2001 07 10 PC Minutes MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
July 1 O, 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 lead the flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Robert
Tyler, and Chairman Steve Robbins.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City
Attorney Kathy Jenson, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior
Engineer Steve Speer, Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, Principal Planner
Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Michele Rambo, and Executive Secretary
Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
IV. ELECTION OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR:
A. Chairman Robbi'ns opened the nominations for Chair.
1. Commissioner Butler nominated Jacques Abels. Commissioner
Kirk seconded the motion.
2. There being no further nominations, nominations were closed and
Jacques Abels was unanimously elected Chair.
B. Chairman Abels opened the nominations for Vice Chair.
1. Commissioner Kirk nominated Richard Butler. Commissioner
Robbins seconded the motion.
2. There being no further nominations, nominations were closed and
Richard Butler was unanimously elected Vice Chair.
V. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
June 26, 2001. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 8, Item 16 be
corrected to read "...until the property owner wants to .... "; Page 9, Item
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01 .wpd ]
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
20 be corrected to read "...beyond what can be decided at this time."
Commissioner Kirk asked that Page 9, Item 23 be corrected to read,
"Commissioner Kirk stated for consistency, the issues not ripe until a
specific project is proposed." There being no further corrections, it was
moved and seConded by Commissioners Robbins/Butler to approve the
minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved.
B. Department Report: None.
VI. PRESENTATIONS: None.
VII. PUBLIC HEARING:
A. Environmental Assessment 2001-425, Conditional Use Permit 7001-061,
and Site Development Permit 2001-706; a request of AT&T Wireless
Services. for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of
Environmental Impact and approval of the installation of a 65 foot high
wireless antenna with mon0palm prototype design and construction of
a single story 1,002 square foot building for related equipment to be
located west of Eisenhower Drive, north of Los Arboles and south of
Avenida Fernando within the La Quinta Resort and Club.
1. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated a request had been
received by the applicant to continue this hearing to July 24,
2001, to allow the applicant additional time to complete their
application.
2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Butler/Robbins to continue Environmental
Assessment 2001, Conditional Use Permit 2001-061 and Site
Development Permit 2001-706, to July 24, 2001. Unanimously
approved.
B. Conditional Use Permit 2001-058 and Site Development Permit .2001-
702: a request of Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses for approval of
the development plans and construction of a 4,000 square foot church
and a future church building with ancillary facilities on 2.39 acres on the
east side of Dune Palms Road, between Westward Ho Drive and the
Coachella Valley Storm Channel.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Planning Consultant Nicole Criste presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01 .wpd 2
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked if windows were omitted due to a
religious concern. Staff stated the applicant should answer this.
Commissioner Tyler noted a correction in the conditions and asked
if the number of parking spaces required was for the ultimate
buildout of the project. Staff stated this was correct.
3. Commissioner Butler asked if the second building would come
back to the Planning Commission. Staff stated the second
building elevations would come back to the Commission.
Commissioner Butler asked if there was a time frame by which the
second building would have to be built. Staff stated there is no
time frame. Commissioner Butler asked staff to clarify the location
of the project.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked about the property to the north of the
project site. Staff stated it is zoned Low Density Residential. On
the south is a mobile home project and to the east is Low Density
Residential.
5. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to explain the accent band that
was indicated on the drawings. Staff stated it was the band
around the window detail. Commissioner Robbins asked staff to
clarify what Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
conditions had been met. Staff stated Condition #1 had been met
and #2 had been partially satisfied.
6. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Adam Elkins, representing the Kingdom of
Jehovah Witnesses, stated there is no significance to whether or
not they have windows. They generally do not want the windows
due to vandalism, so any time they can avoid it they do so.
7. Commissioner Tyler asked what their relation was to the church on
Darby Road. Mr. Elkins stated they are a growing church
community and each is a separate congregation.
8. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project
for Commission discussion.
9. Commissioner Robbins stated he understood the applicant's
concerns regarding vandalism, but he would like to have windows
on the Dune Palms Road elevation.
~.\wp~n~..c;\p~.7-1 O-Ol .wnd ~
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
10. Commissioner Kirk stated he concurred and given the surrounding
uses being Low Density Residential, he would like to reconsider
the lighting and require the Iow profile lighting in the parking lot.
He concurs with Commissioner Robbins, but would go even
further and require windows on at least three sides.
11. Commissioner Tyler concurred with Commissioner Kirk.
1 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-093 approving Conditional
Use Permit 2001-058, subject to the findings and conditions as
recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
13. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-094 approving Site
Development Permit 2001-702, subject to the findings and
conditions as amended:
A. Condition //24: "Retention basins shall be visible from the
adjacent parking lot."
B. Condition //49: Windows will be provided on the north,
south, and west elevations.
C. Delete Condition //50.
D. Add Condition//61: Requiring the height of the light poles
be reduced on the parking lot lighting plan.
14. Commissioner Butler stated he did not concur with windows on
three sides.
15. Commissioner Kirk stated his concern was that the north and
south elevations are visible from the street as well as the
neighbors.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01 .wpd 4
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
C. Site Development Permit 2001-669: a request of James R. Paul for
review of a proposed sign program for an approved multi-tenant
industrial/office building located at 79-440 Corporate Centre Drive, within
the La Quinta Corporate Center.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Michele Rambo presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
,
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Robbins asked staff to clarify the request. Staff
stated they were requesting approval of the tenant and directory
sign and not the monument sign. The monument sign requires a
specific plan amendment. Discussion followed as to the different
signs.
3. Commissioner Butler asked if the height proposed was allowed.
Staff stated the height was not defined in the Code, but there was
a 48-foot maximum size.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked why the applicant was making
application for an amendment to the existing Code requirement.
Staff stated the applicant could address this under a sign program.
Commissioner Kirk asked what would happen if one tenant took
two lease spaces. Staff stated they would still only be allowed a
total of 80 percent of the total store frontage as designated by the
sign program.
5. Commissioner Tyler asked if the specific plan modified the Code
requirements. Staff stated it did not address size, but required
them to submit a sign application under a Site Development Permit
for each building.
6. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Mark Ross, Imperial Signs representing the
applicant, clarified the designated sign area and stated that if a
tenant took two spaces, they would still be required to submit an
application to the City for approval. He went on to describe the
material to be used for the sign.
7. Commissioner Tyler asked the applicant to show where the
designated sign area was on the storefront. Mr. Ross showed
where it was located.
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-O1 .wpd :~
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
8. Commissioner Butler asked if this sign program would be applied
to all the tenants. Mr. Ross stated that was correct for just this
building within the Center. Staff stated the entire project had
design guideline for each building and each would have to come in
with a sign program to conform to the Specific Plan. Mr. Ross
stated that depending on the use of the building, different signage
would be needed.
9. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project
for Commission discussion.
10. Commissioner Kirk asked what the Specific Plan requires; can the
Specific Plan change the Zoning Code. Staff stated yes within the
guidelines of the Specific Plan. Commissioner Kirk asked if the
sign program must meet the Zoning Code if the Specific Plan did
not have a sign program. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated that
if you were going to exceed the Zoning Code requirements, it
would have to be stated in the Specific Plan. Planning Manager
Christine di Iorio read the Zoning Code definition for sign program
and stated the applicant is seeking additional flexibility in the sign
program. Commissioner Kirk stated that if a registered trade mark
is involved they could request a cabinet sign. Staff stated that
was correct, but the Commission could deny the cabinet. The
reference to a cabinet could be deleted from the condition.
Commissioner Kirk asked why the Commission would have to
address registered trademarks when they are submitting a sign
program. Condition //2 could be removed. Staff clarified that
staff in the past, has not supported what type of products are sold
by the tenant in the sign program as a sign is for the identification
of the business.
1 1. Commissioner Tyler stated that that type of information usually
appears on the windows and can be controlled by the Zoning
Code.
12. Commissioner Kirk asked if they met the sign program can they
put whatever they want up for a sign. City Attorney Kathy
Jenson stated they would not be in compliance with the Zoning
Code as it defines identification signs for multi-tenant buildings.
1 3. Commissioner Butler asked how the sign would be positioned if a
tenant took two spaces. Staff stated a condition could be added
allowing them to center the sign.
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01 .wpd 6
- Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2OO1
14. Commissioner Robbins stated there was a discrepancy in the size
of the sign and what is shown on the design. Mr. Ross stated the
example shown in the picture is the east elevation on Dune Palms
Road. If one tenant took two spaces they would still be limited by
the size stipulation.
15. Commissioner Robbins stated there was enough discrepancy in
what was being proposed that he would like the project to be
continued as it is uncertain what they are proposing.
1 6. Commissioner Tyler asked if the applicant was entitled to signs on
both frontages. Mr. Ross stated they have one tenant who would
have two frontages.
1 7. Commissioner Robbins asked if the size was the same for all signs.
Mr. Ross stated the signs are all different sizes as they were trying
to achieve a balance in the signs.
1 8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-095 approving Site Development Permit 2001-
669, subject to the findings and conditions as amended.
a. Condition//2 & 3 deleted.
b. Condition//4: The proposed directory and monument signs
are not a part of this approval
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman
Abels. NOES: Commissioner Robbins. ABSTAIN: None.
ABSENT: None.
D. Site Development Permit 2001-682, Amendment//1; a request of World
Gym Palm Desert, LLC for review of a revised exterior elevation and
landscape plan for a previously approved 25,500 square foot fitness
center located at 46-760 Commerce Court, within the La Quinta
Corporate Center.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Michele Rambo presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01.wpd
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked if the applicant could provide any
rationale for their request. Staff stated cost was the reason for
the request.
3. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant wanted to address the
Commission. Ms. Wanda Mataranga, representing World Gym,
stated they wanted a brick building, but the architect designed a
building with awnings and plaster which they did not want. The
building is 30 feet high and there are small 3 by 5 windows to
bring natural light into the building to decrease the intense lighting.
The awnings defeat the purpose of the windows which was to let
in the natural light.
4. Commissioner Kirk asked why the applicant was objecting to plant
sizes. Ms. Martaranga stated their only objection was the cost.
5. Commissioner Tyler asked if they were wanting smaller trees as
well as the plant material. Ms. Mataranga stated both.
Commissioner Tyler asked if' the applicant was concerned about
the amount of heat that would be coming in the windows. Ms.
Mataranga stated the windows would be treated to keep the heat
out and let the light in. Commissioner Tyler stated the purpose of
the awnings was to add articulation and without them there is only
a flat exterior. Ms. Mataranga stated the look of the building
would not be changed by adding the awnings.
6. Commissioner Butler asked how much of the use of the building
was on the second floor. Discussion followed regarding the size
and whether Title 24 requirements would be changed.
Commissioner Butler stated he was concerned about approving the
smaller plant material. Ms. Mataranga stated they have invested
a lot of money into this building and the landscaping will be
maintained no matter what the size.
7. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project
for Commission discussion.
8. Commissioner Kirk stated she agrees with the applicant's request
to remove the awnings and retain the plant material as
recommended by staff.
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01 .wpd 8
- Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
9. Commissioner Butler stated he could concur with the applicant's
request for both the plant material and awnings.
10. Commissioner Tyler stated he agrees with the elimination of the
awnings, but he is concerned about the landscaping reduction.
11. Chairman Abels stated he agrees with the elimination of the
awnings and reduction in plant material.
12. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Robbins/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-096 approving Site Development Permit 2001-
682, Amendment #1, subject to the findings and conditions as
amended:
a. Condition #3 deleted.
b. Condition 4: Palm trees shall be varied in height from six
feet to eight feet. The shrub plant material as recommended
by staff.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, Robbins and
Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
E. Environmental Assessment 2001-425 and Conditional Use Permit 2001-
060; a request of Verizon Wireless for Certification of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and approval of the
installation of a' 60-foot high wireless antenna monopalm prototype
design and related 230 square foot one story equipment building for
cellular telephone service to be located on the north side of Highway
111, west of Adams Street within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping
Center.
1. Chairman Abels 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 Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler questioned the environmental report in that all
but two of the items listed, are listed as less than significant. If
all are of no impact, why is there such an elaborate monitoring
program. Staff stated they are Code requirements and by
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01 .wpd 9
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
complying with them it creates no impacts. Commissioner Tyler
asked why the two that are less than significant are not included.
Staff stated that in regard to aesthetics there is no need to do
anything further than what is proposed.
3. Commissioner Kirk stated it does not make sense. If there are no
impacts why is there a mitigation monitoring program. City
Attorney Kathy Jenson stated that was correct and it could be -
eliminated.
4. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to' address the
Commission. Mr. Krugman, representing Verizon, stated he was
available to answer any questions.
5. Commissioner Tyler asked where the tower would be located. Mr.
Krugman explained the location and stated the building was ten
feet six inches high and the two foot dish would remain.
6. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project
for Commission discussion.
7. Commissioner Tyler asked who was using the trash enclosure.
Staff stated it was used by the restaurant.
8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-097 certifying a Mitigated Negative Declaration
of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-425,
as submitted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-098, approving Conditional
Use Permit 2001-060, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, Robbins and
Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01 .wpd ] 0
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2OO1
F. Site Development Permit 99-651. Amendment #1; a request of KSL
Recreation Corporation for an amendment to Condition of Approval #1 7
of City Council resolution 99-71 that requires removal of the existing
corporate office modular units on June 1, 2001, to be extended to
November 30, 2001.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and 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 Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Butler asked if any complaints had been received
regarding the proposal. Staff stated none had been received.
3. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Bill Dodds, representing KSL, stated he was
available to answer any questions.
4. Commissioner Robbins asked if the applicant could meet the time
frame to construct the new office buildings. Mr. Dodds stated
yes, as the buildings are modular in construction enabling them to
meet the deadline.
5. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project
for Commission discussion.
6. There being no further discussion it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-099 approving Site Development Permit 99-651,
Amendment #1, subject to the findings and conditions as
recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
None.
VIII. BUSINESS ITEMS: None
G:\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01 .wpd ] 1
Planning Commission Minutes
July 10, 2001
IX. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
X. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Staff gave a report of the City Council meeting of July 1 9, 2001.
Xl. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Tyler/Butler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held July 24, 2001, at 7:00 p.m.
This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:08 p.m. on July 10,
2001.
Respectfully submitted,
B,e'tty 2J~"~wyer, ~.xecuti~rf~ Secretary
City 5f-Ea Quinta, California
G :\WPDOCS\PC7-10-01.wpd ] 2