PCMIN 11 12 1997 MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California
November 12, 1997
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by
Chairman Butler who asked Commissioner Tyler to lead the flag salute.
B. Chairman Butler requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Gardner,
Kirk, Tyler, Woodard, and Chairman Butler.
C. It was moved .and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Woodard to excuse
Commissioner Seaton.
D. Staff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attomey Dawn
Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer,
_ Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
A. Commissioner Gardner asked that the Agenda be reorganized by reversing Public
Hearing Items A and B. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Gardner/Kirk to reorganize the Agenda as requested. Unanimously approved.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Chairman Butler asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of October 28, 1997.
Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 8, Item 10 be corrected to read "local sellers";
Page 9, Item 14, add the words "last year"; Item 21, he asked that the words
"screening option" be deleted; Page 10, Item 23, the wording needed to be corrected.
City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated it should read, "when a person buys in a
custom tract, you were expected to have more flexibility. There was no expectation
that all the homes would be the same." Commissioner Tyler continued with Page
PCllo12-97 1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
11, Item 27, it was his understanding that the caliper of trees would be indicated for
box trees and it is not reflected in the minutes. There being no other changes to the
minutes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Tyler to approve
the minutes as amended. Unanimously approved.
B. Chairman Butler asked if there was a Department report. None.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Chairman Butler excused himself due to a possible conflict of interest. Vice Chairman Woodard
assumed the chair.
A. Environmental Assessment 97-346 and Tentative Tract 25953; a request of Oliphant
and Williams Associates, Inc., for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 97-345; approval of a
revision and third one year time extension for an approved subdivision map of 38.4
acres into 132 single family and other common lots; and approval of prototype
houses which range in size from approximately 1,724 to over 2,200 square feet.
1. Vice Chairman Woodard opened the public hearing and asked for a staff
report. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department.
2. Vice Chairman Woodard asked if there were any questions of staff. There
being none, he asked if the applicant wished to address the Commission.
3. Betty Williams, President, Oliphant and Williams Associates, stated she had
met with staff and reviewed the proposed Conditions of Approval and had the
following comments. There are three elevations for this plan and two have
been submitted to the Commission for review. The third plan will be
submitted at a later date for Commission review. Regarding Issue 8, of the
staff report, Oliphant and Williams will be constructing a park retention basin
on the project and it will not be maintained by the City. Initially, it will be
maintained by the developer and ultimately by the unincorporated
management association. It is staff's recommendation that this cannot be
accepted and has recommended that an in-lieu fee be paid. This fee amounts
to approximately $28,000. The improvements they are proposing are greater
PCl 1-12-97 2
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
than an acre and will cost in excess of the in-lieu fee and will be an asset to
the development. They are therefore, requesting to be relieved of this fee.
Regarding Condition #22.C., (Dune Palms Road) it is their understanding that
the current improvements which widened Dune Palms Road by nine feet in
1993, is estimated by the Public Works Department to be approximately
$57,500 for their fair share of the improvement costs. It is their
understanding that all or a portion of these improvements were completed
with regional transportation funds. These improvements installed and paid
for by others should not be a cost of improvements to this project. They are
therefore requesting relief from these financial burdens.
4. There being no further public comment, Vice Chairman Woodard closed the
public comment portion of the public hearing and opened the item for
Commission discussion.
5. Commissioner Kirk asked if the City had ever waived a fee when part of the
facilities had been paid for out of regional transportation funds. City
Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated she was unaware of the history on that item.
Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated that some of the money that was used to
--- construct the signal at Dune Palms Road and Miles Avenue was constructed
with regional arterial funds from CVAG. The basis of those funds is that the
developer is still responsible for 50% of the regional arterial improvements
and the fund is responsible for the other 50%. There may be some
adjustment, but staff does not expect the entire amount to go away. Staff
would need to see how this is consistent with CVAG and City policies before
making a determination.
6. Commissioner Kirk asked if the third extension was the last extension
available to the applicant. Staff stated it is the last extension based on the
Subdivision Map Act as adopted by the City.
8. Commissioner Tyler commended the developer on the revised layout of the
project. He also commended the developer for combining the park/retention
basin as it was a long way to the Adams Street Park or any other proposed
park. He then noted changes that were needed to be made to the staff report.
Regarding Conditions of Approval #43.C., a more definitive statement needs
to be made as to when the temporary vehicular access off Miles Avenue will
be closed. It needs to be tied to a more specific calendar date. On the Site
PCI 1-12-97 3
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
Plan, none of the streets are named and he would recommend that a condition
be added requiring Lot C, which goes from Dune Palms Road and connects
with an existing street on Quinterra, be named Nuevo Drive. It should be
noted that on Page 57 of the Environmental Assessment, the intersection at
Dune Palms Road and Miles Avenue is controlled by a traffic signal, not a
stop sign. On Page 58~ it states there is no need for a bus turnout as there is
no bus route on Miles Avenue. This is presently true, but the City should be
planning for the furore. He would further recommend a bus turnout on Dune
Palms Road somewhere close to the main access to this project for school
buses.
9. Vice Chairman Woodard asked staff for their opinion regarding the bus
turnout. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that Sunline does not
have any bus lines planned other than what is currently existing. Staff is
therefore, not recommending any changes.
10. Commissioner Tyler stated that on Fred Waring, just east of Las Vistas there
is a bus mmout and there is no bus service on Fred Waring. If Sunline does
not anticipate any then the City should consider them for school buses to
service this development. Staff stated that no comments had been received
from Sunline regarding the addition of bus turnouts. Commissioner Tyler
stated he was suggesting the bus turnout be supplied for the school district.
Staff stated they would make a recommendation.
11. Vice Chairman Woodard asked staff why this request was before the
Commission after the date of expiration for the tract. Community
Development Director Jerry Herman stated the request for an extension had
been received in time. The project is automatically extended to allow for
staff's processing time. Vice Chairman Woodard asked if the 2:1 and 3:1
slope was the recommendation for berming. Associate Planner Greg
Trousdell stated it is the requirement that whether or not there is sloping and
there will also be berming.
12. Vice Chairman Woodard asked if the proposed retention area/passive park
had playground equipment added to make it more functional, would it change
staff's requirement regarding the in-lieu fees. Staff stated the applicant would
have to process a General Plan Amendment to be able to request that their
park be included in the Parkland Plan.
13. Vice Chairman Woodard asked if the Fire Department had any problems with
PC11-12-97 4
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
the phasing plan. Staff stated the Fire Department had seen the initial
concept. The applicant will have to submit their final phasing plan to the Fire
Department for their final review and approval.
14. Vice Chairman Woodard asked if the Commission could make any changes
to the map at this time. Staff asked Vice Chairman Woodard to be more
specific. Vice Chairman Woodard stated he would like to request that the
setback area at the entrance be increased by the deletion of one lot and
divided into landscaped setback area between the road and the wall of the
first house. Staff stated this could be added to the conditions.
15. There being no other comments, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Cormnission Resolution 97-
071 recommending to the City Council certifying Environmental Assessment
97-346.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Gardner, Tyler, and Vice
Chairman Woodard. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners
Butler and Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
16. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 97-072 recommending to the City Council approval
of Tentative Tract 25953, subject to the Conditions of Approval as revised:
a. Necessary changes be made to the Transportation Mitigation Fee
based on regional contribution to the construction of the signal.
b. Condition #43.C., be modified to state that the access will occur prior
to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the first model
home.
c. Lot C will be named Nuevo Drive.
d. Plan 1, Elevations A and B be modified to differentiate between the
two garages to be reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission.
e. One lot be eliminated and the area dedicated to setback and
landscaping to be approved by staff.
f. Condition #66 have the following words added: "prior to issuance of
Building Permits" and "acceptable to the City in the CC&R' s.
PC11-12-97 5
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Gardner, Kirk. Tyler, and Vice
Chairman Woodard. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners
Butler and Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
B. Continued - Environmental Assessment 97-344, Specific Plan 97-030. Site
Development Permit 97-612. and Conditional Use Permit 97-035; a request of
Thomas Bienek for Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact, approval of Specific Plan Guidelines and Standards, approval
of a Site Development Permit application to allow construction of a 12,546 square
foot two story building with 80 tees for a golf driving range, and a 1,000 square foot
maintenance building, and approval of a Conditional Use Permit for a lighted golf
range, at the northeast comer of Adams Street and 48th Avenue.
1. Chairman Butler informed the public that the public hearing had been closed,
but public comment would be taken and asked for a 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 Butler stated that Exhibit 12 still appears to have the lights. Staff
clarified that the towers still have lights on them.
3. Commissioner Kirk asked if there were any changes to the bunker lights.
Staff stated there were none.
4. Commissioner Tyler asked for clarification in the staff report regarding the
building lights to be used. Staff stated it was referring to the facia under the
roof overhang. Three lights are shining out of the facia and on either end
there are two lights.
5. Commissioner Tyler stated there appears to be a discrepancy between the
report that stated the project complies with the Dark Sky Ordinance and the
discussion of Option 4 where it stated that it almost meets the Ordinance.
Staff stated that the majority of the lights are below the one foot candle
reading at the 100-foot lighting level envelope.
6. Chairman Butler asked how the noise coming from the site would be
determined and measured for the noise study. Staff stated it is a part of how
the noise study is conducted and it was determined based on the uses
proposed and the mitigation measures proposed. Therefore, it meets the
City's standards.
PC11-12-97 6
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
7. Commissioner Tyler stated that Section 3 of the Specific Plan (3.20.2) still
references the future office building as 32 feet and should be corrected to
state 28-feet.
8. Commissioner Woodard asked if the setbacks for the office site would be
considered now or at a later date. Staff stated they would be considered later.
The applicant is showing only what the General Plan requires for a minimum
setback. Commissioner Woodard asked if this plan meets the Dark Sky
Ordinance. Staff stated that it does come close. (Within the 100-foot
envelope that they have created with the tower mounted lighting, there is a
level of lighting just above this envelope of less. than 1 foot candle.)
Commissioner Woodard asked if the 48th Avenue was an arterial road. Staff
stated it was. Commissioner Woodard asked what the projected traffic on
that road would be per day. Staff stated the furore volume at building out for
48th Street is projected to be 29,000 trips per day. Commissioner Woodard
asked if the present zoning would allow the serving of liquor. Staff stated
that a restaurant serving alcoholic beverages would be a permitted use if they
met the Alcoholic Beverage Control regulations. Commissioner Woodard
-- asked if there was a time when the utility poles would be required to be
removed. Staff stated they would not due to the high power levels that are
carried on these lines. Staff informed the Commission that the sight line
exhibits were available for Commission review. Mr. John Vogley, landscape
architect for the project, explained the line-of-sight exhibits.
9. Chairman Butler asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Tom Bienek, applicant, gave an overview of the project
and asked if he could address the Commission after the public comment had
been taken.
10. Mr. Tom Cullinan, 73-38 Juniper, Palm Desert, stated he was representing
the Homeowners' Association for Rancho La Quinta and TD Desert
Development, the developer of Rancho La Quinta and asked for a show of
hands of how many in the audience had written letters in opposition to the
project. Commissioner Tyler raised an objection and stated they had read all
the letters submitted and Mr. Cullinan was to address his concerns to the
Commission. Mr. Cullinan stated he would like to clear up some
misconceptions. First, the misconception that they had known of this
development for year and had made no objection. They had met with Mr.
_ Bienek 18 months prior and stated at that time that they could not support the
PCI 1-12-97 7
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
project with the night lighting and the netting so close to their project. Two
weeks prior to the last Commission meeting, Mr. Bienek approached him to
go over the new proposal and that meeting never occurred. The second
misconception is that Mr. Bienek has expended money and time and because
of this he should be allowed to proceed. He too has had projects where
money has been spent and the project was not approved. They have spent
$60 million to make Rancho La Quinta what it is and in their opinion their
project enhances the charm of La Quinta. Two years ago, a PacTel Cellular
proposal was turned down due to the tower. Adams Street and 48th Avenue
are residential on three comers and even though the third comer is zoned
Regional Commercial, compatibility must be considered. Their model
complex is 75 yards from this proposed development and it is their opinion
that visitors looking out their model complex at these poles would not have
a favorable opinion. It is therefore their request that the Commission deny
this proposal.
11. Mr. Tony Rushent, 79-235 Rancho La Quinta Drive, directly across the street
from the project, stated his concerns are noise, traffic, hours of operation,
netting, and primarily, the lighting. This project is not what exemplifies La
Quinta.
12. Mr. Ralph Baggs, 78-705 Descanso Lane, stated he had previously submitted
letters to the Commission objecting to this project. This letter stated his
objections to the project which included lighting, glare, steel structures up to
110 feet, a two story building, and the noise. He questioned whether the
noise study was based on one person hitting a ball or 80 people. In addition,
the noise that would be generated from the serving of beer and wine. The
visual affect of the steel structure and black netting during the daylight hours.
There are utility poles and power lines nmning along Adams Street which are
70 feet in height. Now the poles and netting at almost twice this height will
destroy the scenic vistas and natural desert and mountain views. The
Environmental Assessment stated that there will be less than significant
impact on scenic vistas. In his opinion, it should be stated that it would be
potentially a significant impact. There will not only be 300 feet of poles and
netting near Adams Street, but 200 yards east there will be another line of
poles and netting up to 110 feet. Therefore, the view east from Adams Street
and northwest from Rancho La Quinta, toward the Santa Rosa Mountains,
will be blocked by two rows of black netting and two story poles. This
project should not be in any residential backyard in La Quinta.
PC11-12-97 8
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
13. Mr. Trevor Jones, 79-195 Rancho La Quinta Drive, stated his house is 100
feet from 48th Avenue. Virtually across the street from entrance to 195 stalls
of parking. They selected La Quinta because of the quietness and
composition of residential communities. Now they will be looking directly
into lighting, netting, and steel poles. He visited the Community,
Development Department to see the material that was being reviewed by the
Commission. In the environmental review under noise, there is a letter from
the acoustical engineer firm addressing the noise that comes from striking a
ball with a titanium covered club, but never addresses the noise relative to
automobiles or the lighting that comes from the automobiles. The line-of-
sight that was presented tonight, is not true. If it were true he would be
looking above the mountains in the far distance. There is ample land for this
project in a commercial area that is not tucked in a residential area.
14. Mr. Mark Wurtz, 48-612 Calle Esperanza, stated he was in favor of the
project as it was a first class driving range that will have a wonderful junior
golf program with top instructors. This is needed for the youth in the desert.
15. Ms. Sandra J. Lyman, 85-075 Merion, stated she too supported the project
and in her opinion, it would be a wonderful recreational use for La Quinta.
16. Mr. Richard Cullhne, 80-075 Merion, stated he was moving from his PGA
West home because he no longer wanted to live in a gated community. This
project will do nothing but enhance La Quinta.
17. Mr. David James, 44495 Blazing Star Trail, stated he has been a resident of
La Quinta for eight years with three children. There are a lot of private
golfing facilities, but no place for those outside the private facilities to
practice their golf swing. This type of facility is needed in the desert and he
is very much in support of the project.
18. Mr. Rey Neufeld, 48-205 Paso Tiempo, stated he was speaking on behalf of
others as well as himself. One of the reasons he moved to Rancho La Quinta
is because the City has taken the time and effort to ensure that there is good
visual aesthetics. He had taken the time to contact Mr. Tom Lyons of
Imperial Irrigation District regarding the poles along Adams Street. He stated
these poles are 61 feet above the ground. Commissioner Woodard stated the
poles are "ugly" and he would agree with him. Mr. Neufeld stated he had
taken some pictures in which he had drawn in the netting and towers to show
PC11-12-97 9
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
what the potential impact of 11 O-foot poles would be. These exhibits were
taken at the 7th green to show the telephone poles and netting. Additional
pictures were taken on Descanso Street and at the sales office on the south
side of Lake La Quinta. In addition, the commercial building in the second
phase was also of concern to him.
19. Commissioner Woodard asked Mr. Neufeld how he determined his pictures
and drawings were accurate. Mr. Neufeld stated his figures were based on
the height of the utility poles. Commissioner Woodard questioned the poles
appearing to be closer than the IID poles. Discussion followed regarding the
location of the power poles.
20. Mr. Jack Fleck, 48-425 Via Solano, stated his concern was that these towers
would be highly visible from both Rancho La Quinta and Lake La Quinta.
From his home he can look down into the proposed site. To say that it will
not be visible, is not true. He also commented on the additional traffic and
public safety problem as noted in the SherifFs Department report. It is a
good project, especially for the youth, but not here. In addition, the exposure
of the children to a micro brewery in this location is of concern. He then read
a letter from Assemblyman Jim Battin expressing his understanding of Mr.
Fleck's concern.
21. Mr. Dave Sawyer, 48-380 Via Salano, stated he was a full time real estate
appraiser, and his comments were based on his real estate experience.
Pointing the lights to the north will not solve the problem. One thing buyers
continually request of him is that they not put them near anything that is ugly,
high power lines, etc. He has watched the appraisal process and an appraiser
will make a negative adjustment when the developments cause visual
downgrading. A mandatory disclosure will be placed on Rancho La Quinta
to their potential buyers as to what is planned for the neighboring properties.
He has seen potential buyers walk away because of these type of impacts.
This will have an impact on property owners within Rancho La Quinta.
22. Mr. Robert Leccercq, 78-835 Descanso Drive, stated his objection and
showed pictures of other driving ranges in Glendora with 100-foot netting
and poles. This is a good project, but not for this location.
PCl1-12-97 10
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
23. Commissioner Kirk asked that the applicant be shown the photographs taken
by Mr. Neufeld.
24. Ms. Ann Madison, 78-735 Dulce Del Mar, stated her concern was with the
lighting as they like to take their boat out onto the lake at Lake La Quinta at
night and they will now see the lights and not the moon. The noise standards
might not have been based on residential developments, but on commercial.
They will hear all the noise from the ball hitting as well as the traffic. She
was concerned that the City has a conflict of interest in regard to this project
in that the City stands to gain from the purchase of this land. The City will
profit more from a commercial project rather than a residential development.
It appears to be a beautiful project, but not at this location.
25. Mr. Richard Agnello, 48-480 Via Solana, stated he has practiced law for 27
years in the County of Los Angeles. His background has caused him to be
involved with developers who wanted to develop driving ranges, but most
were in the outskirts of town and not in residential areas. He represented the
Monterey Country Club in its litigation against the City of Palm Desert in
regards to their ball fields. At those hearings they were assured that with the
diffusing of the lights they would not affect the 187 residents on the south
corridor of that development. They lost their case as the park is still
operating. What he would like to point out is that development guaranteed
the property owners that the lights would be diffused and lowered down and
directed on the ball fields. If you are to visit there now you will find that the
light pollution is tremendous. If this project moves forward and any litigation
develops therefrom, any prospective buyer for a Rancho La Quinta property
will have to be made aware of the pending litigation. When this happened at
Monterey Country Club, potential buyers passed on the purchases.
Financially, the impact on revenue would be devastating. How can the City
go from a low density residential to a high density commercial directly across
the street. He objects that this project can meet the Dark Sky Ordinance. He
then read an article from the newspaper on the affect of the Palm Desert
driving range.
26. Mr. Jake Batin, 47-415 Via Cordova, stated the three comers at this
intersection are residential and Lake La Quinta is an investment in excess of
$40 million and their property taxes are $5,500 a year on their property alone.
Lake La Quinta is an open lake area and extends from one end of the project
to the other. These lights and netting will be seen in both the daylight and
night time hours. This is a unique community and noise will be a problem.
He would like to see a crane delivered to the site with a light placed at the
height of towers so everyone can see the affect.
PC11-12-97 1 1
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
27. Chairman Butler read Commissioner Seaton's comments into the record
stating that she was in objection to the project due to her concern of the
aesthetics in the area and the impact on the scenic vistas. The mitigation
measures do not eliminate her concerns as well as the objections raised by the
residents.
28. Mr. Steve Lee, the architect for the project, stated this project meets the Dark
Sky Ordinance and other requirements of the City. The noise study was
based on 80 people hitting balls. The berming, building materials, and
landscaping all work to diffuse the noise. Actual anticipated build out traffic
volume is estimated to be 29,000 cars per day which generates 66 decibels
and their facility is anticipated to be 46 decibels. The distance between the
property line of Lake La Quinta and the first pole is 400 feet. They have
planned this project to meet all of the City of La Quinta's zoning laws and
requirements. A housing project will generate a higher traffic flow than this
project. As far as the impact on housing, it is a point of view; the quality of
life has to do with a community. This facility will provide a recreational use
to the community that is needed.
29. Commissioner Kirk asked if Mr. Lee could address the photometric study; is
this design better than the previous design in regard to the Dark Sky
Ordinance. Mr. Lee went over the different lighting options that had been
presented to the City for this project. Commissioner Kirk stated that although
the developer is receptive to the City's concerns regarding the Dark Sky
Ordinance, there are still some lighting impacts. Mr. Lee reminded the
Commission that this project is exempt from meeting the Dark Sky
Ordinance, but due to their concern to mitigate any potential negative
impacts, they have tried in every way to meet the Dark Sky Ordinance.
Commissioner Kirk stated that the Commission should consider revising the
Zoning Code to see that this type of project be required to meet the Dark Sky
Ordinance.
30. Commissioner Kirk stated he too was concerned with the aesthetics. The
concerns that he is not as receptive to are traffic and noise. If this project is
developed at a .35 floor area ratio as allowed by the Zoning Code, there
would be significant amounts of commercial and office development and
significant amounts of traffic and noise. Hitting 80 golf balls at one time is
not as significant a noise impact as the traffic will be. Real estate sales
PCI 1-12,97 12
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
should have already been making the disclosure that commercial
development is probable on this site. Concerning the comment that was
made regarding the Commission's motivation, it is not based on what the
City could or would potentially make from this project. This is a great
project, but he is still concerned with the light.
31. Commissioner Gardner asked staff to give an example of what streets meet
the same traffic demand as proposed. Senior Engineer Steve Speer clarified
that the project would not be generating the 29,000 trips. Traffic projections
were based on the buildout of the City. This is based on the potential projects
that could be built. This project will not come close to generating anywhere
near this amount. The figure of 29,000 is what would be on Washington
Street at Highway 111. Highway 111 currently only carries 26,000 trips.
Commissioner Woodard asked staff if the projection in the future is to be
29,000. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated this is true, based on the entire
City being built out. Commissioner Woodard asked if this project site were
to be developed with residential would it be more or less. Staff stated that
housing usually would be less than a commercial development.
32. Commissioner Gardner thanked staff for clarifying this figure. He has spent
a lot of time at driving ranges and has lived next door to one, and the noise
level is not as high as the traffic impact. There is a light impact concern. It
is a well designed project and he would like to see it in La Quinta, but it is
probably in the wrong location. In addition, he is concerned with the
mandatory disclosure of the real estate laws and whether or not people in this
area were aware this site was zoned commercial.
33. Commissioner Woodard complimented the applicant on his project and the
planning that went into it. The issues raised are the same as in all projects.
Traffic will be greater in the future due to the development of the City. In
regard to noise, he visited a driving range at Newport Beach and the noise
was insignificant. He drove through Lake La Quinta and from the lake, you
are going to see the poles that hold up the netting. His concern is more with
the daytime aesthetics than the nighttime. He is concerned with what
distance should be required for real estate disclosures. It has been his
objection from the beginning to not have commercial zoning next to
residential, but it is and these homes were bought knowing this area was
zoned for commercial. He then asked staff to explain how this zoning came
to be. Staff stated that the General Plan in 1985 designated this area as
Regional Commercial. The zoning was not changed to reflect the General
PCI 1-12-97 13
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
Plan but the use intent was commercial. In 1992, the General Plan was
updated which maintained the Regional Commercial zoning and in 1996, the
zoning was changed to reflect the General Plan. Rancho La Quinta was
originally designed in 1977 before the City's incorporation. It was approved
in the 1980's as The Grove, then it changed to The Pyramids in 1988-89 and
then went into receivership and later 1 bought by the Drummond Company in
the early 1990's and became Rancho La Quinta. The houses were started in
approximately 1992. Commissioner Woodard stated that if he was living in
the first row of homes he would have taken a hard look about whether or not
he would want to be next to the telephone poles along 48th Avenue and
Adams Street. The first poles that will be seen from the Rancho La Quinta
residents will be two football fields away. From the standpoint of the
overview of the project, if the telephone poles did not exist, he would vote no
for the project. The aesthetics of driving by a project that is as well designed
and landscaped as this one is, will be much more aesthetically pleasing.
34. Commissioner Tyler stated he currently lives next to a golf course and his
concern is more with the noise that is generated from the maintenance
workers than this project. In regard to the question of whether or not he
would have this in his back yard, this was originally proposed for his
"backyard" and he was in favor of it then. It is his opinion that this project
would be an asset to the City for numerous reasons. He went over corrections
that needed to be made to the staff report. He spent time walking and driving
around Rancho La Quinta and Lake La Quinta and he is very proud of these
developments. It was his opinion that there are very few streets from where
this project will be able to be seen. These homes will have more trouble from
the proposed auto mall than this project. The houses along Descanso Lane are
the closest, but the living area is in the rear and designed to take their view
from the south side onto the golf course. When you add up all the distances
from those houses and take into account the landscaping, wall, width of the
street, the setback on the south side of 48th Avenue, the width of 48th
Avenue at 110 feet, and the landscaping on the other side, they are far apart.
The project was developed to maximize the distance from these homes. He
had read all the objections to the project and there were some very prominent
issues; some valid and some not. He went on to discuss the objections raised
in relation to what is proposed with the project. The purpose of the
Commission is to review projects based on their ability to meet the City's
requirements.
PC11-12-97 14
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
35. Chairman Butler stated he too was concerned with the towers and netting.
There is no way to change the effect of the netting. Although the applicant
has worked hard to mitigate the lights, the lights will be seen. It is a project
that is needed, but he would like to see it somewhere else.
36. Commissioner Abels stated he had sat on this Commission when this project
was originally proposed at Miles Avenue and Washington Street. He is pro-
business for La Quinta and believes this is a fine project for La Quinta. If
everyone objects to this in their back yard, then there is no place for it to be
built. In his opinion he does not believe this will project will have a negative
effect on the neighborhood.
37. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 97-073
recommending to the City Council approval of a Certification of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental
Assessment 97-344 according to the Findings set forth in the attached
Resolution.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Tyler, and Woodard. NOES:
Commissioners Butler and Gardner. ABSENT: Commissioner
Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
38. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 97-074 recommending to the City Council approval
of Specific Plan 97-030.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Tyler, and Woodard. NOES:
Commissioners Butler and Gardner. ABSENT: Commissioner
Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
39. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 97-075 recommending to the City Council approval
of Site Development Permit 97-075 to allow construction of a lighted golf
range with a 12,546 square foot building and a 1,000 square foot maintenance
building at the northeast corner of Adams Street and 48th Avenue subject to
amendments to Conditions 14.B., 20.A., and 38.
PC11-12-97 15
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Tyler, and Woodard. NOES:
Commissioners Butler and Gardner. ABSENT: Commissioner
Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
40. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 97-076 recommending approval to the City Council
of Conditional Use Permit 97-035, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Tyler, and Woodard. NOES:
Commissioners Butler and Gardner. ABSENT: Commissioner
Seaton. ABSTAIN: None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VIII. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS:
A. Commission discussion regarding the landscaping at Home Depot.
1. Commissioner Woodard stated that he had spoken with staff regarding this '
issue and according to what he understood, Caltrans would not allow any
berming or change in elevation within the first 12-feet. Home Depot is not
willing to make any changes to the remaining 20 feet which can be modified.
He would therefore, like to strongly recommend that this Commission write
a letter to the Council asking them to address their concerns to the applicant.
Staff stated that the Conditions of Approval allowed options for screening.
Home Depot chose the additional landscaping which is currently being
planted.
2. Commissioner Gardner stated that Home Depot is notorious for causing the
social economic downfall of the cities they reside in. Is there not something
the City can do to make them comply? City Attorney Dawn Honeywell
pointed out that they are complying with every condition as written.
3. Commissioner Woodard stated the Conditions were not written in a manner
that would require them to meet the Commission's intent.
PC11-12-97 16
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
4. Commissioner Gardner asked if nothing could be done to resolve this issue,
such as revoking their business license, etc. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell
stated they have improved and upgraded the landscaping that was originally
installed. Even though they were approved prior to the new Highway 111
Guidelines, they have added the additional landscaping. Planning Manager
Christine di Iorio stated that some of the delays were due to the time
constraints in dealing with Caltrans.
B. Status of the used car lot on Highway 111. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio
stated that the owner has evicted the used car dealer and staff is working with the
owner to resolve the outstanding issues regarding landscaping lighting and cars
parked in the dirt.
C. Discussion regarding a Cooperative Agreement with Riverside County regarding the
proliferation of signs on adjoining boundaries. Staff stated they are working to
obtain a report for Council to see what they would like to do regarding this issue.
1. Chairman Butler asked about the flying of the American flag by a
development on Fred Waxing Drive for advertising purposes. Staff stated
they are not allowed to have more than what is allowed by Code. Staff will
speak with the Code Enforcement Division to see that the developer complies
with the regulations. Chairman Butler asked if there are developers that
repeatedly violate regulations, could fines be issued prior to any Certificates
of Occupancy being issued. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that some
changes have been made to allow cities to adopt framework for
administrative type fines. There has been no direction by Council to
investigate or look into doing this in La Quinta. Chairman Butler stated he
would like to recover the City's cost to enforce these requirements. City
Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated there is some ability to require developers
to pay the City's cost to enforce these regulations. Discussion followed
regarding potential solutions.
2. Commissioner Tyler stated the developer, Mr. Snellenberger, was holding
their grand opening this weekend and he would suggest the developer be
contacted to take these flags down on Monday after the grand opening.
3. Commissioner Woodard suggested the applicant be turned down on any
future developments if he does not comply with these requirements. Staff
stated they would be required to correct the problem before proceeding.
PC11-12-97 17
Planning Commission Meeting
November 12, 1997
D. Discussion regarding the art piece at the comer of Washington Street and Highway
111.
1. Staff stated they were working with the developer and artist to design the
landscaping that will enhance the art piece.
E. Commissioner Tyler commended Commissioner Kirk on his appointment to the
Salton Sea Authority as the Executive Director.
F. Commissioner Kirk asked that the lighting on the Washington Street medians be
placed on the next agenda. Staff stated the City realizes it is not in compliance with
the Dark Sky Ordinance and is trying to resolve the problem. Commissioner Kirk
suggested that this be addressed in the Zoning Code update.
ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to
adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission to be held on November 25, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning
_.
Commission was adjourned at 9:57 p.m. on November 12, 1997.
PCl 1-12-97 18