Loading...
2001 01 23 PC Minutes MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 23, 2001 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 Robbins who asked Commissioner Butler to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, and Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman R°bbins asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of January 9, 2001. Commissioner Kirk asked that Page 6, Item #25, be corrected to read "...sign clutter and have an auto orientation."; Page 8, Item #5 be corrected to read," .... they were asked what the difference was, ..... These homes are almost identical and not consistent with the intent of the Master Design Guidelines. "In his opinion, there is not nearly enough variation in the designs. Page 9, Item #7 be corrected to read, "Commissioner Kirk stated he understands the cost involved, but the City was concerned about exactly what he was suggesting to do; ..." There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved with Commissioner Abels abstaining. B. Department Report: None. V. PRESENTATIONS: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01 .wpd Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Continued - Municipal Code Amendment 2000-066 - Title 8. Building and Construction; a request of the City for an amendment to Chapter 8.1 3, Water Efficient Landscaping, throughout the City. 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Staff requested this item to be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of March 13, 2001, to allow additional time to prepare the report. 2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to continue this item to March 13, 2001. Unanimously approved. B. Environmental ASsessment.,7000-402, General Plan Amendment 2000- 071, Zone Change 2000-069, Amend the Village Design Guideline Boundary, and Village Use Permit 2.000-004, a request of Chapman Golf Development, LLC and the City for: 1) Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; 2) an Amendment to the General Plan and Zoning Land Use Designation from Low Density Residential to Village Commercial and from Medium Density Residential and Cove Residential to Village Commercial; 3) an Amendment to the Village Design Guideline boundaries; and 4) development plans for a 16,222 square foot restaurant located at the northeast corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive and the west side of Eisenhower Drive between Calle Tampico to Avenida Montezuma. 1. Commissioner Kirk excused himself due to a possible conflict of interest and left the dias. 2. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Abels asked if this was the same project that was before them at the prior hearing. Staff responded that it was. 4. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the hearing to Commission discussion. G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01 .wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 5. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-002, rescinding Planning Commission Resolution 2000-087 and recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2000-402. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. 6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-003, rescinding Planning Commission Resolution 2000-088 and recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 2000-071, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. 7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-004 rescinding Planning Commission Resolution 2000-089 and recommending approval of Zone Change 2000-069, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. 8. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Abels to adopt Planning Commission' Resolution 2001-005 rescinding Planning Commission Resolution 2000-090 and recommending approval of the Amendment to the Village Design Guideline Boundary, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. 9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-006 rescinding Planning Commission Resolution 2000-091 and recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2000-004, as recommended. G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01 .wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. Commissioner Kirk rejoined the Commission. C. Site Development Permit 99-649; a request of Country Club of the Desert for review of architectural and landscaping plans for a clubhouse, main entry guard house, and golf course maintenance facility within Country Club of the Desert located on the north side of Avenue 54 between Jefferson Street and Monroe Street. 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted that the Fire Marshal conditions were just received and were to be incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler noted that Condition #3 should be changed to require approval from Coachella Valley Unified School District. 3. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to clarify the Architecture and Landscaping Committee's recommendation regarding the architectural recommendation for additional detail on the maintenance building. Staff stated the applicant was required to provide an enhanced decorative cornice around the entire building. 4. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to clarify the need for the Sheriff's conditions as they are difficult to implement. Staff stated they could be deleted. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Anton Marinkovich, representing the applicant, gave a presentation of their request. 6. The Commission asked the architect to explain the design of the maintenance building and guardhouse, which he did. 7. There being no further public comment, Chairman Robbins closed the public participation portion of the hearing and asked if there was any Commission discussion. G :\WPD O CS\PC 1-23-01. wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 8. Commissioner Kirk stated it was a good design but asked that there be more architectural detail on the north and east elevations of the maintenance building. 9. Commissioner Tyler stated he agreed with the need for additional architectural design on these elevations as they faced Avenue 52 and Madison Street. 10. Chairman Robbins stated he agreed with the request to have the added architectural detail and suggested arcades or wall mass variations on the maintenance building. 11. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-007 approving Site Development Permit 99-649, as amended: a. Condition #3: Replace DSUSD with CVUSD. b. Conditions #45-48: Deleted c. Add Conditions from Fire Department d. Modify Condition #40: Prior to preparation of final working drawings for the maintenance building, an enhanced cornice treatment shall be provided around the top of the maintenance building with additional architectural articulation (i.e., popouts, etc.), provided on the north and west sides of the building to the satisfaction of the -Community Development Department. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. D. Environmental Assessment 2000-406, Specific Plan 2000-050, Village Use Permit 2000-005, and Tentative Parcel Map 29909; a request of Santa Rosa Plaza, LLC. for, 1) Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, 2) review of design guidelines and development standards for a 15.25 acre commercial center; 3) development plans for a six story 145 room hotel; and 4) creation of 11 lots ranging in size from .4 to 6.2 acres to be located north of Calle Tampico between Desert Club Drive and Avenida Bermudas. 1. Commissioner Butler excused himself due to a possible conflict of interest and left the dias. G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01.wpd Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 2. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio and Planning Consultant Nicole Criste presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler stated the staff report referenced a traffic study which was not received. Was there anything significant contained in that report they should know about as completed. 4. Planning COnsultant Nicole Criste stated it was made a part of the environmental review process that is attached to the staff report. There was nothing notable to comment on that was not Summarized in the environmental review. 5. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Dan Brown, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 6. Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment. Ms. Lucia Moran, P. O. Box 1305, La Quinta, stated she was the listing agent on the land, and as a former Planning Commissioner she often had to wrestle with the needs of many versus the wants of the few. As the Commission is aware the City is in need of revenue to afford the beautiful landscape medians and setback, the parks, the Senior Center, the Parks and Recreation program, etc. and to address the public safety concerns of its citizens. This hotel with its Transient Occupancy Tax will bring the needed revenue to continue and enhance these programs. The land use and specific plan illustrates the thought that went into this project. With the casitas along the north side of the property, it brings the hotel building further south away from the six homes that would be affected at Duna La Quinta. She hopes the Commission will take into consideration the economic interests of the City when reviewing this project as proposed. 7. Ms, Arlene Turi, 48-800 Avenue Fernando, stated she is a resident of La Quinta and also owns a lot facing this proposed project. Her concern is regarding La Quinta setting a precedent to allow high rise buildings. This is going to block the view of all the residents in the adjoining neighborhoods. The overall plan of La Quinta and what we want the Village to be should be considered. She has always considered the Village to resemble El Paseo in Palm Desert G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01.wpd t~ Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 with flowing courtyards; a leisure place and not a metropolis. This project needs to be addressed in the overall picture of what the City wants to achieve. Whether we want high rise buildings that give a cosmopolitan atmosphere or whether we want a Village with gardens and what we seem to be doing with the landscaping. 8. Ms. Kay Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, stated that while she generally accepts the concept of the hotel, she must agree that 78 feet for a six story hotel is much too high for the Cove area and Village. She is not sure how high the recommended height of 55 feet is, but the guideline being used for a two story building has set a precedent for this area and to go beyond that is unnecessary. In addition the building pad is elevated which will also increase the building height. She does not agree with the Specific Plan where it indicates that a dramatic presence is needed for this project. In her opinion, the mountains are the City's dramatic presence and the rest of the area should stay quaint looking and Iow to the ground. The architecture as proposed does not appear to be compatible with the general feeling of the Village concept. Therefore, she would ask the Commission to limit the height of the hotel building. 9. Mr. Fred Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, stated he is delighted that a major development would come to the center of our City and hopefully vitalize it again. It is the type of project that may bring those results. However, he is utterly and totally uncompromisingly opposed to having the first high rise building in our City in this end of the Coachella Valley. We have pride in our community because of the ambiance that has been developed. Since he was first mayor of the City we have tried to maintain that ambiance and approved and disapproved projects based on that ambiance. In the 1 980's Landmark wanted to construct a hotel at PGA West and it was negotiated away. Approving this high rise will set a precedent and others will follow. There is an arrogance of the applicants' as they know what we want and they are giving no regard to the community. If the building blocks some people's views, it is their problem, not the developers. It is not only the view, but the presence of this giant building. It will totally change what our community is about. The residents do not want high rise buildings in our community. He would ask that the Commission approve the project with no more than three stories in height. G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01.wpd Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 10. Mr. Louis Compagna, P. O. Box 1286, La Quinta, stated he owns a commercial piece of property across the street from this proposed project and he has no problem with a six story building and if it were negotiable to four stories, that would be fine also. As an owner across the street he supports the project. 1 1. Mr. Doug Yavanian 49-499 Eisenhower Drive, stated his comment is based on Commissioner Kirk's comment on water flow and drainage. As the Commission is aware, KSL Development has been having discussions with staff regarding how to resolve a water drainage issue at their Hole//3 on their Dunes Golf Course. They receive a lot of excess ponding at this location and it is not meant to be a lake, but they are receiving a lot of collection from the south and north and while the Commission is discussing water flow, they need to take into consideration the impact this project could have on this location in regard to water flow. 12. Mr. Marshall Harris, 53-995 Avenida Cortez, stated he came to this Valley from a different area and has seen how the Valley has developed and commends the City on its management of that growth. He supports this proposal and hopes that the citizens could look at this hotel as it will appear instead of who's view it will block. This project will add a lot to the aesthetics of the area as compared to what is in this area presently. It will not only bring revenue to the City but stimulate other business to come here. 1 3. Mr. Robert Cunnard, 48-825 Avenida Enselmo, stated he has been in business in La Quinta for 20 years and owns the property just adjacent to this site. The area behind his property has been a haven for people who live in cardboard boxes and have caused untold trouble. This project will be good for this community and will help to clean up this area. He supports all six stories. 14. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 15. Commissioner Kirk stated it appears that everyone present likes the essence of the project and he agrees that it is an excellent use consistent with what the City wants to do in the Village area and would probably be an 'anchor and magnet for additional development to come to this area. Most of the concern will probably center around the height of the building. He was not as concerned about the height, even though he is sensitive to the issue and believes as Mr. Wolff stated that this community does G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01 .wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 have a special character in part because of the height'restrictions that has been maintained over the years. His initial concern was the entire design and as the architect described the site as a campus, that was the first thing that triggered his memory of office developments that are being built around the world and that is the orientation to the campus idea. While the name suggests something from the university setting with a pedestrian feel, what it has come to mean is the orientation around the automobile. As you look at the project, the building is surrounded by parking lots and landscaping, all orientated around the vehicles. There is more parking provided than required by City ordinances. Related concerns are how the applicant was able to change City code around. As the Commission and staff are aware, this project would not be allowed under the Zoning Ordinance and General Plan. A zoning variance would normally not even be considered. He then asked the height limit was for this area. Staff stated 35 feet. Commissioner Kirk stated that in order to do this, they have developed and submitted an application for a specific plan approval. This allows them to change standards and regulations and employ design guidelines as they want them to be. If we are going to employ the specific plan, we ought to do so in the spirit in which it was crafted by State law and that is to engage other property owners. We have a neighboring property owner at this meeting that applauds this application and he would rather have seen his property and the other two adjoining properties brought into this plan. While these property owners have no plans for their property at this time, in another 10, 20, or 30 years when the market changes, those three properties are still going to be outside of this specific plan and those properties should be integrated into this plan. He does not believe anything could be done at this stage, but encourage staff that when an applicant first suggests using a specific plan tool that staff look at the entire area around the project and see if they can be integrated together. He is not in favor of the campus feel, but rather the Village design with zero lot lines, pedestrian emphasis, and de-emphasizing the automobile. The height is something of an issue, but he is not pleased with staff's recommendation either. The staff suggest lowering the height 1 5-20 feet and creating a more massive lower structure sitting in the middle of a parking lot. He does support the hotel 'use, but is not pleased with the way it is designed in the context of what we are trying to achieve in the Village. 16. Commissioner Abels stated he concurs with most of the comments made by Commissioner Kirk. He has lived in this community for 33 years and is pleased to see this project. We G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01.wod ~) Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 talk how we want to improve the Village and nothing has ever taken place. Now, we have an opportunity. As to the six stories, he does not believe it will detract at all. Once the landscaping has matured you will not even remember what it looked like before. He supports the project as proposed. 17. Commissioner Tyler stated he has mixed emotions. It is an interesting project that could do a lot to infuse a breath of life into "the ailing commercial environment in the. Village". Most are familiar with the elusive vision for the Village and it has been so elusive for the past 25-30 years that nothing has happened to turn it into a reality because no one can figure out what the vision really is and most probably never envisioned a hotel of this size. He likes the atrium concept as it will be a haven from the summer heat. However, as stated by Commissioner Kirk the project was reviewed with the Village Design Guidelines in mind and yet the developer came back with a design that is twice the allowable height which is an affront to the citizens of La Quinta. The public hearing just prior to this one proposes a tower with a maximum - height of 74 feet and the rationale used by the City Council to approve this was that this clubhouse will be a centerpiece for a master developed community that is located in the flat portion of the City and not blocking any views of the mountains. Getting rid of storm water retention is a problem for both projects and this may be contributing to an already existing problem. He appreciates the comments given by the public. He is supportive of the project in all regards except the height. 18. Chairman Robbins stated that in regard to the storm drainage and nuisance water, staff has stated the soils are very tight at this location that nothing will percolate which causes a problem. He understands Mr. Yavanian's problem concerning the nuisance water. The drawings for this project appear to be very lush and yet the conditions do not contain any water efficiency language of the City's Ordinance and to him this is an important point. A condition should be added to address this concern. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it is a mitigation measure. Chairman Robbins stated it is not contained in the conditions. · Staff stated it is contained in the Environmental Assessment as well as a condition in the Specific Plan that states mitigation measures are incorporated as part of the Conditions of Approval. G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01.wpd ]. 0 Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 19. Commissioner Kirk stated the Specific Plan does indicate under landscape guidelines, Iow water using plant material including native palms need to be used throughout the project. This sounds good, but for those who know plants, the native palms are not Iow water use plants. 20. Chairman Robbins stated this project needs to reflect that this is the desert and not the tropics. Generally, he is in favor of the project, but from a height standpoint this is a crossroad for the Village. A project like this is needed for the Village to move forward and prosper. He concurs with Commissioner Tyler that when the Village was envisioned no one thought of a six story hotel. The Village height limit is 35 feet. This is more than twice the height limit that was envisioned. Approving this project as it is today will change the direction of the Village. We need to realize that if we approve a six story building, it will change the vision of the Village and we need to be sure that that 'vision of the Village is what they want. This will set a precedent. If we do not want the high rise, then we need to take that into consideration and say no to this project. 21. Commissioner Abels stated he did not agree that every project after this would have to be approved for six stories. They can control the height of other projects. This will be an asset to the City and is needed to jump start the Village. 22. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-008 recommending Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2000-406, as recommended. 23. Chairman Robbins asked if this recommendation was for the 55 foot height. Commissioner Abels stated his motion was for the height at the applicant's request. Commissioner Tyler withdrew his second. Commissioner Kirk seconded the motion for purposes of discussion. 24. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was another way of mitigating the aesthetic issues. When there are height impacts, it is not just the height that is a concern, it is the height and mass. What this project has isn't a single tower that is six stories high, the entire structure is six stories high and this is much more of a significant G :\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01 .wpd ] ] Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 impact than having one building element, as. in the case of the prior public hearing. To mitigate the aesthetic impact one consideration could be the atrium portion of the building could remain high and not have guest rooms around it. This may not be cost effective to the builder, but he would consider this. 25. Commissioner Abels withdrew his motion and suggested discussion with the applicant. Commissioner Kirk withdrew his second. 26. Chairman Robbins stated he did not see how this could make any difference. Walking out of your room and looking over the balcony d°wn at the atrium creates the ambiance. To take that away does nothing for the developer. 27. Mr. Dan Brown, managing member for Santa Rosa Plaza, stated this has been a long road to get to this point. They have redesigned five or six times and kept in mind what they thought was necessary to make a hotel successful. One of hardest sells - was to sell Hilton Hotels that the Village at La Quinta was ready for a project like this. He was questioned why he wanted to build at this location and he had to defend his decision to build at this location. They did take into consideration all the Zoning regulations for the Village, but knew there had to be a presence. This hotel had to have a high presence for it to be noticed. It had to be special which would complement what as going on in the Village. They have to be successful in the long term because the Village is successful, but they also have to make a statement that they are 100% first class. That is their main concern in requesting the six stores. They also have to get financing and in order to get that it has to be something different and special. The architecture of most hotels is a box, unlike the exterior of this proposal which contains both Mission and Mediterranean to complement the area. 28. Commissioner Kirk asked Mr. Brown to comment regarding having only part of the building reaching the desired height. Mr, Brown stated not the way this building is configured. The building only goes to 69 feet and the tower takes it to 78 feet. The plan was to break up the height and not create a box. It is a $20 million project that they have to make sure it works. They need to make a presence for the hotel so people will come. G:\WPDOCS\PC1-23-O1.wpd ] 2 Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 29. Commissioner Tyler noted that the economics of a project were not a concern of the Commission. They were to see that it meets the land use designation, the General Plan and Zoning criteria. The City Council are to consider the other factors. 30. Chairman Robbins stated he has no problem with the aesthetics of the project. As a Planning Commissioner he is to uphold the City's ordinances. As this area has a 35 foot height limit and to allow 78 feet is a large stretch. 31. It was moved by Commissioner Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-008 recommending Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2000-406, as proposed by the applicant. The motion died for lack of a second. 32. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-008 recommending Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2000-406, as recommended by staff. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: Commissioner Abels. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. None. ABSTAIN: None. 33. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-009 recommending approval of Specific Plan 2000-050, as amended and recommended by staff: a. Condition #6: Unrestricted access both to and from Desert Club Drive at the southerly location shown on the approved Specific Plan only. The northerly access shall be gated to restrict access for emergency purposes only. b. Condition #19: Delivery trucks, vehicles, and trash trucks shall access the site from Calle Tampico and or Avenida Bermudas. c. Condition #20: Add the three parcels at the northwest corner of Avenida Bermudas and Calle Tampico. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. G :\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01.wpd ! 3 Planning Commission Minutes - January 23, 2001 34. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-010 recommending approval of Tentative Parcel Map 29909, as amended and recommended: a. Condition #6: Unrestricted access both to and from Desert Club Drive at the southerly location shown on the approved Specific Plan only. The northerly access shall be gated to restrict access for emergency purposes only. b. Condition #49(A)(c): Remove the reference to Condition 8.A.3 above. c. Condition #58.C. That the northerly access shall be gated to restrict access for emergency purposes only. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. 35. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-011 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2000-005, as recommended. a. Condition #69.A: Change the recess windows from 12 inches to eight inches. b. Condition #69.C: Delete. c. Condition #56.C: Unrestricted access both to and from Desert Club Drive at the southerly location shown on the approved Specific Plan only. The northerly access shall be gated to restrict access for emergency purposes only. d. Condition #71: Delivery trucks, vehicles, and trash trucks shall access the site from Calle Tampico and or Avenida Bermudas. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Robbins. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. Commissioner Butler rejoined the Commission. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Sign Application 7001-598; a request of Riofine Neon for Jiffy Lube for review of two internally illuminated individually mounted channel letter signs on the west side of Adams Street immediately north of the La Quinta Care Wash, within the Highway 111 La Quinta Shopping Center. G:\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01.w~d ] 4 Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 1. Chairman Robbins asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked staff if the temporary Lube Shop board sign had been approved. Staff indicated it will be removed as it is a condition of approval. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if there were two different configurations of the sign. Staff stated they were proposing two signs; one on the south and one on the north elevation and went on to describe the two signs. Staff noted that they were recommending that the lettering be removed on the on the logo on the south elevation. On the north elevation, staff is recommending the sign be reduced to fit the fascia. The sign program for the Center is that each sign -- be individual letters. Chairman Robbins asked if any part of the sign was corporate signage. Staff stated that was a question for the applicant. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated the applicant can consent to whatever they desire, notwithstanding what the case or Federal law may dictate. Chairman Robbins reiterated that he can agree, but the City cannot force it on them. 4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Rio Score, representing Riofine Neon, explained the sign proposal and stated the design was their corporate logo. He went on to note the error in the sign length. The fascia on the north side that contains the sign is 42 inches so the sign would not hang off. 5. Chairman Robbins asked staff to clarify their concerns regarding this sign. Staff stated that as long as the letters were 24 inches, then they would be centered on the facia area. Mr. Score noted the existing letters are 29 inches tall. Staff stated it was unknown as to how the existing sign was installed at 29 inches. Staff was requiring the signs to conform to the existing sign program which only allows 24 inches in height. Mr. Score stated they preferred the straight across look. Chairman Robbins stated the letters would have to be smaller. G :\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01. wpd ] 5 Planning Commission Minutes January 23, 2001 6. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would agree to the smaller arrow without the letters. Mr. Score stated that would defeat the logo. The sign would also be out of proportion in regard to the letters and the arrow. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked why it was necessary to say "Jiffy Lube" twice in the same sign. Mr. Score stated it is more of a sight issue. 8. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Minute Motion 2001-003, approving Sign Application 2001-528, as amended: a. Condition #1: "...Sign letter height shall be reduced to 24 inches with the exception of the letter 'J'. The 'J' shall not exceed 27 inches in height." b. Condition #2: Change "may" to "shall". c. Condition #4: Replace with "The south elevation sign shall not exceed 50 square feet." Unanimously approved. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of January 16, 2001. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Abels to adjourn 'this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held February 13, 2001, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:07 p.m. on January 23, 2001. Respectfully submitted, Secretary City of La Quinta, California G :\WPDOCS\PC 1-23-01.wpd ! 6