2004 02 24 PC Minutes
I MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
February 24, 2004 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7 :00
p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Tyler to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Rick Daniels, Paul Quill, Robert
Tyler, and Chairman Tom Kirk.
C. Staff present: Interim Community Development Director Oscar Orei,
Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Principal Planner Stan Sawa,
Associate Planners Wallace Nesbit, Greg Trousdell, Martin Magaña, and
I Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
February 10, 2003. There being no corrections, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to approve the minutes as
corrected.
B. Department Report: None.
IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Sign Application 2004-758; a request of I.E.A. Industries, Inc., for
consideration of a deviation from a Sign Program to allow corporate
colors for a proposed internally illuminated 1 5 square foot Subway
I Restaurant sign on the south building façade located at 50-801
Washington Street.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the
information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler stated the adopted sign program allows a
second sign on the buildings west face and wondered if they were
asking for a sign at this location. Staff stated no.
3. Chairman Kirk asked if any of the other tenants were using
anything other than a white background. Staff stated two of the
freestanding pad buildings were allowed channel letter. The only
other exception is the Dyson and Dyson building which was
allowed a modified cabinet sign. The only in-line tenant that has a
deviation is the Pizza Hut.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Staff stated the applicant had called and stated he I
was sick and would be unable to attend.
5. There being no further questions, and no other public comment,
Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the
hearing.
6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Quill to adopt
Minute Motion 2004-005, approving Sign Application 2004-758,
as recommended. Unanimously approved.
B. Site Development Permit 2004-798; a request of Summit Team Inc. for
loQ. Investments loP. for consideration of architeetural plans for a one
story 1,192 square foot addition to the existing Dyson & Dyson Real
Estate building located at 50-981 Washington Street, within the La
Ouinta Village Shopping Center.
1 . Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the
information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. I
Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the pop out area next to
the palm trees. Staff explained the addition.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 2
I Planning Commission Minutes
February 24. 2004
3. Commissioner Quill questioned why so many boiler plate
conditions (#10, #11, #14, #15, #16, etc.) were needed. He
would recommend eliminating the conditions that are not
necessary. Staff stated that some conditions could be deleted.
The conditions do help applicants check to ensure that some of
the areas listed are completed. Discussion followed as to the
necessity of some of the conditions.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. There being no applicant and no other public
comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of
the hearing.
5. Commissioner Quill asked that the parapet roof be modified to
have a rotunda with a tile roof and exposed rafter tails.
6. Commissioner Tyler asked if any equipment was proposed to be on
the roof. Staff stated they did not have any equipment proposed
I for this new addition.
7. Commissioner Tyler asked that the water feature and palm trees
be retained.
8. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Tyler to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-004, approving Site
Development Permit 2004-798, as amended.
a. Conditions #10, #11, #12, #14, #15, #17, #18, and #20,
deleted.
b. Condition #2: add the following: " .. ., if such clearanees
and/or permits are applicable."
c. The rotunda shall be a modified to incorporate a sloped roof
with a mudded tile and exposed rafter tails.
- d. The existing water feature and palm trees on the south side
of the building's patio will not be changed.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
I Commissioner Abels left the meeting due to illness.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 3
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
C. Site Development Permit 2004-797; a request of WG Properties for
consideration of development plans for the construction of a 7,430
square foot office structure located on the west side of Caleo Bay in Lake
La Quinta, north of the Omri & Boni Restaurant.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the
information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Quill asked why the extra six feet of width on
Washington Street. Steve stated to be consistent with the
General Plan as well as Council's policy on deceleration lanes.
3. Commissioner Tyler asked about the Architecture and Landscaping
Review Committee recommendations. Staff stated the
cobblestone was intended to be a hardscape area for those
walking through the planter. The applicant was concerned that it I
not be identified as a walkway which would require the ADA
requirements. Discussion followed regarding ADA requirements
and the location of the walkway.
4. Commissioner Tyler asked about the parking requirements. Staff
explained the parking requirements would be based on the tenants.
The uses could be restricted if the use creates a greater demand
on the parking than the number of parking spaces provided.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Timothy Bunch, architect for the project,
explained the building site and parking layout.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if anyone else wanted to speak on this
project. Mr. Chuck Topalian, contractor for the project, explained
the purpose of the cobblestone areas.
7. There being no further questions, and no other public comment,
Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the
hearing.
8. Commissioner Tyler asked that Condition #2 where it references I
Coachella Valley Unified School District be changed to Desert
Sands Unified School District.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 4
.Planning Commission Minutes
I February 24, 2004
9. Commissioner Quill asked why California Water Quality Control
Board was listed in the conditions. Staff stated NPDS rules are
changing and any site over half acre has to have a water plan.
Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston stated it is required for
both new and currently existing construction depending on its size.
10. Commissioner Tyler asked that Condition #32 be amended to add
rock work and delete cobblestone. Condition #35 seems to be
subjective and not needed.
11. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Quill to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-005, approving Site
Development Permit 2004-797, as amended:
a. Condition 2: Change CVUSD to DSUSD and add the
following: " if such clearances and/or permits are
,
applicable."
b. Condition #32: Change to "... incorporate rock work..."
I
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels.
ABSTAIN: None.
D. Environmental Assessment 2003-490 and Tentative Tract Map 31816; a
request of Mattco Construction for consideration of a recommendation to
certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and a
request to subdivide :t 7.75 acres into 26 single-family lots located at the
southwest corner of Westward Ho Drive and Roadrunner Lane.
1 . Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the
information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Daniels asked if Roudel Lane was to be a public
street. Staff stated yes.
I 3. Commissioner Tyler asked about the wall along Westward Ho
Drive. Staff stated it was Condition #79.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-Q4WD.doc 5
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
4. Commissioner Quill asked why a clearance was needed from
Sunline Transit Agency. Staff noted a letter had not been received
from Sunline and it was to ensure they had no issues.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if staff was concerned with putting low
density residential into a medium density residential zone in terms
of being in compliance with the Housing Element. Staff noted that
in the past staff would only be concerned if it was a change from
low to a higher density in the surrounding area. The current
, General Plan is not as specific in regard to density. Interim
Community Development Director Oscar Orci stated there are no
issues in regard to Housing Element. The project as proposed is
consistent with the General Plan.
6. Commissioner Tyler noted the Water Efficient Landseaping
condition should be boiler plated and Condition #8 of Public
Hearing "G" would be a good example.
7. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the I
Commission. Mr. David Hacker, engineer for the project, gave an
explanation of the project and stated they agreed with the
conditions.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Tyler asked if there were any issues with the grade
differential. Mr. Hacker stated no.
9. Chairman Kirk asked how the sidewalk and street would be
designed. Mr. Hacker explained they expect to have a curb, small
parkway, and eight-foot sidewalk. Chairman Kirk stated he would
prefer to see a five foot sidewalk and more landscaping. Assistant
City Engineer Steve Speer explained the wider sidewalk was to
accommodate bicyclists and pedestrians.
10. There being no further questions, and no other public comment,
Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the
hearing.
11 . It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Tyler to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-006, certifying a I
Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for
Environmental Assessment 2003-490, as reeommended:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 6
I Planning Commission Minutes
February 24, 2004
ROLL CALL: A YES: Commissioners Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels.
ABSTAIN: None.
12. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Quill to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-007, approving
Tentative Tract Map 31816, as amended:
a. Condition #53: A five-foot sidewalk shall be constructed on
Roudel Lane and Roadrunner Lane and eight feet along
Westward Ho Drive, and the parkway landscaping
increased.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels.
ABSTAIN: None.
Chairman Kirk excused himself due to a potential conflict due to the proximity
I of his residence and left the dais. Commissioner Tyler was asked to act as
Chairman. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston noted that with Chairman
Kirk leaving the Commission, a two-member vote will be a majority vote.
E. Village Use Permit 2004-020; a request of Old Town La Quinta, LLC for
consideration of development plans for two commercial buildings with
58,550 square foot of floor space in the Village Commercial Zone (Phase
II of Specific Plan 2001-058 located at the southwest corner of Calle
T ampico and Desert Club Drive.
1. Acting Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the
staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the
information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Acting Chairman Tyler asked staff where the area was that the
ALRC wanted landscaped. Staff explained the location.
3. Acting Chairman Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address
the Commission. Mr. Wells Marvin stated he was available to
answer any questions.
I 4. Acting Chairman Tyler asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. Commissioner Quill asked if there was any thought to a
treatment to the sidewalks. Mr. Marvin explained there were
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 7
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
problems with drainage as there is no grade. Second, they wanted
the site to have an older look. After the landscaping, bicycle
racks, etc., are added, it shóuld not be as noticeable.
5. There being no further questions, and no other public comment,
Acting Chairman Tyler closed the public participation portion of the
hearing.
6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Quill to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-008, approving
Village Use Permit 2004-020, as amended:
a. Condition #30: deleted.
ROLL CALL: A YES: Commissioners Daniels, Quill, and Acting Chairman
Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels and
Chairman Kirk. ABSTAIN: None.
Chairman Kirk rejoined the Commission. I
F. Site Development Permit 2003-793; a request of CP Development La
Quinta, LLC for consideration of development plans for a 1 33 room hotel
and 1 32 associated casitas units located at the southeast corner of
Washington Street and Miles Avenue.
1 . Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Daniels asked staff to provide information for the
entire site. Staff reviewed the project site. Commissioner Daniels
asked if the restaurant sites would have their own access. Staff
stated no, they would be internal within the site.
3. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to clarify the requirement for
parking spaces for the hotel - one or one and a half spaces per
room. Staff stated it is 1 parking space per room. Commissioner
Tyler questioned why the Commission would be approving grading I
and park plans. Staff explained the Specific Plan required them to
be submitted for Commission approval.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 8
Planning Commission Minutes
I February 24, 2004
4. Chairman Kirk asked for clarification on the reason why the park
plan was before the Commission. Staff stated it could be
reviewed at a later date as the applicant needs to do some more
work on the park plan. Chairman Kirk asked how far the Porte-
cochere was within the 150-foot setback. Staff stated it is 133
feet set back or 17 feet into the setback area. Chairman Kirk
asked if the Specific Plan sets the height limits 'or does it rely on
the Zoning Code. Staff stated the Conditions are in the Specific
Plan.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Richard Oliphant, applicant, gave a presentation
on the project and introduced Greg Watkins, architect, Margo
Thiebalt, engineer,. and Chris Hermann, landscape architect, who
gave a presentation on the project.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Chairman Kirk asked if the park site would be a super pad or just
I graded. Ms. Thiebalt stated it would be a superpad but it is based
on the Development Agreement.
7. Commissioner Quill asked how the retaining wall would be
softened. Mr. Chris Hermann, landscape architect, stated it would
be setback and landscaped.
8. Ms. Thiebalt reviewed the questions she had on the conditions.
The Parcel Map creates the individual sites and as it is not before
the Commission she questioned Conditions #8 and # 11. The
Conditions regarding retention basins as well, as the site will not
have any. Condition #44.A.3 in regard to the Parcel Map, where
all improvements shall be constructed and in place, they would like
to post a bond, or security based on an approved plan that would
be submitted to the City. Condition #52 refers to residential
development and there is no residential component that is before
the Commission at this time.
9. Commissioner Tyler asked when the mass grading was proposed
to start. Ms. Thiebalt stated when the approvals are obtained.
Commissioner Tyler asked if Seeley Drive in its entirety was to be
I completed in the first phase. Ms. Thiebalt stated yes.
Commissioner Tyler asked about the signal at the intersection of
Seeley Drive and Miles Avenue. Staff stated it would not be
required until the warrants are met.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 9
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
10. There being no further questions, Chairman Kirk asked if there was
any other public comment. Mr. Dave Lippert, 78-745 Rockberry
Court, stated he did not believe the Specific Plan allowed any
access from Washington Street. He was concerned about traffic
turning out onto Washington Street. Chairman Kirk noted Seeley
Drive did go all the way through and was noted in the Specific
Plan. It is not noted on this plan as these plans are for site
development only. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated the
Specific Plan did note the accesses off of Washington Street and
are not before the Commission at this time. They are in a slightly
different location. In regard to site line and the wall, there will ~e a
12 foot parkway (curbline to the right of way line) and an
additional 20 feet at the bottom of the retaining wall. In regard to
slowing traffic down, the parcel map will define property lines and
anticipate a deceleration line will be needed for Seeley Drive as
well as the main entrance into the hotel. This is why the Parcel
Map has been referenced in the conditions. The City has concerns
in regard to the corner of Washington Street and Miles Avenue
where they have incorrectly depicted the way the right turn works. I
They have encroached into an area the City is already using for
public right of way. There are also concerns along Miles Avenue.
Chairman Kirk asked if there would be a declaration lane on Miles
Avenue. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated no, because
there already is an extra lane. In regard to the retention basin
conditions, Condition #30 will be reworded to be more specific to
allow them to drain to the Whitewater Channel. Condition
#44.3.c. the last paragraph will be revised to a different milestone.
Condition #8 there are dedications that may impact the layout of
this site and needs to remain as they may not be able to meet their
setbacks. Interim Community Development Director Oscar Orci
stated this was a place holder to reserve the right to ask for right
of way. Staff would suggest a place holder condition be added to
allow the City to impose additional requirements subject to the
future entitlements. Condition #52 they have no issue with.
11 . Mr. Lippert asked how they could submit applications before they
should. Why are they not being required to follow the rules.
12. Ms. Thiebalt stated they had received notification of the problems
in regard to setbacks and believe they have solved them. The I
Parcel Map is not needed in regard to this application. It is a
convenience to the developer to transfer title to the individual pad
sites.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 10
Planning Commission Minutes
I February 24, 2004
13. Commissioner Daniels asked if the City had the right-of-way
needed if the Parcel Map is not part of this application. Assistant
City Engineer Steve Speer stated he has not seen the new map
and as long as the applicant understands the City has to have the
right-of-way, he has no objections.
14. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the
public participation portion of the hearing.
15. Commissioner Quill commended the applicant on the project. As
long as the applicant and staff are comfortable with the
conditions, he has no issues.
16. Commissioner Tyler agreed. He expressed his concern about
approving a grading plan when this is not normally approved by
the Commission and staff has not given their approval.
17. Chairman Kirk concurred with the Commission on the project.
I There is some concern with the retaining wall. He asked if the
landscaping would come back to the Commission. Staff stated it
could be brought back to the Commission. Chairman Kirk asked
that both the landscaping plan for the retaining wall and the park
be brought back to the Commission for review.
18. Commissioner Quill stated the grading plan is not a concern to
him, but review of the wall in relation to the landscaping is of
concern. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer informed the
Commission that the landscaping that was to go in front of the
wall is out to bid. The applicant can be required to come back and
enhance the plan. The wall requirements are open for discussion.
Commissioner Quill stated it is a mistake to not have the
landscaping done in concert with the retaining concepts. There
should be a way to split this apart to accomplish to have- them
work together. The public portion should be held out of the bid to
allow this applicant's landscape architect to work with City staff
to design something that works together. Assistant city Engineer
Steve Speer stated there was a time constraint on applying for the
federal funds that will be paying for the landscaping and therefore
I the plans have been drawn and sent out for bid. Discussion
followed as to possible alternatives. Commissioners asked that
staff review the landscaping plan to ensure it works with the
retaining wall.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 11
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
19. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Quill to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-009, approving Site
Development Permit 2003-793, as amended:
a. Condition #30: applicable conditions regarding drainage to
be revised.
b. Condition #44.3.c.: last paragraphs will be revised.
c. Condition #52: deleted.
d. Condition #71: Amend to allow the Park plan to go through
the normal review process.
e. Condition #76 & 77: deleted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioner Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels.
ABSTAIN: None.
Chairman Kirk recessed the meeting at 9:30 and reeonvened at 9:35 p.m.
G. Site Development Permit 2003-795; a request of Brighton Properties for I
consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for three new single-
family prototype residential units each with three different elevations
located at 80-600 Avenue 52.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the
information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler questioned staff about the chart in the staff
report. Staff explained the chart. Staff noted the
recommendation of the ALRC of the mudded tile roof.
3. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Ms. Marie Sanchez, representing the applicant, gave
a presentation on the project. She would like to use the mudded
tile on the front and S-tile on the rear. She had no objections to
the conditions.
4. Commissioner Tyler asked about the ALRC recommendation about I
replacing the aluminum edging for the landscaping. Ms. Sanchez
stated they would like to keep the newer aluminum product.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 12
Planning Commission Minutes
I February 24, 2004
5. Commissioner Quill stated the S-tile could be mudded to get the
look and keep the cost down.
6. There being no further questions, and no other public comment,
Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the
hearing.
7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Daniels to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-010, approving Site
Development Permit 2003-795, as amended:
a. Condition: roof may be S-tile if mudded.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
I H. Environmental Assessment 2004-501 and General Plan Amendment
2004-099; a request of the City for a request to certify a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of environmental impact and a General Plan
Amendment to add a Program to the Traffic and Circulation Element to
allow traffic signals within 1,060 feet of intersections throughout the
City.
1 . Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Martin Magaña presented the
information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department. Assistant City Engineer
Steve Speer made a presentation on the three Options.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked if all the options depending upon having
the gate at Highland Palms an emergency only. Staff stated all of
the Option 2s are dependent upon the emergency gate only.
3. Commissioner Quill asked if there was assurance from Caltrans
that the lights could be synchronized with the Highway 111
signals. Staff stated they are in the process of working this out
I with them.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 13
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
4. Commissioner Tyler asked the distance from Highway 1 1 1 to
Channel Drive and Simon Drive to Highway 111. Staff stated it is
700 feet to Channel Drive and 900 to Simon Drive.
5. Commissioner Tyler asked about problems with the cul-de-sac on
Option 2. Staff clarified it is based on having two way traffic.
The north half would use this access instead of Highway Palms
and that is where the traffic would be generated from.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if the default alternative presented by the
applicant could have an acceleration lane for those leaving Plaza La
Quinta that would work with the deceleration lane for this project.
When Washington Park is constructed Washington Street will be
constructed to six lanes with a median and there may be an
opportunity for this to happen.
7. Commissioner Tyler asked if the Environmental Assessment would
be affected by the different Options. Staff stated the
Environmental Assessment is based on staff's recommendation of I
Option 2.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Rick Wilkerson, representing the applicant, gave
a presentation on the project.
9. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Quill asked if Option 2.C reflects the default option
should the applicant not be able to purchase the houses. Staff
stated no; staff would have to amend the conditions for Option 3.
Commissioner Quill asked about the letter from Keith Companies,
for Washington Park, that indicated the traffic warrants do not
warrant a traffic signal at Simon Drive. Assistant City Engineer
Steve Speer stated he believes the intent is that they do not want
to pay for the signal.
10. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. Mr.
Fred Huerta, 78-590 Singing Palms Drive, stated the traffic from
the St. Francis of Assisi Church causes extreme traffic. He
believes Option 3 would not work with this amount of traffic.
With Option his property is one that would have to be purchased. I
The developers offer on his property so far is too low. He was
concerned that his property would not be purchased at its market
value.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 14
Planning Commission Minutes
I February 24, 2004
11. Mr. Don Rector, 46-450 Cameo Palms Drive, stated his concern
was the amount of traffic that would be generated with the
different options. He would prefer Option 2.C.
12. Mr. John Hendricks, 46-555 Cameo Palms, stated Option 2.C. is
the preferred option of everyone.
13. Ms. Karen Broch, 78-395 Singing Palms, stated she supported
Option 2.C., even though she would not be affected by the projeet
as she is further down the street. Her concern is that her
neighbors would be affected by the constant traffic which would
be a detriment to the neighborhood.
14. Mr. Bill Sanchez, owner's representative for Washington Park,
stated their concern is that when they went through their
entitlement process, the traffic report for their development
showed there was not enough traffic to warrant a traffic signal.
I They are in opposition to contributing to a traffic signal at Singing
Palms. They could install a signal between Avenue 47 and Simon
Drive if warrants required it. There concern is that if a signal were
installed is there any guarantee that the synchronization between
Highway 111 and this signal can remain; will Caltrans keep it in
place. If not, it can be a negative impact on the traffic flow.
15. Mr. Aldo Corcini, 46-975 Highland Palms, stated he would like the
Commission to consider the default option if Option 2 is not
workable.
16. Ms. Michael Bendadell46-875 Highland Palms Drive, voted for the
option that would keep her streets the same.
17. There being no further questions, and no other public comment,
Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the
hearing.
18. Commissioner Tyler stated the options that dump the traffic on to
the frontage road are unacceptable. The only option that makes
sense is Option 2.
I 19. Commissioner Daniels stated he also believes Option 2.C is the
best alternative.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 15
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
20. Commissioner Quill stated he too believes Option 2.C is the best
alternative.
21. Chairman Kirk thanked the audience for staying the duration of the
meeting and thanked staff for their presentation. He is concerned
about having five traffic signals within two miles and the ability to
keep them synchronized.
22. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Tyler to
adopt Planning Commission Res~lution 2004-011, certifying a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for
Environmental Assessment 2004-501, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels.
ABSTAIN: None.
23. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Quill to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-012, approving I
General Plan Amendment 2004-501, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels. ABSTAIN:
None.
I. Environmental Assessment 2003-479, General Plan Amendment 2003-
094, Zone Change 2003-115 and Tentative Tract Map 31348; a request
of Madison Development, LLC for consideration to certify a Mitigated
Negative Declaration of environmental impact, General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change to change the land use and zoning designations from
Medium Density Residential and Community commercial to Low Density
Residential; and the subdivision of 37.72 acres to allow 73 lots for the
property located at 46-201 Washington Street.
1 . Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
r~port. Associate Planner Martin Magaña presented the
information contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Commissioner Tyler asked staff if there were any substantive I
changes to the tract map other than those changes directly related
to the revised entry. Staff answered no.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 16
Planning Commission Minutes
I February 24, 2004
3. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Daniels to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-013, certifying a
Mitigated Negative Dectaration of environmental impact for
Environmental Assessment 2003-479, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
4. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Daniels to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-014 approving
General Plan Amendment 2003-094, as recommended:
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
5. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Daniels to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-01 5 approving Zone
I Change 2003-11 5, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill; Tyler, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
6. Staff requested the Commission consider the default Option in
case Option 2.C. is not obtainable, Option 2.A.1
7. Commissioner Quill asked if they had to approve a default option
as this provides the opportunity to make it easy for the applicant
to not acquire the properties. He is adamant that if they cannot
cause Option 2.C. to be the option, he will not vote in favor of the
project. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston clarified the
Commission does not have to specify that there is a default. The
result is that the Subdivision Map Act does not permit the City to
require a developer to make improvements which require the
obtaining of title in property which is off-site. The City is then left
with the possibility of proceeding through eminent domain. Should
the City chose not to do so, essentially there is no egress or
ingress as a result of not specifying a default option.
Commissioner Quill asked if the developer then has the right to
I sue. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston stated no. The
Map Act states that if the City conditions approval of off-site
improvements and the title to those off-site improvements cannot
be obtained, the City has 120 days to determine whether or not to
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 17
Planning Commission Minutes I
February 24, 2004
proceed with the eminent domain action. Should the City choose
not to do so, the off-site improvement obligation is deemed waived
for purposes of approval of the final map. Meaning the City
cannot disapprove the final map for failure of them to obtain the
two lots that are necessary. This puts the City in an interesting
position, because at that point, the City's failure to exercise
eminent domain results in their not being any ingress or egress to
their property pursuant to what we have approved. It is up to
Commission as to whether or not they want to specify a default
option. It does make sense to do so. Commissioner Quill stated
that for purposes of discussion, he would still not specify the
default option and let the City Council make the determination as
to whether or not they want to declare eminent domain.
8. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Daniels to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-016 approving
Tentative Tract Map 31348, as amended:
a. Condition: Option 2.C. only. I
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Abels. ABSTAIN:
None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Continued - Public Nuisance Case 9693; a request of Robert and Barbara
Valdivia for consideration of an appeal of a public nuisance determination
for the property located at 54-360 A venida Juarez.
1. Chairman Kirk informed the Commission there was a request to
continue this item to the meeting of March 23, 2004. It was
moved and seconded by CommissionersTylers/Daniels to continue
Public Nuisance Case 9693 to March 23, 2004. Unanimously
approved.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of I
February 17, 2004.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-04WD.doc 18
I Planning Commission Minutes
February 24, 2004
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Quill/Daniels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on March 9, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. This
meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 11 :00 p.m., on February 24,
2004.
Respe tfUIIY;Z::,
By. yer, Execu~ecretary
City 0 a Quinta, California
I
I
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-24-Q4WD.doc 19