the north side of the Channel. The problem is how to get the bikepath across Dune Palms Road and Adams Streets. Commissioner Butler stated that on the north end of the building the landscaping is very sparse. Staff clarified there would be 36-inch box trees along the entire length of the project. 4. Commissioner Tyler asked if the design of the wall with openings as stated in the ALRC minutes, would be constructed. Staff stated that is something that could be considered as it was required of the Corporate Center. 5. Commissioner Butler stated his concern has always been the maintenance of the landscaping of the rear elevation. He would prefer to have 36 inch trees in the parking lot and the smaller trees in the rear. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked if the entire parking lot would be built at the time the 99 Cent Store is constructed. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Kirk asked where and how large the monument sign would be. Staff stated it is consistent with the Specific Plan requirements and would-be located in front of the Jack in the Box G :\WPD 0 CS\PC 5-22-01. wpd Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2OO1 and is not included in their 50 foot size limitation. Each retail tenant would be allowed 50 square feet or a percent of the store frontage. Discussion followed regarding the Code requirements and Specific Plan requirements. 7. Chairman Robbins stated his only concern was with the rear elevation as it appears to be a square box. The wall behind the Home Depot appears to be higher than six feet and the view is nothing but concrete and building. There needs to be more landscaping to soften the look. Staff stated the Specific Plan requires a six foot wall. 8. Commissioner Butler asked about the color of the awning. Staff stated the colors have been conditioned to be blue and grey. Commissioner Butler asked if the height was stipulated in the conditions. Staff stated yes. 9. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Bob Bucci, architect representing the applicant, stated they agree with the arcades for the entire length of the 99 Cent Store. They would like to request bringing the rest of the buildings back to the Commission at a later date. Staff stated there was a requirement that it be brought back to ensure it meets all the requirements. 10. Commissioner Kirk stated it was his understanding that this approval would be the final approval. Staff stated Condition //37 requires it come back to the Planning Commission. 11. Mr. Bucci stated another issue is the requirement to match the Home Depot's arch. Home Depot has a simple band around the building and their design was to add some interest to the building. In regard to signage, the would like to request a seven foot height and seven foot width or eight foot height and six foot width which is still within the allowable square footage for signs. 12. Commissioner Tyler asked what the sign height was on the drawings. Mr. Bucci stated it was 13 feet by 9 feet. They concur with all the other conditions. 13. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant could address the rear elevation. Mr.-Bucci stated staff recommended they mirror the Home Depot rear elevation, hiding the mechanical equipment and adding the split face block wall. G :\WPDO CS\PC 5-22-01. wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 14. Chairman Robbins stated the color change will not be seen due to the block wall as well as the tree. Mr. Bucci stated the rear elevation could be varied to break it up. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that lowering the rear elevation will allow you to see the back of the front parapets as well as the mechanical equipment from the rear. 15. Commissioner Butler asked if the mechanical equipment was below the roof line. Staff stated yes and the rear parapet height is 26 feet and the front parapet is 34 feet. Mr. Bucci stated they could raise the parapet up on the back of the 99 Center Store and lower it in other areas. 16. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 1 7. Commissioner Abels stated he had no objections. 1 $. Commissioner Butler stated his concern is the north elevation and landscaping. Staff stated it is still conditioned to come back to the Commission before final approval for building permits. 1 9. Commissioner Tyler stated he is concerned about the arcade that it not be blocked with vendors. He would like to see the arcade developed and agrees with staff that the awnings be lowered. In regard to the sign, if they propose a sign that is within what is' allowed he has no objection. 20. Commissioner Kirk stated he agrees with the changes to the design. His concern is that staff has asked them to mirror the Home Depot store and the Commission is not happy with the Home Depot design. In regard to the project coming back again for Commission approval, he would recommend that the site plan and elevations for the 99 Cent Store come back to the Commission, along with the remainder of the center. 21. Chairman Robbins stated he does not like the design of the Home Depot ' arches and what the applicant has submitted is a much better design. He would not like to piece-meal the project by considering the entire site in sections. 22. Commissioner 'Kirk asked if a project had ever been submitted in different phases. Staff stated the Albertsons Center was approved under the Site Development Permit with the in-line stores. G :\WPDO C S\PC 5-2 2-01. wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 Commissioner Kirk stated that the way it is proposed he would not support it. Without seeing the changes they are suggesting for the rear elevation and how the arcade would be designed he would not approve it. 23. Commissioner Tyler stated he concurred. They ought to be able to focus on the 99 Center Store and see the rest of the site later. Staff suggested that Condition //37 be amended to read that the elevations for Buildings "A", "B", "C", and "D" be brought back to the Commission. 24. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-079, approving Site Development Permit 2001- 693, as amended. a. Condition//35.A.: Add - 99 Cent Store excluded. The roof of the arcade shall be equivalent in height to that shown for the 99 Cent Store and shall be covered. b. Condition//35.B.: Deleted c. Condition //35.C.: Expand either Buildings "C" or the 99 Cent Store to incorporate the triangular area between the two buildings into either of the floor plans. d. Condition //35.D.: Step the parapet along the entire rear elevation of all buildings. e. Condition//37: Amended elevations, landscaping, and site plan for Buildings "A", "B", "C" and "D" shall be submitted to the Planning Commission for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. f. Condition //40: Signs shall not exceed 50 square feet (7 feet in height and 7 feet in length). ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: Commissioner Kirk. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. B. Addendum to Fnvironmental Assessment //41, General Plan Amendment 2001-078, Zone Change 2001-101, Specific Plan 1 21-E Amendment//5, Site Development Permit 2001-703 and Tentative Tract Map 301 25; a request of KSL Land Development for, 1) certification of an Addendum to an Environmental Impact Report; 2) a General Plan Amendment and Zoning Change to change lands currently designated as Tourist Commercial to Low Density Residential; 3) a Specific Plan Amendment establishing development standards and design guidelines for the G:\WPDOCS\PC5-22-01 .wpd ~; Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2OO1 construction of 65 single family homes, a clubhouse, and amendment of the landscaping plant palette; and 4) development plans for the model homes and subdivision of 17.82 acres into 65 single family and miscellaneous lots to be located on the southeast corner of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50. 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio and Planning Consultant Ni¢ole Criste presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff requested a condition be added that parking for a three car garage be provided if a plan for a fourth bedroom is added. Condition #19 should be deleted. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the house minimum square footage. Staff stated the Specific Plan states 1,200 square feet excluding the garage, but the prototypes state 2,1 31 square feet excluding the garage. 3. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to explain Condition #4. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it is an explanation of how they widen the street at the bridge. Commissioner Tyler asked why there were no conditions on the turning access width. Staff stated it could be added to give them full turn access at the emergency access. The interior stacking is adequate and the outside pocket is yet to be designed. 4. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any existing homes of this size in this area. Staff stated no. 5. Commissioner Tyler stated he would like to see the tandem parking in the garage allowed. Staff stated the development standards could be modified to allow the tandem garage parking. 6. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing the applicant, stated they have prepared some elevations to address issues raised by staff. He understands the off-site improvements, but not the requirement to build and pay for the retaining wall. Specific conditions they question are the retaining wall easement in Condition #4. They asked that Condition #22 be amended to not tie the parking lot to the development of the houses being constructed on Avenue 50. He suggested that before this parking G :\WPDO C S\PC 5-22-01. wpd 0 Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 lot be eliminated the permanent parking lot be built. He asked that a condition be added to allow a development regulation to allow the pool to be built to the zero lot line for Planning Area 3. Condition //10 of the Specific Plan and Condition //2 of the Site Development Permit would need to be changed. 7. Chairman Robbins asked there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Butler asked Mr. Haag to explain why they should have relief from building the retaining wall. Mr. Haag stated that as Eisenhower Drive widening over the bridge is constructed to four lanes it will encroach into their existing golf hole requiring a retaining wall of 16 feet to four feet to be constructed. Staff clarified that in Tract Map Condition //47.A. it explains it better. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the City is consistent with their practice to have developments widen Arterial streets adjacent to their property. Although the golf hole is not part of this tract, the previous parcel map for the parking lot required them to widen Eisenhower Drive along the golf hole frontage. The issue of widening is part of their issue and the retaining wall is a second issue. The General Plan as currently written requires the four lanes. The updated General Plan might not. The bridge widening is included in the Capital Improvement Projects for 2003. This requirement is not new, but has been on the site since its creation. 8. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any public comment. Mr. Gene Reed, representing the L Quinta Country Club, stated their issue is with Condition //17 which states the minimum square footage intended to be built. In regard to the wall, they would request it match what is currently there for Duna La Quinta. Regarding the parking lot, they agree with staff's recommendation. On the pool at the corner of Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50, is there any requirement to hide the pool with landscaping. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste stated there is a six foot high perimeter wall with landscaping. Mr. Reed asked that the traffic pattern on Avenue 50 take into consideration their entrance as well. 9. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened it to Commission discussion. G:\WPDOCS\PC5-22-O 1.wpd ] 0 Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 10. Commissioner Kirk stated they have reviewed other amendments where the procedure was not correct for the site. In this case it is the right use for the site. With respect to the concerns raised, he concurs with staff's recommendation; on the timing, he agrees with the applicant; the zero lot line for pools, he has no objection; the meandering wall averaging 20 feet is acceptable; lot sizes at 6000 square feet instead of 6500 feet still needs to be addressed; building square footage minimums he does not feel strongly about. 11. Commissioner Butler stated he is concerned about the parking lot and agrees with the applicant as long as it is conditioned. He agrees with the requirement for the retaining wall. 1 2. Commissioner Tyler stated that in Planning Area II, it talks about minimum lot size for this project and should include the data for this project. He would like to know exactly how many lots are less than 6500 square feet. Staff stated there were five. Commissioner Tyler stated that based on the information provided by the applicant, he has no objection. 13. Chairman Robbins asked if the Compatibility Ordinance would come into play with this project. Staff stated that if another developer builds a part of the project, then it will. 14. Commissioner Tyler stated the approved Specific Plan document should agree with what they are approving. 15. Chairman Robbins stated he concurs with staff's recommendation on the street widening and retaining wall; timing for parking lot is acceptable as requested by the applicant; zero lot line and the meandering wall are also acceptable as requested by the applicant; and he has no problem with the lot sizes or building square footage. 16. Chairman Robbins reopened the public hearing portion of the hearing. Mr. Chevis Hosea, K SL Land Development, stated their objective is to be able to develop a project that is economically feasible. To do this they need a higher density created by allowing some flexibility on the lot sizes. 17. Mr. Reed stated they are in favor of this project. What they have an objection to is any houses built that are less than 1400.square feet. G:\WPDOCS\PC5-22-01 .wpd ]. ] Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 18. Chairman Robbins closed the public comment portion of the hearing. 1 9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-080 recommending certification of an Addendum to Environmental Impact Report//41, as recommended ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 20. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-081 recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 2001-078, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 21. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-082 recommending approval of Zone Change 2001-1 01, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 22. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-083 recommending approval of Specific Plan 121-//Amendment//5, as amended. a. Condition //10: Add meandering walls b. Condition//17: Minimum lot size is 6500 not abutting golf course, 6000 on golf course, and minimum livable square footage is 1 900 square feet, excluding garages. c. Condition //19: Delete and replace with "Allow tandem parking in the garage to meet the parking requirement for four bedroom houses." d. Condition #22: Add, "Prior to final inspection of the 10th house the permanent parking lot shall be completed." e. Condition//23: Planning Area III shall be allowed to have a zero lot line for swimming pools. G :\WPDOCS\PC 5-22-01. wpd ] 2 Planning CommisSion Minutes May 22, 2001 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 23. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-084 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-703, as amended. a. Condition #2: Delete and replace with Condition #10 of the Specific Plan. .~ b. Condition #3: Add "the wall design and materials will be compatible with the Duna La Quinta's perimeter wall." ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 24. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-085 recommending approval of Tentative Tract 301 25, as amended. a. Condition #8.B(3): Change Lot (G) to Lot (H). b. Condition #27: The perimeter walls along Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50 shall be constructed at the time the homes are built along either of the two streets. The Community Development Department shall determine the portion of the wall that shall be installed when building permits are issued for the clubhouse. c. Condition #47.B.(2): Change Lot (G) to Lot (H). ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 25. Following discussion it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Abels to'reconsider the motion and vote on Site Development Permit 2001-703. Unanimously approved. 26. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-084 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-703, as modified: a. Condition #2: delete and replace with Condition #10 of the Specific Plan. G:\WPDOCS\PC5-22-01 .wpd ] ~ Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 b. Condition #3; Add that the wall design and materials will be compatible with the Duna La Quinta perimeter wall. c. Condition #5: the perimeter walls along Eisenhower Drive and Avenue 50 shall be constructed at the time the homes are built along either of the two streets. The Community Development Department shall determine the portion of the wall that shall be installed when building permits are issued for the clubhouse. C. Tentative Tract Map 29858; a request of RJT Homes for review of an amendment to reconfigure seven acres in the southeast corner of the tract into 18 single family and other-common lots located approximately 800 feet south of Avenue 50 and west of Jefferson Street, within Palmilla Specific Plan. 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the number of h.ouses to be built in each phase. Staff clarified the plan was referring to the size of the homes not the number of houses. Commissioner Tyler asked if this change had any affect on the water efficiency issue. Staff stated no. 3. Chairman Robbins questioned why Lot "D" on the legend is called out as a lake lot and yet Lot "D" on the map is listed as a landscape lot. Mr. Chris Bergh, MDS Consulting representing the applicant, stated it is a misprint. They should be reversed. 4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chris Bergh was available for any questions. 5. There being no questions of the applicant, nor any other public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and asked if there was any Commission discussion. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-086 recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 29858, Amendment #1, as recommended. G:\WPDOCS\PC5-22-01 .wpd ] 4 Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. D. Conditional Use Permit 2001-058 and Site Development Permit 2001- 69,3 a request of La Quinta Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses to allow the use and review of development plans for a church facility on 2.39 acres located on the east side of Dune Palms Road, between the Coachella Valley Storm Water Channel and Westward Ho Drive. 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requested a continuance to July 10, 2001, to allow time to revise their plans per the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee recommendations. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there was a motion to continue Conditional Use Permit 2001-058 and Site Development Permit 2OO1-693. It was moved and second by Commissioners Tyler/Abels to continue Conditional Use Permit 2001-058 and Site Development Permit 2001-693, as recommended. Unanimously approved. E. Environmental Assessment 2001-418, General Plan Amendment 7001- 077, Zone Change 2001-100 a request of NRI, La Quinta Limited Partnership to change Riverside County zoning designation to Very Low Density Residential (RVL) and the General Plan designation to Very Low Density Residential (VLRD) for approximately 240 acres within the Sphere of Influence of the City of La Quinta for subsequent annexation bounded on the north by Avenue 52, on the east by Monroe Street, on the south by Avenue 53 and east of the existing City limits. 1. Chairman Robbins informed the Commission that the applicant had withdrawn their applications and no further action was required at this time. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS' A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of May 1 5, 2001. G :\WPD O C S\PC 5-22-01. wpd ] $ Planning Commission Minutes May 22, 2001 IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held June 12, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:35 p.m. on May 22, 2001. Respectfully submitted, City of ,E.a Qu i nt~a, Cal~ifornia ~wyer, Executive Secretary G :\WPDOC S\PC 5-22-01. wpd ] {~