Loading...
2002 01 22 PC Minutes MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA January 22, 2002 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Butler to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Jacques Abels. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: A. Chairman Abels welcomed Boy Scout Troop #848 who were in attendance as part of their "Citizens in the Community" badge. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: B. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of January 8, 2002. Commissioner Tyler asked that Pages 17 and 19 be amended to reflect the Resolutions were approved, "as amended". There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. C. Department Report: None V. PRESENTATIONS: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd ] Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 2oo1-~r:~1, Addendum to Environmental Impact RePort No. 232, General Plan Amendment 2001-080. Zone Chanae 2001-103: a request of T. D. Development for 1) Certification of an Addendum to Riverside County Environmental Assessment No. 232; 2) Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for the area bounded by Avenue 58, Monroe Street, Avenue 60 and Madison Street, outside of Riverside County Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment #1; 3) Change the land use designation from: A. Medium Residential, Medium High Residential, and Golf Course, Community Facilities and Commercial as shown in Riverside County Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment #1 to Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Major Community Facilities, Neighborhood and Community Commercial; B) From Agriculture to Low Density Residential for the area bounded by Avenue 58, Monroe Street, Avenue 60 and Madison Street, outside of Riverside County Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment #1; 4) Change the zoning from: A) Riverside County designetion Specific Plan as shown in Riverside County Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment #1 to Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, Golf Course, Major Community Facilities, Neighborhood and Community Commercial; B. From Agriculture to Low Density Residential and Golf Course Bounded by Avenue 58, Monroe Street, Avenue 60 and Madison Street, outside of Riverside County Specific Plan No. 218, Amendment #1, for the property bounded by Avenue 58, Monroe Street, Avenue 60, and Madison Street. Also, a portion of the area east of Monroe Street between Avenue 69 and Avenue 61. 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. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Kirk asked staff where the figure referred to in Addendum Item II.c) came from. Staff stated the figure was provided by Riverside County for the Eastern Coachella Valley. Commissioner Robbins stated that figure would have to apply to the entire Riverside County. Staff would research the figure and correct the figure if necessary. 3. Commissioner Tyler asked if there was a Williamson Act contract in this area. Staff noted where one existed within the area. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd ~- Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 4. Commissioner Robbins asked how a zone change in and of itself can have any environmental impact. Staff stated the zone change does not, but the buildout of the project under the zoning designation does and that is what is evaluated in the Environmental Assessment. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated it is a discretionary project and the Environmental Assessment looks at the uses that will result from the zone change. 5. Commissioner Kirk stated the Zone Change does not increase the intensity it is a conversion of the County designations to City designation. Staff stated not within the lands outside the Specific Plan area. There is an intensification of land use there, as they are currently agricultural. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked why the City was not be listed as one of the applicants. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated it should be and it would be corrected before going to the City Council. 7. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Gamlin, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project and stated they had no objections to the conditions as written. 8. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. There being none, Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment on this item. 9. There being no further public participation, the public comment portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-013, recommending Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-431, subject to the findings. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-O2.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 11. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-014, recommending Certification of an Addendum to Environmental Impact Report #232, subject to the findings. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 12. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-015, recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 2001-080, subject to the findings. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 13. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-016, recommending approval of Zone Change 2001-103, subject to the findings. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. B. Environmental Assessment 2001-436. General Plan Amendment 2001- 083. and Zone Change 2001-105 and Soecific Plan 2001-055 - "Th~ Gateway"; a request of the City of La Quinta Redevelopment Agency for review of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from High Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and Tourist Commercial and review of development standards and design guidelines for Tourist Commercial uses including hotels, and retail-related uses, and residential development including townhouses and single family residences for the property located at the southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Washington Street. 1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Mr. Frank Spevacek, Rosenow Spevacek Group, Redevelopment Consultant for the City, presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-O2.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Kirk stated that given the original purpose and land use of the site, what is the impact of the City's ability to meet the regional fair share of housing needs? Staff stated it will both reduce the City's ability to meet the need in terms of the fair share housing for the City's General Plan as well as the Redevelopment Agency (RDA) inclusionary housing requirements. However, staff found that as noise impacts, that would be generated by the Washington Street and Miles Avenue roadway activities was studied, that to put residential units at this location, it would provide more impacts to residences than it would to occupants of hotel/commercial uses. From an environmental compatibility standpoint, it makes more sense to have commercial abut those areas. In addition, the RDA will be looking at revising its housing strategies to perhaps include purchasing additional properties to meet both the City's affordable housing needs as well as the Agency. Commissioner Kirk asked if the City and Agency were close to meeting its inclusionary housing requirements. In terms of the Agency's requirements, we are one-third of the way there. 3. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was a copy of the visual simulation available as referred to in the Environmental Assessment. Also, on Page 13 of the Specific Plan there is an Energy Efficiency Plan requirement; is this the first time the City has done this and if so, who will monitor this? Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the City is trying to see what a potential developer could provide in order to encourage these measures. The Planning Commission will review the site development permit for energy provisions. Commissioner Kirk asked if there were other guidelines than those contained in the Zoning Code. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that depending on how this project develops, staff could create the guidelines and require them of the developers in the future. Staff will try to obtain whatever they can for a model in order to establish these types of guidelines. The Specific Plan is not specific in order to allow the developer the opportunity to inform staff of what is possible. Commissioner Kirk asked if the requirements should be in place before hiring a developer. Staff stated the City wanted as much latitude as possible to help create the standards. Discussion followed. 4. Commissioner Tyler stated he was concerned that some of the City's established standards were being reduced to accommodate this Specific Plan, such as building setbacks. The minimum livable G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 floor area is being reduced to 1,200 square feet. The casitas units location should be specified. He also has several concerns about the off-site improvements that are mentioned in the Environmental Assessment. He asked why the City is'asking the developer to install a signal at Seeley Drive and Miles Avenue. It should be required to be at the first phase of development or when it meets warrants; it should be defined better. He suggested adding a left turn pocket to Seeley Drive where it enters Miles Avenue from the Acacia development. 5. Commissioner Butler questioned why staff was lowering the square footage for the houses to less than the City's requirement of 1,400 square feet. He, too, is concerned with the reduction in setbacks. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that by allowing the reduction in setbacks on the corners, it will allow the building to be pushed up to the corner instead of having a parking lot. Staff gave examples. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that as it relates to unit sizes, there are two sizes. This project is envisioned to have affordable units and market units. Staff is wanting to give flexibility to the design. These are minimum sizes, the site development permit will provide more when it is reviewed in the future. Commissioner Butler asked if there was a limit to the number of smaller houses that could be constructed at this time. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated there are only 90 units to be built in this site. Staff is requesting the flexibility to give a potential developer options at this time. The intent is to have a variety of housing units sizes. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff had a percentage of affordable units they were proposing to develop. City Consultant Frank Spevacek stated that at this time, it is the Agency's goal to have a minimum of 15% to 20% affordable units. It becomes a matter of economics as to how much the Agency elects to subsidize the units in order to reach the affordable level. At this point in terms of housing production goals, it is looking to be 15% to 20%. When the City tried to make the Miraflores 100% affordable at moderate rates, we ran into market condition problems, therefore, we went to 50% affordable and 50% market rate. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff needed to reduce building area in order to have the affordable units. Mr. Spevacek stated that not so much in reducing the building area, but what they found out with the Miraflores project was that the 1,200 to 1,300 square foot units were the most popular. What staff is trying to accomplish is to G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC1-22-O2,wpd (~ Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 raise the development standards by allowing the flexibility of the development by permitting the 1,200 square foot units as well as the larger units and broker with the developer the unit mix. Commissioner Kirk asked about the 1,000 square foot attached units. Mr. Spevacek stated the object was to have a townhome type project with two stories, two bedrooms to buffer the residential from Miles Avenue and commercial development. 7. Commissioner Kirk asked if the reduction in size was to meet the affordable standards. Staff stated that what the City found out in the Miraflores project was that the market was for the 1,200 square foot house. Staff want to have the flexibility to broker the size with the developer. Commissioner Kirk asked about the attached units. Staff indicated that a townhome type project is proposed that would buffer the single family from both Miles Avenue and the commercial development. Commissioner Kirk asked what staff position has been With potential developers in regard to reducing the livable floor area. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the project at Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive has the smaller units approved on 5000 square feet lots. However, the developer will be changing the size, but at the time pf the approval they wanted flexibility. 8. Commissioner Robbins asked why the Specific Plan does not contain the objectives as explained by staff. Why is it not a part of the document. Staff stated it is a City Redevelopment Agency project and it depends on what the Agency wants to do in regard to assistance. Commissioner Robbins ask why, on a piece of property next to the Storm Channel, is the City tying up several acres of land in retention basin when the channel can be used. Staff stated it is temporary in nature. Commissioner Robbins stated it is shown on the plan as retention basin. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated it is a phased program where the hotel is constructed and the retention is in the residential area and when the residential is built it is removed. Mr. Doug Franklin, Keith Companies, engineer for the project, stated the park is one foot deep and permanent and the other is temporary. Staff stated that on Page 15, Section 3.3.1 it speaks to temporary measures and temporarily directing surface runoff and explains what is to be done permanently. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 9. Commissioner Kirk asked what the advantage was to having it temporary with the storm channel is so close. Mr. Franklin stated it is to accommodate the runoff on a temporary basis and then divert to the Channel. The park is part of the permanent system. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the intention is to build the commercial portion first and then the residential and connect to the Channel at that time. 10. Commissioner Tyler stated he had a concern on Page 8 of the Specific Plan where it stated "within the site Seeley Drive will be lined by entrances to the residential component." Mr. Frank Spevacek explained that Exhibit "B" of the Specific Plan is just an illustrative site plan for design to identify how much building mass the site can be accommodated given the development standards. He went on to explain the openings and the objective for the area. 11. Commissioner Butler asked if Seeley Drive would come from Miles Avenue, go through the project and exit onto Washington Street. Staff stated it would. 12. Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment on this item. Ms. Margaret Taylor, 78-615 Alden Circle stated her concern was in regard to the traffic onto Seeley Drive. Her home faces onto Seeley Drive and kids are always playing on the street. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated Seeley Drive is intended to have a signal and will be a controlled access. Washington Street will be a right in and right out and maybe a left in. It is not intended to be a fast moving thoroughfare. It will have a traffic circle to slow the traffic down. Ms. Taylor asked if there would be some direction given to keep the tourists from driving down this street. Staff stated they are trying to mitigate it and achieve the least amount of traffic. 13. Ms. Helga Paul, 45-395 Coldbrook Lane, stated she was concerned as this development is right next to her house. She asked if Seeley Drive would be the only street into this development from Miles Avenue. Staff stated yes. There may be an opportunity to have a right in. and right out between Seeley Drive and Washington Street into the hotel. Ms. Paul stated she was also concerned with the height o[ the project. Staff noted that with the grading of the property there will be a one foot differential between the City's project and the single family homes. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC1-22-02.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 14. There being no further public participation, the public comment portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 15. Commissioner Tyler stated he has mixed feelings in regard to Exhibit "B". He would like to see a southbound lane on Seeley Drive. 16. Commissioner Kirk stated this is a nonspecific specific plan that allows as much flexibility as possible at this time. He applauded staff on the energy efficiency plans, but was still concerned with the setbacks and questioned why the City should give itself a greater break than it would give a developer. He would not want every unit to have the ability to be 1,200 square feet; maybe 20% 17. Commissioner Robbins stated there are no parking spaces at the park and there should be some off street parking for the use. He agrees with Commissioner Kirk that there should be.a limit placed on the number of smaller units. He also agrees with reducing the setbacks for the corners, but there also needs to be some limit in the middle of the block where the changes do not apply. There should be a limit of 100 feet from an intersection as a suggestion. He was also concerned with Seele¥ Drive becoming a through street. There does not need to be a full turn at Miles Avenue and Seeley Drive. Right in and out and a left turn in off of Miles Avenue would be sufficient. The problem is to get a left turn onto Washington Street. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the possibility of getting a full turning movement on Washington Street is slim due to the angle and visibility. The reason for the full movement on Miles Avenue is for the hotel as a full turn movement will not be allowed on Washington Street. Discussion followed. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated full turn movements are a premium. The one at Seeley Drive has a full turn and will match up. The concern is the cut-through traffic of northbound traffic leaving this site and going across Miles Avenue and then through the neighborhood. If this becomes a real problem, there are things the City can do to control this. The occasional tourists who travel through the neighborhood can be a concern and could be handled at a later time. 18. Commissioner Kirk asked about the buildings in the setback area. City Consultant Frank Spevacek stated there are two factors. First, the City has a requirement that there can be no building G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02,wpd c) Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 higher than 22 feet within 150 feet of an Arterial street. This would limit the building height to one story. Second, looking at the potential noise impacts and building limits, there will need to be a combination of berming and setbacks. Third, the entry at Miles Agenue and Washington Street is difficult to get into and have good circulation from a physical standpoint and to make it a major entry statement to the City. To make this happen when you deal with the setback, height limits, and circulation to get to this point and add the entry points, staff came up with this design as it would accommodate with the setback and allowed for rational circulation to that point, and facilitated the landscape feature at this intersection. In regard to parking, there will be a landscaped berm to buffer along the streets; an adequate setback of a potential three story building from Miles Avenue; and the potential single family next door. The thought was instead of loading the parking off Seeley Drive and moving the building back to Miles Avenue, the parking was placed between the berm that would hide it and the hotel structure. 19. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-017, recommending Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2001-436, subject to the findings. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 20. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-018, recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 2001-063, subject to the findings. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 21. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-019, recommending approval of Zone Change 2001-105, subject to the findings. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd 10 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and · Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-020, recommending approval of Specific Plan 2001-055, subject to the findings as submitted/amended: Condition #1: Page 5. Land Use Area I. Tourist Commercial Development Standards. Add a Minimum 30 foot building setback from Miles Avenue and Washington Street. Condition #2: Page 6. Land Use Area II. Detached Dwelling Units. The development standards shall be changed in that the minimum livable floor area for single family detached excluding the garage shall be 1,400 square feet with 15% will be allowed at 1,200 square feet. Condition #3: Page 7. Land Use Area II. Attached Dwelling Units/Resort Casitas. The minimum livable floor area shall be 1,400 square feet with 30% allowed to be under 1,400 square feet. Condition #4: Page 7. Land Use Area III. B. Permitted Uses. Add a #5. Parking Lot. Condition #5: Page 14. Off-Site Improvements.' The Public Works Department shall consider the option to install aleft turn pocket for Seele¥ Drive southbound. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Site DeveloDment Permit 2001-724; a request of Family YMCA of the Desert for review of architectural plans for a 2,626 square foot addition to the YMCA La Quinta Preschool, located at 49-955 Park Avenue. 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. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd ] ] Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner asked if the trees would be replanted. Staff stated the architect could answer that question. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Walling, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. He stated that in regard to the trees, it depends on whether or not they could be moved and saved. 4. Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-021, approving Site Development Permit 2001- 727, subject to the findings and conditions as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. Chairman Abels recessed the meeting at 8:20 p.m. and reconvened at 8:26 p.m. D. Site Development Permit 2001-725; a request of Carlos Gomez for Von's Shopping Center for review of development plans to increase the size of the Von's Supermarket from 36,827 square feet to 47,198 square feet for the property located at 78-271 through 78-297 Highway 111, within Plaza La Quinta. 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 Robbins stated the old plan shows a wooden trellis shade structure and it now appears to be a solid archway that is shorter. Staff stated it is a reduced arcade structure. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd ]2 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 3. Commissioner Tyler asked the purpose of the flat arcade. Staff stated there is no purpose, it was a design element. 4. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Carlos Gomez, representing the applicant, stated he was available to answer any questions. 5. Commissioner Robbins asked if the roofline was extended. Mr. Gomez stated that as a result of the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee's recommendation they balanced the structure to be more symetrical with the in-line units. 6. Commissioner Tyler asked if the entrances would be the same. Mr. Gomez stated they would be moved only five or ten feet. Commissioner Tyler asked if the building would move any further out into the parking lot area. Mr. Gomez stated no. 7. Commissioner Robbins asked if the blowers over the entrance doors would be made more attractive to not appear to be add-ons, Mr. Gomez stated they are designed according to health standards. Commissioner Robbins stated his objection is to the aesthetics and whether or not they could not be treated aesthetically. Mr. Gomez stated they would see if there were any other designs available. 8. Commissioner Kirk asked about the parking analysis. Mr. Gomez stated they based their parking plan on the aerial photograph that had been taken. Commissioner Kirk stated if they are showing 147,000 square feet of tenant space and if the parking requirement is one parking space for every 250 feet, he comes up with 588 parking spaces. Mr. Gomez stated each particular tenant is allocated a number of parking spaces, and they are within at least one stall of meeting the requirements. Discussion followed as to how they were calculated. 9. Commissioner Butler asked staff what they were asking of the applicant in regard to employees parking in the rear. Staff explained they were trying to make sure all parking was utilized. Additional lighting and patrol was needed to ensure the employees would use this area for parking. However, Vons does not have a rear entrance for accessibility and staff has made this a condition of approval (#8.D). G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd ],3 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 10. Commissioner Tyler asked if they are going to enclose the arcade and will the carts be moved inside. Mr. Gomez stated yes. Commissioner Tyler asked for clarification on the pavilion. Mr. Gomez stated this area was the Manager's office. Commissioner Tyler asked if a bank was proposed to be located inside. Mr. Gomez stated none at this time. 1 1. Chairman Abels asked if the entrance could be a double vestibule for energy conservation. Mr. Gomez stated two vestibules are proposed. Also in regard to proposed Condition #8.D., they are willing to provide employee accessibility, but believe a rear door access is a security problem. Could this be done through the side driveway aisle? They will provide extensive lighting and security to encourage employee parking. Mr. Thomas Acevedo, Director of Real Estate for Vons, stated there are security issues to be considered in regard to internal theft and nighttime security, such as packages leaving, bodily injury, etc. They can accommodate ,, striped access and lighting to direct employees to the parking in the rear. The nighttime employees would be given the ability to park out front due to the decreased amount of usage of the store. 12. Commissioner Kirk asked about the bus stop on Washington Street. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the bus stop on Washington Street will be moved across the street in front of the Point Happy development. The bus stop on Highway 1 1 1 will be upgraded to meet the City's new standards. 1 3. Commissioner Tyler asked if the mezzanine as shown on the plans, will be kept? Mr. Gomez stated yes. 14. Commissioner Kirk asked why Von's security is any different that the other in-line stores. Mr. Acevedo stated the issues of the products being removed is primary as there is no one in the rear of the store on a constant basis and second the bodily harm as there is no way to secure the area. 1 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff did a parking analysis. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated yes and they came up with.614 spaces which meets the requirement. Commissioner Kirk asked if staff was concerned if they did not use the parking in the rear. Staff stated yes, as they would not meet the requirements. To limit them to day use in the rear and nighttime in front would be G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-O2.wpd ] 4 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 sufficient. Mr. Keith Charles, Architect for the project, stated there is 147,618 square feet of building area and 575 parking stalls are required. With the proposed building area they are showing it at 3.8 per thousand; 4 per thousand would be 590 stalls. They are providing 589, so they are within one stall. Discussion followed regarding parking and security issues with a rear entrance. 16. Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment. There being no further discussion, the public participation of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 17. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was any way for the City to enforce the employee parking plan. Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated he was not sure. This is different from the prototypical situation where you would involve Code Compliance, and he would be skeptical of it being a viable tool. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio there could be a stipulation put on Vons to meet the requirement and require them to submit the plan to staff prior to issuance of building permit. Discussion followed as to possible alternatives regarding the parking plan. 18. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-022, approving Site Development Permit 2001- 725, subject to the findings and conditions as amended: A. Condition #8.D: Amend to read, "The Plaza La Quinta Employee Parking Plan shall be modified to include an enforcement program for the employee parking area south of the Vons building. This enforcement plan shall include a provision that the spaces shall be used, in the daylight hours, from October 1 through May 31. The enforcement plan shall be submitted and approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit." ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC1-22-O2.wpd ] 5 Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Develooment Permit 2001-723: a request of Rancho Capistrano Development Corporation for review of architectural and landscaping plans for three new casas prototype residential plans located north of Avenue 54 and east of Jefferson Street, within County Club of the Desert. 1. Chairman Abels 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 None. 3. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Robert Wilkinson, representing the applicant, stated he was available for any questions. 4. Commissioner Butler asked the height of the front door. Mr. Wilkinson stated it was eight feet tall. 5. Commissioner Tyler asked how the curved glass would work with the Title 24 calcs in regard to Plan 1. Mr. Wilkinson stated it is a tempered glass and meets the requirements. 6. Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion was closed and open for Commission discussion. 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Minute Motion 2002-001 approving Site Development Permit 2001-723, as submitted. Unanimously approved. B. Si~e Development Permit 2001-726: a request of Mike Mendoza, Project Designer for compatibility review of architectural and landscaping plans for a single family residence located at 4-550 Via Montana, north of Via Florence, within Lake La Quinta. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC 1-22-02.wpd ! (~ Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 1. Chairman Abels 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. There being no questions of staff, or the applicant, Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion was closed and open for Commission discussion 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning C6mmission Resolution 2002-023 approving Site Development 2001-726, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. C. Site Development Permit 2001-727; a request of La Quinta Jefferson Fifty, LLC for review of architectural plans of three new prototype residential plans located north of Avenue 50 and west of Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Abels 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 Robbins stated the exterior elevations look out of proportion with the garage doors. 3. Commissioner Tyler suggested a condition be added to Plan 1, Type A. to rectify the problem 4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Michael Kaufman, stated in regard to the garage door, the doors are 7 feet in height and are in line with the front plate elevation. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC1-22-O2.wpd ! ? Planning Commission Minutes January 22, 2002 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if the architect had an explanation for the blank elevation. Mr. Kaufman stated Plan A will change to have a gable end and could be articulated. 6. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed th'e public participation portion of the meeting and opened for Commission discussion. 7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to adopt Minute Motion 2002-002 approving Site Development Permit 2002-727, as amended: A. Condition #2.C: Add, "On Plans 1, 2, & 3 for Type A & B, additional articulation shall be provided on the facade · between the garage door and roof eaves." Unanimously approved. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: B. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of January 15, 2002. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held February 12, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. on January 22, 2002.. ~F~ecutive Secretary ' Cit~fLa Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PC1-22-O2.wpd ] 8