Loading...
2000 05 09 PC Minutes MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA May 9, 2000 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Abels to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Robert Tyler, Steve Robbins, and Chairman Kirk. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Abels to excuse Commissioner Butler. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of April 25, 2000. Commissioner Abels asked that Page 1 6 be amended to note that he did not say anything regarding a signal on Washington Street. There being no further changes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Abels to approve the minutes as amended. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Specific Plan 97-0.?9. Amendment #2 and Development Agreement 97- 002. Amendment #2; a request of Stamko Development Company for a recommendation of approval to amend "The Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan" modifying the sign regulations allowing car display racks, and other minor changes; and recommendation for approval of an amendment to the Development Agreement regarding definitions. C:WIy Documents\WPDOCSXPC5-9-20.wpd 1 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 1. Chairman Kirk opened the Public Hearing and asked for the staff report. Community Development Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to clarify their recommendation. 3. Chairman Kirk asked if staff was recommending that in regard to the applicant's request #3 it be changed from each department to each franchise. Staff clarified that the applicant was asking for up to six or mOre freestanding signs, 40 square feet, per for each franchise and staff is recommending one 40 square foot sign per dealer to identify all the uses. 4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Christine Clarke, representing Stamko Development Company, asked for clarification on the recommendation: 1) the signs going around the building regarding the exposed raceway. Staff clarified that the signs on the front of the building does not have exposed raceway. The raceway for those signs is behind the facade. It is staff's understanding they cannot put the. raceway behind the other building facade because there is a beam in the way. This is an attempt to allow them to have an exposed' raceway; however, the raceway has to look like it is part of the facade from the exterior, so you are putting the raceway up and the letters on top of the raceway to appear to be part of the building. 2) Permanent or temporary shade structures are to match the building colors. Her concern is that the Chrysler dealership is having a tent sale and the auto manufacturer sends the tents to the 'dealers and it is never known what the colors will be. She then displayed samples of tents that are located at other dealers throughout the Valley. They are asking for flexibility to allow them to use what is sent by the manufacturers and they will keep them off Highway 111. Chrysler currently has tents up to shade the workers who are washing the cars. 3) Secondary signs being unlimited for used cars, service, parts, and body shop. She would like to change #3 to read dealer not franchise and to have them located on the interior streets only, for each of the uses. 4) Balloons, banners, pennants, etc.; a specific plan should allow a development to address specific issues. Therefore they are not asking for this on the east side, but C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC5-9-20.wpd 2 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 the auto mall only. In the Specific Plan and the Amendment they do not comply with several City ordinances. For example, the Highway 111 Design Guidelines. The City exempted them due to problems that would be caused by some of the design requirements. They did not change the Ordinance. The Specific Plan allowed the exception. Retention is another example as well as signs on Highway 111. All of these exceptions were allowed because they had a Specific plan. She then showed examples where pennants were being used tastefully at other auto dealers. They are not asking for a change in the City's Ordinance, but to handle allow the uses as a part of the Specific Plan process. If allowed, she would like a condition added that all flags, pennants, etc. be kept in a "new-like" condition. In regard to the Development Agreement the .only correction is to delete the Juvonen Trust as they are no longer a part of the Agreement. 5. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked if the applicant had an alternative to the colors of the tents. Ms. Clarke stated she is asking that this requirement be deleted as they have no control over the colors as they are sent from the auto manufacturers. Commissioner Tyler suggested two conditions; one for the tents supplied by the manufacturers and one for the dealer. Ms. Clarke suggested there be three; the manufacturers, those shown on the front of the property, and those on the back of the property. 6. Commissioner Abels stated he thought the manufacturers tents should be allowed and the balance of the tents should conform to staff's recommendations. 7. Commissioner Robbins stated that if they are to be permanent shade structures, they should match the building. If temporary, then whatever the manufacturers wants. 8. Chairman Kirk asked what the applicant wanted in regard to the 40-square foot signs. Ms. Clarke stated the dealers would like to have one sign per use. Chairman Kirk asked the applicant if she was agreeing with staff's recommendation. Ms. Clarke stated no; ~ she would like each of the signs as requested. 9. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened'it for Commission discussion. C:XMy Documents\WPDOCSXPC5-9-20.wpd 3 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 10. Commissioner Robbins stated he agreed with staff's recommendation, with the exception of the tents. He asked if there were any limits on the length of time for a temporary facility, such as a tent. Staff stated they are allowed 40 days a year under a Special Advertising Permit. Page 54 of the Specific Plan states, "...special events shall be limited to no more than 40 total days per year for the Auto Mall, with no single event lasting more than ten days. Concurrent or jointly sponsored events held on the same day shall count as a single day regardless of how many dealers participate. These special events may .... " Staff would recommend leaving the word "permanent" shade structure as it exists and take the "temporary" shade use and put it under the temporary use permit process. Commissioner Robbins asked if the Specific Plan would govern over the City ordinances. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the Specific Plan would govern in this case. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that there is another existing auto dealer and other retail uses that do not have the advantage if the banners and flags are allowed at the Auto Mall. The only way they could have the flags and banners is to amend the Ordinance to allow them the same use or they process a specific Plan. WalMart has a specific plan and could apply for an amendment to allow the banners and flags. Commissioner Robbins stated the Planning Commission does not have to approve the amendment. Staff stated that is true, but now one specific plan is being allowed and a second is being denied. 11. Commissioner Tyler stated he had met with the applicant on May 3rd to discuss the project. He is however, concerned that you are unable to see the cars from the Highway and signs are needed. In regard to the shade structures, perhaps they should limit the number per dealership. 12. Chairman Kirk stated he too met with the applicant to discuss the project. He has strong feelings in regard to signs, but agrees that more signs are needed in this case. On staff's recommendation in regard to the ground mounted sign, there is a significant different between staff's recommendation and the applicant's request. Does the Commission want one sign per use or per dealer. 13. Commissioner Robbins stated he too met with the applicant. If the signs are put on the back side of the buildings, he has no problem with the .applicant's request. His concern is the view from Highway 111. C:LMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC5-9-20.wpd 4 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 1 4. Commissioner Abels stated he too met with the applicant. 1 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-025 recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment //2 as requested by the applicant and as amended: a. Section 2.50.4.1.1 Site Plan - Auto Mall (pg. 52); delete reference to temporary. Permanent tents are allowed, shall be the color of the buildings, and approved by staff. b. Section 2.50.4.1.3- Special Events (pg. 54): temporary shade structure shall be allowed regardless of color c. Section 2.80.1.1 Signage- Auto Mall (pg 62): two 40 square feet freestanding monument signs per dealership shall be allowed south of along Highway 111 and east of Adams Street. d. A new section added: Pennants, including pennants mounted on lighting fixtures, and banners shall be allowed, kept in a "like new" condition, and can be permanent. Balloons are not allowed ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. 16. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-026 recommending to the City Council approval of Development Agreement 97-002, Amendment//2 as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. B. Environmental Assessment 99-391, General Plan Amendment 2000-066, and Tentative Tract Map 29563; a request of Century-Crowell Communities for a recommendation to certify a Mitigated Negative -- Declaration of Environmental Impact, recommending to the City Council approval of an amendment to reduce cul-de-sac bulb radius dimensions for private streets from 45 feet to 38 feet, and a recommendation for approval of a tract map allowing 3 single family and other common lots on 7.65 acres located on the north side of Westward Ho Drive, West of Dune Palms Road. C:\My Documents\WPDOCSXPC5-9-20.wpd 5 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 1. Chairman Kirk 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 Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Robbins stated he has a problem with consistency where a previous tract was required to have the 45-foot cul-de- sac. Staff noted that with this request the General Plan was being amended to allow the 38-foot wide cul-de-sac. If this amendment is approved the previous applicant can then ask for an amendment to use the smaller cul-de-sac. 3. Chairman Kirk asked why this request had not been processed by the prior applicant. Staff explained that the prior applicant is aware of this application and it was a matter of timing. 4. Commissioner Abels asked if this would allow bigger lots. Staff stated yes; it would result in smaller cul-de-sacs and bigger lots. _ 5. Commissioner Tyler asked if the entrance into the tract would allow full turn movements. Staff noted they are full turns. 6. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Ed Knight, representing Century-Crowell Communities, stated he concurred with staff's recommendation. 7. Commissioner Tyler stated that the other half of the Aliso Del Rey tract to the north, has lots that run north and south, and asked why the lots in this tract are running east and west instead. Also, why don't the streets of this tract connect with the project to the north?. Mr. Knight stated Aliso Del Rey I was processed in 1999, recorded, and is under construction. This tract was not conceived until the other was already under the processing and engineering that they entered into negotiations with the land owner. Therefore, it is now independent of the other, but the HOA will be a part of the other tract. Commissioner Tyler stated Del Rey I has plans to construct a two story unit. If it is approved, will it be used on this tract as well? Mr. Knight stated he is unaware of the unit plan layout at this time. He suspects the plan that has a. loft will be incorporated into this project as well. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC5-9-20.wpd 6 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 8. There bein§ no questions of the applicant, Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. 9. There being no further public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened it for Commission discussion. 10. Commissioner Tyler stated that Century-Crowell has always stated that they knew the potential of Aliso Del Rey II becoming a reality. This Commission has previously heard open discussion that this was likely to happen. In public testimony concerning Aliso Del Rey I, and also at subsequent public hearings regarding the Eucalyptus trees along the northern boundary' of that tract, there was public comment given regarding a concern for heavy traffic on Dune Palms Road because of the schools, and a need expressed to have a second access onto Westward Ho Drive Looking at this tract layout, it is probably the worst example of a tract layout he has seen while serving on this Commission - especially since both tracts involved are being done concurrently by the same developer. For example, Lots 12, 18, and 24 each abut four lots across their northern lot line and Lots 13, 19 and 25 each abut three lots across their northern lot line. This violates common sense and good planning practice, and he cannot understand why the Commission is even considering it. Knowing that Aliso Del Rey II was likely to happen, it should have been integrated into the overall design of Aliso Del Rey from the very beginning. This is a high visibility project, right across from La Quinta High School and will only add to existing traffic problems. He has a problem supporting this project. 11. Chairman Kirk stated he too thinks this could have been designed better, but given what they are left with, he sees no other alternative. 12. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt 'Planning Commission Resolution 2000-027 recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental _ Assessment 99-391. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES' None. ABSENT Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN' None. C:Wly Documents\WPDOCS\PC5-9-20.wpd 7 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 13. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-028 recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 2000-066, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as submitted. 14. Commissioner Tyler stated this would affect all the City's future private streets. Commissioner Robbins stated seas of asphalts are not conducive to single family residences. In his opinion, all. streets in the City should be narrowed. Wide streets do nothing but speed up traffic and are dangerous because they provide more places for kids to play and more opportunity for cars to go fast. He would support anything that narrows the streets or cul-de-sacs. 15. Chairman Kirk seconded his thoughts and supports the General Plan Amendment, but we are addressing it as it relates to a specific development rather than as a part of the General. Plan Update where it should be reviewed. ROLL CALL: .AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. -- ABSTAIN: None. 16. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-029 recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 29563, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Robbins, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: Commissioner Tyler. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Master Design Guidelines 2000-010; a request of Sunrose Corporation for approval of the Master Design Guidelines as submitted for homes to be built throughout the Cove area. 1. Chairman Kirk 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. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC5-9-20.wpd 8 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Abels stated the guidelines were confusing. Some drawings are not defined well enough. Staff should improve the documents before they get to the Commission. 3. Commissioner Robbins agreed that the quality of the reproductions should be better and should have included page numbers. It is a document that was not put together well. Staff needs to see that the documents presented are better prepared. 4. Commissioner Tyler stated that every time the Guidelines are submitted they have the same discussion. A list was given to staff for their use in preparing these Guidelines. 5. Chairman Kirk stated he has spoken with staff and there is a list of minimum guidelines and asked if this met the minimum guidelines. Staff stated yes. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the Master Design Guidelines were added to the Zoning Code to prevent a repetition of the same unit from being built in the Cove area. The Guidelines also require that no house within 200 feet look like any other. Staff has been dealing with developers who are building in the Cove and staff is preparing to remove the Master Design Guidelines from the Zoning Code, but retain the physical review of the houses to prevent the repetition of houses. Chairman Kirk asked if staff had the discretion to require the builder to change their building plans. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the Design Guidelines would be kept in regard to the 200 foot limitation, but the Planning Commission review of Guidelines would be eliminated. Chairman Kirk asked staff for the history on how these guidelines came to be. Staff explained. 6. Commissioner Robbins stated he has no problem with the house plans, but with the Design Guidelines that had been submitted; they need to be more professionally done. 7. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Mr. Mark Tuvel, Sunrose Corporation, stated he thought the product he submitted was acceptable. 8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Minute Motion 2000-010 approving Master Design Guidelines 2000-010, as submitted. Unanimously approved. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC5-9-20.wpd 9 Planning Commission Meeting May 9, 2000 _ VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Discussion regarding the Planning Commission summer meeting schedule. 1. Community Development Director Jerry Herman asked the Commission to consider what meetings they would want to go dark during the summer. Commissioner Robbins asked for August 8th. Chairman Kirk asked that there be no decision until the Commission's meeting of July 11 th. B. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the Council meeting of May 2, 2000. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the 'next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held May 23, 2000, at 7'00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:36 P.M. on May 9, 2000. Respectfully submitted, ecutive Secretary City of La Quinta, California C:\My Documents\WPDOCSXPC5-9-20.wpd ' 10