PCMIN 01 25 1994 - MINUTES
" PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California
January 25, 1994 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting was called to order at 7:03 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows and
Commissioner Abels lead the flag salute.
Il. ROLL CALL
A. Chairwoman Barrows requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Adolph,
Ellson, Marrs, Abels, and Chairwoman Barrows.
B. Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell,
Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell and Wallace
Nesbit, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer.
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS-
A. Plot Plan 91-456. Amendment #1' a request of the Koenig Companies for
approval of Time Extension #2 for a commercial shopping center consisting of
85,650 square feet on 9.25 acres.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the
staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
2. Commissioner Adolph asked staff how many extensions could be
requested. Staff stated it was not specified in the conditions.
3. Commissioner Ellson asked whether commercial projects had the
automatic time extension (two years) as residential tracts. Staff stated
they did not.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened
_ - the public hearing. Mr. John Koenig, applicant, explained his project and
stated his concern regarding Condition #16. He requested to have the
option of doing a lot line adjustment or parcel map.
PCl-25 1
Planning Commission Minutes _
January 25, 1994
5. Commissioner Adolph asked Mr. Koenig if he understood the condition
that required 50% shading of the parking lot and at present he did not
meet it. Mr. Koenig stated that this was a fairly common requirement that
he had been required to meet in other locations and they have been able
to do so with the date palms. Discussion followed regarding problems in
the use of date palms.
6. Commissioner Marrs asked if Mr. Koenig was aware of the problems the
La Quinta Hotel incurred with their palm trees (i.e., damage to cars
through the loss of the palm head). Mr. Koenig stated he was aware, but
the tree provided the landscape effect they preferred. Since they have
used the palm tree so much in other areas, they have learned a great deal
about how to plant and maintain a healthy tree. He further stated that no
matter how many precautions were taken, maintenance of the trees would
be a problem.
7. Chairwoman Barrows asked Mr. Koenig what percentage of coverage was
achieved in Indian Wells. Mr. Koenig stated they had reached the 50%
shading. Chairwoman Barrows encouraged the applicant to accomplish
the same with this project. _
8. Commissioner Ellson asked about the deletion of the detention basin and
how would the drainage would be handled. Mr. Koenig stated that he was
working with staff and the adjacent property owner to the north, to design
a detention basin that would pipe the on-site water to a common facility
off-site utilizing a pumping station.
9. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the
public hearing.
10. Principal Planner Stan Sawa brought Condition 48.B. to the Commission's
attention in that the condition needed to be modified to correspond with
the recently approved Jascorp project. The driveway width requirement
should be the same.
11. Commissioner Ellson asked if Conditions //14 and #61 were the same.
Staff stated they would incorporate the two and delete #61.
12. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Adolph to adopt Minute Motion 94-003 approving
Plot Plan 91-456, Extension of Time //2, subject to the amended
conditions including modifying Condition gl6 to allow the applicant the
option of a parcel map or a lot line adjustment. Unanimously approved.
PCl-25 2
Planning Commission Minutes
January 15, 1994
B. Specific Plan 87-009. Amendment #3; a request of the City for text amendment
to allow implementation of interim and permanent circulation alternatives around
the Downtown Village Park.
1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in
the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department. Staff informed the Commission of the
proposed changes to the recommended specific plan language.
2. Commissioner Adolph asked if the proposed plans were done by staff or
a consultant. Staff stated they had been done by the Engineering
Department. Commissioner Adolph asked if there had been any thought
to hiring a traffic consultant. Staff stated that as this was the initial study
period, no thought had been given to hiring a consultant. Assistant City
Engineer Steve Speer stated that should the City Council direct staff to
hire a consultant, staff would do so, but as these were interim alternatives
staff felt they were workable and safe. He further stated that as the Phase
V Assessment District was in process, the intersection of Eisenhower and
Montezuma needed to be addressed and these alternatives were presented
to be utilized until a permanent decision was made.
3. There being no further questions for staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened
the public hearing. Mr. Don Martin, District Manager of the Coachella
Valley Parks and Recreation District, stated that they had originally
preferred Attachment//3 as the first choice and second choice would be
the Base Alternative. Since then the Board had changed their opinion and
now prefer the Base Alternative as their first choice with Alternative A as
their second choice. Discussion followed as to what each alternative
consisted of and the District's preference.
4. Audrey Ostrowsky, La Quinta property owner, stated her concern that the
Planning Commission represent the people and not consider themselves as
staff. She further stated that the City needs a City Traffic Engineer. The
streets need to be planned before they are constructed.
5. Mr. Rick Morris, La Quinta property owner, stated his appreciation for
the work the City is putting into this area.
6. Mr. Rupert Yessayian, La Quinta property owner representing his family
and other businesses in the area, asked that the Commission vote against
this proposal as all of the property owners in the area are against this
proposition. He further stated that most of the property owners around
the park have all expressed their desire to have the two-way traffic He
went on to give a history of the park circulation plan.
PCl-25 3
Planning Commission Minutes
January 25, 1994
7. There being no further public comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the
public hearing.
8. Commissioner Marrs stated that he had not heard of any serious accidents
in this area even though the area is an accident waiting to happen. He
further stated he would like to see safety controls at all the intersections.
Staff stated that all the alternatives create a four-way stop to allow safe
pedestrian traffic. Commissioner Marrs stated he was referring to half-
way down Montezuma between Eisenhower Drive and Avenida Bermudas.
Staff stated this was an option the Commission might want to pass on to
the Council.
9. Commissioner Abels stated the item before them was to give the Council
the ability to make traffic circulation changes as deemed necessary. He
further stated he did not see a need for a traffic engineer as these were
only interim alternatives.
10. Chairwoman Barrows clarified that the Commission was only
recommending approval of an amendment to allow the Council more
flexibility to the adopted specific plan. _
11. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioner Abels/Ellson to adopt Resolution 94-002, confirming the
Environmental Determination and recommending to the City Council
adoption of Amendment //3 to Specific Plan 87-009 and in accordance
with Exhibit "B" as revised and dated January 25, 1994.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Ellson, Marrs, Abels,
Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: Commissioner
Adolph. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
IV. PUBLIC COIVIMENT: - None
IV. BUSINESS SESSION
A.. Precise Plan 93-840; a request of Richard and Ida Livingston to establish a large
family day care operation at their home.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the
staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
PCl-25 4
Planning Commission Minutes
January ~5, 1994
2. Commissioner Abels asked staff to clarify which license came first, City
or State and whether a City license was needed. Staff stated that once a
precise plan has been approved by the City, the applicant will go to the
County for their day care license. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated
that the City business licensing requirement may be pre-empted by State
law and she would look into the matter.
3. Commissioner Adolph asked if large meant 7-12 children and a small day
care Would be 1-6. Staff stated that was correct, and the applicant has
stated they only planned to have six children but wanted the large day care
license to allow them the flexibility should there be a need for an
occasionally extra child or two.
4. Commissioner Abels asked if the State law was different for the different
sizes. Staff stated 'there were different requirements for each type of
facility.
5. Commissioner Ellson asked if the City knew by prior day care facilities
in the City, whether they required State and City licensing. Staff stated
_ the City has only issued one license prior to this one.
6. Commissioner Adolph asked if the State takes precedent over the City.
Staff stated that was correct.
7. Mrs. Ida Livingston, the applicant stated they were told by the State that
they would have no problem obtaining a State license due to their
experience and background, but to check with the City to see that they
met the City requirements. They have completed all applications and are
awaiting City approval. They have received clearances from the Sheriff's
Department, Child Abuse Department, fire alarms are in and they have
installed all the safety requirements that are needed. She went on to
explain the operational requirements of their proposed day care operation.
8. Commissioner Abels asked if the home met the Social Services
requirement for size. Mrs. Livingston stated they did and she went on to
explain what the requirements were for their home.
9. Commissioner Adolph stated he parked by the site for a while and never
saw a car on the street while he was there, but was concerned for the size
of the backyard as a playground. Mrs. Livingston stated the State did not
-- require a yard or even fencing. Their yard is fenced and is adequate for
the number of children they will be caring for. They plan to add a slide
PCl-25 5
Planning Commission Minutes _
January 25, 1994
and sandbox as the only equipment for the children. Commissioner
Adolph asked if there was any way a child could get through the fence to
the neighbor's pool. Mrs. Livingston stated no there was no access
between her home and the neighbor to the rear.
10. Mr. Hans Kraker, neighbor and property owner, indicated his concerns
about for the day care center. His major concern was for the safety of the
children in the neighborhood and the increased traffic due to children
being dropped off and picked up. He further stated he did not feel the
house was large enough for 12 children. In addition, he felt the frontyard
should be fenced.
11. Commissioners Ellson and Abels commended the Livingston for going
through the proper channels to have this type of business as they felt La
Quinta needed such a service.
12. Commissioner Adolph asked if the City could place any stipulation on the
number of children the home could have. Staff stated they could not.
13. Chairwoman Barrows stated that she lived in an area with a day care but _
she never noticed any increase in traffic and felt the parents were even
more attentive to children playing than the average driver.
14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Ellson/Abels to adopt Minute Motion 94-004 approving
Precise Plan 93-840, subject to the attached conditions. Unanimously
approved.
B. Tentative Tract 23269 - La Ouinta Highlands; a request of Mr. Jimmy Crowell,
Century Crowell Communities, for approval of final site/landscaping plans for
Lots # 173, # 175, # 177, and # 185 of Phase VII.
1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in
the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department.
2. Commissioner Abels asked the City Attorney to clarify whether the
request to change a two story to a single could be discussed as it was not
agendized. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that since the project
was on the agenda all items could be discussed as people were notified
that this tract was on the agenda.
PCl-25 6
Planning Commission Minutes
January ~5, 1994
3. There being no further questions, Chairwoman Barrows asked if the
applicant wished to address the Commission.
4. Mr. Jimmy Crowell, applicant, stated his request that Lot//181 be allowed
to be a single story rather than the planned two story. This was at the
request of the buyer of the home. He further requested clarification on
the front yard setback. He did not want to lose any additional backyard
if it was possible. In addition, he asked for clarification of Condition//6
of the staff report and asked that he not be required to return to the
Planning Commission for approval, but be able to work these items out
with staff. Discussion followed Mr. Crowell's request.
5. Commissioner Marrs asked about the changing of one of the models from
a two story to a single story. He stated that any time the applicant wants
to go from a single to a two story, the Commission would want to review
it, but from a two story to a single story should be handled through staff.
6. Commissioner Ellson asked if this would cause a problem of similarity of
front exteriors. Mr. Crowell stated it would not as they did not want any
similarity either.
7. Commissioner Adolph questioned how the applicant could get three cars
on Lot//185 based on his proposed driveway design and its abrupt angles.
Mr. Crowell stated he would look at it again and if necessary he would
widen the driveway. Discussion followed as to possible alternatives. Mr.
Crowell stated he would work the problem out with staff.
8. Commissioner Ellson stated her concern of getting three cars on Lot #177.
Mr. Crowell stated that he would get all three cars on all the required lots
and he would work this out with staff to the Commission's satisfaction.
9. There being no further no further comment, it was moved and seconded
by Commissioners Marrs/Abels to adopt Minute Motion 94-005 to
approve the site plan/landscape plans for Century Crowell Communities
for Lots //173, //175, //177, and //185 of Phase VII, subject to the
Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission stated the applicant
was to work with staff to refine the final construction drawings.
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. ' Chairwoman Barrows asked if there were any additional corrections to the
Minutes of January 11, 1994. Commissioner Ellson asked that on Page 4, Item
PCl-25 7
Planning Commission Minutes
January 25, 1994
//5 be eliminated and on Page 7 the wording be changed from line 4 to delete "off
of Park Avenue" and add after Tampico, "between Washington Street and Park
Avenue" There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Ellson to adopt the minutes as corrected. Unanimously
approved.
VII. OTHER
A. Planning and Development Director Jerry Herman informed the Commissioners
that there were enough funds available for the entire Commission to attend the
League of California Cities Planners Institute. He further stated that the badges
for the Commissioners was still being designed.
B. Commissioners were informed that staff was writing letters to the J.M. Peters
company notifying them of their illegal tract signs and the matter would be turned
over to Code Enforcement.
C. Commissioner Ellson asked if staff could answer the question regarding the walls
on Calle Tampico east of Washington Street. Staff stated they were constructed
prior to the height restrictions of the SR Zone.
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made and seconded by Commissioners Adolph/Marts to adjourn this regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission on
February 8, 1994, at 7:00 P.M. at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers. This meeting
of the La Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:36 P.M., January 25, 1994.
PCl-25 8