Loading...
PCMIN 11 25 1997 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California November 25, 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 Gardner, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Butler. C. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Tyler to excuse Commissioners Abels, Seaton, and Woodard. Unanimously approved. D. StaffPresent: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attomey Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and -- Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Chairman Butler asked if there was a Department Report. There was none. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Sign Permit 97-402; a request of Roger Snellenberger and Associates for approval of two permanent project identification signs for the Bella Vista development at the ' northeast comer of Fred Waring Drive and Venice Drive pursuant to provisions of Chapter 9.160 (Signs) of the Zoning Code. PC 11-25-97 1 Planning Commission Meeting November 25, 1997 1. 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. Staff noted that subdivision flags, that had not been processed under a Minor Temporary Use Permit for approval, were presently installed along the frontage of the site and staff is requesting that the applicant submit their plans for the flags and reduce the number of 20 flags to eight. 2. Chairman Butler asked if the location of the sign permit is for the main entrance or at the signal. Staff clarified it was for the main entrance into the tract, east of the proposed signal. 3. Chairman Butler asked is there was any illumination proposed for the sign. Staff stated none had been proposed. Community Development Director Jerry Herman noted that if any were proposed for in the future, it would require staff approval only. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it would be for extemal illumination or uplighting, if they were to propose any. 4. Commissioner Tyler asked staff for clarification as to whether the signs were to be free standing or affixed. Staff stated the Sign Ordinance states that freestanding signs can be affixed to a wall under the signs requirements for a residential district with a sign permit. Commissioner Tyler asked that this be reviewed during the updating of the Zoning Code. 5. Chairman Butler asked if the applicant wished to address the Commission. Mr. Don Olson, with Roger Snellenberger and Associates, clarified that it was their intention to illuminate the sign by the use of uplighted lights. Staff noted that the lights specifications would need to be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Mr. Olson noted that eight project flags were currently up and 13 American flags. One for each lot that is adjacent to Fred Waring Drive. He expressed his concern that they would not be allowed to fly the American flag. They have never been told they cannot fly the American flag nor any concern as to how many. It is something they would like the Commission to reconsider. They have reduced the number down to 13 and can't understand why they are even being requested to do this. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked which flags had been reduced. Mr. Olson stated they had reduced the number of American flags and went on to explain how they had been displayed. PC 11-25-97 2 Planning Commission Meeting November 25, 1997 7. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to verify that the eight flags were allowed. Staff noted eight were allowed with the filing of a Minor Use Permit and no permit had been issued as of this meeting. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant was aware that a permit was required. Mr. Olson stated they were not aware that a separate permit was needed. It was their understanding that it was included in their sign permit. The application was filed by their sign company and it had not come to their attention. It is an oversight that will be taken care of. 8. Commissioner Kirk asked if the eight flags had to be project flags or could they be any type of flag. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated there is no content restriction on the flags. They can fly any flag they want. The City is regulating the time, place, manner, and number of signs in which case the flag is likened to a sign. It is the total number that is being regulated not the content. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant was concerned with the number of flags that were being required. Mr. Olson stated he has no objection to the number of project flags that are being regulated. It is their belief that the number of American flags should not be governed. Commissioner Kirk asked if the flags would remain once the houses are sold. Mr. Olson stated they would be removed once the units were sold. Commissioner Kirk asked if patriotism continued beyond the selling of the units. Mr. Olson stated he hoped that every homeowner would be proud to fly the flag. Commissioner Kirk noted that the flags may be up for patriotic reasons, but largely they were there to advertise the project. If the argument was that flags had to be up to show how patriotic we were, they should be everywhere and not just new projects. His concern was that the flags were being used to sell homes. Mr. Olson stated that was not their intention. 9. Commissioner Gardner stated he concurred with Commissioner Kirk. In addition, he questioned the logo for the sign of Bella Vista in that it appeared to resemble the logo at PGA West and wondered if this was a conflict. Mr. Olson stated it was not exact. It was created by the sign company and it was an emblem that he created ten years. 10. Mr. Olson stated he had a disagreement with the comments that were made by the City Attorney in regard to the flags they were flying. The City has a standard flag size and it does not fit the American flag size. In addition, they have always flown American flags at all their developments. They would be PC 11-25-97 3 Planning Commission Meeting November 25, 1997 willing to leave the flags up after the properties are sold, but as they do not own the property at that time, it is not their decision. It is their desire to fly the flag at every development they have in process. 1 1. Commissioner Gardner asked staff to look at the size of flags that are listed in the Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Olson also stated that he had raised the question that a neighboring developer was allowed 16 flags because they had two tracts next to each other. 12. Chairman Butler stated he lived in this area and the American flags do not come down at night as stated by Mr. Olson. That in itself is a violation. If the American flag is to be flown at night, it is to be lighted. The flags at Quinterra were not lighted and in his opinion, he was in violation of the City's ordinance. If Mr. Olson would like to discuss the flying of the American flag as a patriotic issue, then all Commissioners agree and fly the flag on every holiday. In his opinion, this whole issue is about advertising. He would urge him to continue flying his flags, American or project, as long as only eight are flown. To infer by way of a letter addressed to the Commission that the Commission is unpatriotic, is totally out of reason. No Commissioner objects to the flying of the American flag as long it is done in the appropriate manner. If it is flown for the purposes of advertising, then he completely objects. 13. Commissioner Tyler stated he too was a veteran and flies his flag on holidays and he agrees with his fellow Commissioners that to say these flags are being flown as a matter of patriotism, is a stretch of the imagination. The Commission is here to see that the project meets the City's ordinance and that ordinance allows only eight flags. Rather than belabor this issue, he would like to ask the City Attorney to give an opinion as to whether the American flag goes beyond the advertising flags that are allowed. Mr. Snellenberger stated that according to the City's ordinance, there is no way he could fly the American flag due to the size restrictions. Commissioner Tyler stated it was not an issue of the size of the American flag, but the number of flags. 14. Commissioner Tyler questioned the wrought iron segment of the perimeter wall along Fred Waring Drive and asked if that would be replaced with a solid wall upon the selling of the models. Mr. Snellenberger stated that it would be replaced with a solid wall. Commissioner Tyler commended him for lighting the sign as it is difficult to see the signs at night. PCll-25-97 4 Planning Commission Meeting November 25, 1997 15. Community Development Director Jerry Herman asked Mr. Snellenberger what size American flag he was using. Mr. Snellenberger stated they were three feet by five feet. Staff pointed out that the Ordinance allows up to 18 square feet. Therefore, the flags meet the sign requirements of the Ordinance. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the staff's recommendation is that the developer comply with the City's ordinances for flags which states a number of eight flags under 18 square feet each are permitted. As far as flags flown at individual residences, the City has a standard that does not require a permit and fits within the defmition of temporary/decorative flags and gives a size specification. 16. Mr. Snellenberger stated he owns the 13 lots and should be allowed to fly a flag at his individual lots. Chairman Butler asked staff for a clarification. Staff stated the flags would not be flown on the perimeter of the property. Community Development Director Jerry Herman suggested that the item be continued to allow the City Attorney time to prepare an opinion. 17. Chairman Butler stated he would also like to point out that if the American flag is to be displayed, the Code should define how it is to be displayed. If at night, it should be lighted or removed. Discussion followed. 18. Following discussion, Community Development Director Jerry Herman suggested that since there was a dispute as to whether or not the American flag should be counted as part of the subdivision flags, he would recommend Mr. Snellenberger remove his tract flags and leave the eight American flags up until the City Attorney can render an opinion on the American flag. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell suggested he be allowed to keep whatever eight flags he chooses until the issue is researched. Obviously, the City's Code does not allow the additional flags and as we do not know at this time whether or not there is a Federal law that overrides local control on time, place, and manner of signs, the developer is permitted to have his eight flags. 19. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioners Gardner to adopt Minute Motion 97-014 approving Sign Permit 97-402. 20. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked for clarification on the Conditions of Approval to state that all temporary subdivision flags would be removed with the exception of eight and submitted to the Community Development PC 11-25-97 5 Planning Commission Meeting November 25, 1997 Department for review and approval. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell asked that another condition be added that upon final review by the City Attorney if it is determined that Federal law requires allowance of the American flag under any condition different than what is provided by the City, the developer would then be allowed the additional flags. 21. Mr. Snellenberger stated he was unaware that the Ordinance allows only eight flags per model home complex. There has to be a model complex in order to have the flags. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the whole purpose of the flags is for new development model home complexes. Mr. Snellenberger asked what would happen if he was building spec homes with no models. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that one of the spec homes would then become the model. Discussion followed regarding how the ordinance came to be adopted. 22. Commissioner Kirk stated that it might take some time for the City Attorney to research the case law regarding the flags, and asked about the issue of the First Amendment. As the applicant owns all thirteen properties within one subdivision, and it is assumed that the Sign Ordinance and appropriate case law is related to the First Amendment. Then his right to free speech would allow him one American flag to exhibit his patriotism and it would not be necessary to allow him to fly the American flag for every piece of property he owns. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that is correct. As long as he has the opportunity to express the thought in a reasonable manner, then that will be balanced against the communities fight to not have visual blight. It is her assumption that a certain number of flags in a relatively small area is going to be deemed to be sufficient to transmit the message that he wants to state. Going beyond that the local municipalities have the right to regulate how many of the same messages need to be allowed. Commissioner Kirk stated that based on this information, there does not seem to be a need to continue this item unless the City Attorney determines it to be necessary. He would prefer to move forward to make a recommendation. 23. Chairman Butler stated he agreed with Commissioner Kirk, but part of the approval for this sign is to have the signs done correctly. The monument signs are going to be approved based on a modification of the signs that are currently in place. 24. Commissioner Gardner withdrew his motion. PC 11-25-97 6 Planning Commission Meeting November 25, 1997 25. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Kirk/Tyler to adopt Minute Motion 97-014 approving Sign Permit 97-402, subject to the Conditions of Approval as modified to allow eight temporary subdivision flags. Unanimously approved. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VIII. COMMISSIONERS ITEMS: A. Commissioner Gardner stated he was receiving complaints about Home Depot and their lack of vegetation, and asked staff what decisions had been made in reference to this item. Staff noted that all changes had been made with the exception of removing some Pepper trees from Highway 111. They had already changed 30 trees and replaced them with larger box size trees in the parking lot. Commissioner Gardner stated he hoped this would serve as an example of what the City did not want. B. Commissioner Gardner asked staff who was responsible for the completion of the medians. Staff noted that the City Council had allocated funds from the Capital Improvement projects so that certain medians would be completed this year and next. It is a fiscal decision by the City Council as to when the funds would be expended for the completion of the medians. Staff would see that Commissioner Gardner received a copy of the Capital Improvement Program. Commissioner Tyler stated he concurred with Commissioner Gardner and pointed out that one of the most visible medians that is not completed, is the Eisenhower Drive median. Community Development Director Jerry Herman noted this was a separate issue as this median was a joint project between the City and KSL to have additional landscaping added beyond what the City had allocated funds. The problem currently is that Coachella Valley Water District will not sign off on the plans for the median because they believe the landscaping exceeds what they believe is appropriate for efficient water usage. The City is now waiting for CVWD to sign off on the plans before proceeding. C. Commissioner Kirk stated his concern was with the lighting in the Washington Street medians. Staff stated they had met with the lighting consultant and the Public Works Department to determine what needed to be done. They were informed by the lighting consultant that they are burning the lights during the day because after 100 PC 11-25-97 7 Planning Commission Meeting November 25. 1997 hours, the glare goes down 20%. Secondly, they brought in a opaque plastic cover so the light source can no longer be seen which reduces the level of lighting. Their goal is to reduce the glare by reducing the light intensity with the bum off as well as replacing the lenses. Commissioner Kirk asked if the City would be in compliance with the Dark Sky Ordinance with these changes. Staff stated yes with the exception of the lights not shining downward. Commissioner Kirk stated he would like to see revisions in the Zoning Ordinance to require the City to conform with the same regulations as developers. Staff stated they could speak with the lighting consultant to hood the lights. Discussion followed regarding landscape lighting. D. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of November 18, 1997 and Special Meeting of November 24, 1997. He further offered his apology for his actions at the Planning Commission meeting of November 12, 1997. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Tyler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on December 9, 1997, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:55 p.m. on November 25, 1997. PCll-25-97 8