2005 05 24 PC Minutes
I
I
I
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
May 24, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7 :00
p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Daniels to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Rick Daniels, Kay Ladner, Paul Quill
and Chairman Kirk.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, City
Attorney Kathy Jenson, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, Principal
Planners Fred Baker and Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit,
and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
A. Ms. Marty Butler, Trans West Housing, spoke regarding front yard
landscaping. She requested a study session be held to review the City's
standards and requested her company be able to participate. Chairman
Kirk thanked her for their interest and stated this would be discussed at a
future meeting.
B. Ms. Kay Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, noted the amount of new
construction being proposed and asked if it fits into any kind of plan for
the City. Do the new projects fill a need in the City, or a demographic
need? She is struck by how many developments that have large footage,
multi-tenant retail, fast foot restaurant, one-story medical facility, another
big box store, and home occupations. Her question is whether or not all
these projects fit into an overall plan. Can we shape commercial
development to meet the needs of our diverse community?
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
A.
Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of April
26, 2005. There being none, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to approve the minutes as submitted.
Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of May
10, 2005. There being none, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioner Daniels/Ladner to approve the minutes as submitted.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
I
IV. CONSENT ITEMS: None.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 2005-835; a request of Stamko Development
Co. for consideration of development plans for a multi-tenant retail store
consisting of 23,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of
Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road
1 . Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Fred Baker informed the Commission the
applicant had requested a continuance to June 14, 2005.
2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Ladner/Alderson to
continue Site Development Permit 2005-835 to June 14, 2005.
Unanimously approved.
B.
Site Development Permit 2005-829; a request of Tarlos & Associates for
consideration of development plans to allow the construction-of a 3,100
square foot Wendy's restaurant on a 0.80 acre site, located at the
northeast corner of Auto Center Drive and La Quinta Drive.
I
1 . Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Planning Consultant NicoleCriste presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Alderson asked if the parking was reciprocal. Staff
stated the owner of the site has confirmed in writing there is
shared parking. Commissioner Alderson questioned why the entry
to the south went right by the trash enclosure. Staff stated that
due to the configuration of the site this was the only resolution.
Commissioner Alderson asked about the 35-foot high light
fixtures. Staff stated it was consistent with the Specific Plan for
this site. Commissioner Alderson asked about the "no left turn"
sign at the end of the drive-thru aisle. Staff stated it was to deter
cars from entering the drive-thru lane at the wrong location.
3.
Commissioner Daniels asked if the circulation could be improved
by closing the exit onto Auto Center Drive, removing two parking
spaces on the east side, and putting in an access to keep from
having an exit onto a street. It would be better to have them enter
and exit into the larger parking lot. Staff reviewed the circulation
I
G:\ WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
2
I
I
I
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
plan and their concerns regarding changing the access points.
Commissioner Daniels stated additional stacking could be created
if the drive-up window were moved further south. Also, the trash
location cou.ld be moved to where there is only one parking space.
4. Commissioner Quill asked for identification of the plants along the
drive~thru lane. Staff explained the Architecture and Landscape
Review Committee (ALRC) requested it be lantana. Commissioner
Quill asked the elevation of the curve in relation to La Quinta
Drive. Staff stated it was their understanding they were flush.
5. Commissioner Ladner asked why lantana instead of the Bird of
Paradise. Staff stated the Bird of Paradise was a species that
would grow very tall and branch out to block the driveway.
6.
Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. John Tarlos, the applicant, gave a presentation
on the project. In regard to the trash enclosure location, it was
chosen by Waste Management. In regard to the plant material,
they were asked to replace the Bird of Paradise with lantana by the
ALRC.
7. Commissioner Daniels asked about closing the access onto Auto
Center Drive and extending the one way exit through the drive-thru
~nd to the southeast. Also, relocating the existing driveway out of
the parking lot to the north to make it a one-way circulation plan.
Mr. Tarlos stated that to take the double drive, on the right side of
the project, it does not line up with the driveway across. It would
be difficult as to do this would be a traffic issue internally as well
as a conflict with the Goodyear to the north. Commissioner
Daniels asked the distance between the southern point on Auto
Center Drive and the corner of this side with the driveway on the
east. Mr. Tarlos stated about 30 feet or two cars.
8. Commissioner Quill asked the elevation of the pavement at the
drive thru window as it relates to directly across the top of curb
elevation on La Quinta Drive. Mr. Tarlos stated it is the same as
the top of the curb. The bottom of the pavement to the top of the
wall is four feet.
9.
Commissioner Alderson asked why the trash enclosure could not
be moved to the west side. Mr. Tarlos stated the trash truck
cannot make the turn to get out of the parking lot. Community
Development Director Doug Evans stated that if the Commission is
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
3
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
I
concerned about this location, the Commission can request the
applicant work further with Waste Management to relocate the
enclosure. He would suggest the east side.
10. Chairman Kirk asked if Waste Management would allowed sunken
trash enclosures.. Staff stated it was a negotiating issue with
Waste Management.
11. Commissioner Danìels asked about the driveway on the east as his
concern is the access onto Auto Center Drive. Discussion
followed regarding alternative access points. Staff stated the
Specific Plan shows this access.
12. Commissioner Ladner asked if Wendy's had a long-range plan to
maintain the landscaping. The construction manager stated their
goal is consumer satisfaction. They will do what is necessary to
maintain the landscaping. Commissioner Ladner stated the Bird of
Paradise blends better with the architecture.
13. Commissioner Daniels asked if there would be plant material I
between the curb and wall. Mr. Tarlos stated the landscaping is
already installed.
14. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, the public hearing was closed and open for
Commission discussion.
15. Commissioner Ladner asked if the Commission had the latitude to
deny the use. Community Development Director Doug Evans
stated there is a large group of people where this use meets a
need. It is less visible as it is not located directly on Highway
111.
16. Chairman Kirk stated the Commission has expressed concern as to
the number of fast food and/or gas stations in La Quinta.
17. Commissioner Ladner asked if this was the right location for this
use.
18. Commissioner Daniels stated his concerns were the access. He
would like to see a shared access with Goodyear to the north. He
would like to see landscaping in the median.
I
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
4
I
I
I
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
19. Commissioner Quill stated his concerns were the landscaping. He
would like to see the landscape plans brought back to the
Commission for review prior to a Certificate of Occupancy or final
inspection. He would like the Chilean Mesquite replaced. with a
different variety tree. He would also like to see a different plant
than the lantana. The landscape plans need to show what is
planted on the Highway i 11 landscaping. If there is no berm he
wants adequate screening in addition to the four foot wall. He
would like to see the grading plans as well.
20. Commissioner Alderson stated he too did not like this type of use
along Highway 111, but if there is to be one, this location is the
best. He agrees with the landscaping being returned to the
Commission for review.
21 . It was moved by Commissioners Quill/Ladner to adopt Planning
Commission Resolutio'n 2005-016, approving Site Development
Permit 2005-829, as recommended by staff and as amended:
a.
Condition #37: amended to add with lantana as ground
cover and an espaliered vine.
Condition #38: Amended to read, "The final landscaping
and grading plans for the project shall be submitted to the
Planning Commission for review and approval prior to
issuance of building permits.
Condition added: The Chilean Mesquite shall be replaced
with an alternate tree.
Condition added: The parkway landscaping shall be added
~o the final landscaping plan.
Condition added: The applicant shall work with staff to see
if there is an alternate site for the trash enclosure.
b.
d.
e.
f.
22. Commissioner Daniels stated he would be voting no as he is not
convinced this is a good circulation plan.
ROLL CALL: A YES:Commissioners Alderson, Ladner, Quill and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: Commissioner Daniels. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
C.
Site Development Permit 2005-832; a request of Alfred H. Cook,
AlA/William R. Kelly Trust for consideration of architectural plans for a
4,600 square foot, one-story medical office building in the La Guinta
Professional Plaza, located on Parcel 12 of Tentative Parcel Map 29889 -
the east side of Washington Street .±.300 feet south of Avenue 47.
G:\WPDOCs\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
5
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
I
1 . Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked if staff was concerned with
aesthetics or the Title 24 issue on the east elevation. Staff stated
it related to requiring shading on the east elevation.
3.
Commissioner Daniels asked why the landscaping along the
common driveway is not extended. Staff noted the circulation
pattern and why the landscaping ends at the property line.
Community Development Director Doug Evans stated a wide area
of asphalt or nonuse would not be attractive in this location. They
may not want consider a condition that this be resolved in the final
landscaping design stage and if, in the event, it does not become
part of the circulation for the adjoining property, then require it to
be landscaped further. If there is going to be parking a buffer
should be provided. Commissioner Daniels agreed
I
4. Chairman Kirk stated he had a concern on the number of parking
spaces. He stated there appears to be an administrative decision
that allowed Parcel 11 to become a restaurant. Staff noted the
applicant indicated at the time of that application, it was to be an
office or restaurant, but they also increased the size of the parcel
from 3,600 to 5,600 square feet. Chairman Kirk asked the
number of parking spaces needed for all the parcels. Staff stated
they are required to have 275 parking spaces and they are
providing 211. Community Development Director Doug Evans
stated that during the day the parking will be difficult at peak
times.
5. Commissioner Ladner asked if the other restaurant was dinner
only. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated there
are no restrictions on when the restaurant can be open.
6.
Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Cook, the architect and Dr. Kelly, the owner,
stated they were available to answer questions. Mr. 'Cook stated
the pad site is developed. All they have to do is build the building.
He did question the landscaping on the adjacent property owner.
According to him he did have the number of required parking
I
G:\WPDOCs\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
6
I
I
I
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
spaces. Dr. Kelly stated the intended use of the building is to have
an MRI practice. Rarely are there more than two patients and five
employees. The other tenant would have four employees with a
low level of patients at anyone time.
7. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Daniels asked if any of the patients would come by
transit. Dr. Kelly stated rarely. The employees could, but probably
not.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, it was open for Commission discussion.
9. Commissioner Alderson confirmed he has no room for
modifications as the parking lot is built and this applicant has
nothing but the pad site to work with.
10. Commissioner Quill stated he likes the plans as submitted and
thanks the applicant for the thoroughness of the application.
11. Commissioner Daniels stated it is an attractive building.
12. Chairman Kirk stated he is concerned with the number of parking
spaces. This applicant may not be there in 40 years and should he
move would there enough parking for a different use. He was
concerned whether this site had a dedicated right turn deceleration
lane along Washington Street. Associate City Engineer Paul Goble
stated this may be an opportunity to require the deceleration lane,
but it would not serve any interest to require it at this time.
13. It was moved by Commissioners Ladner/Daniels to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 2005-017, approving Site Development
Permit 2005-832, as recommended by staff and as amended:
a. The landscaping between the two parcels shall be resolved
in final landscaping design stage and if in the event it does
not become part of the circulation for the adjoining
property, the site shall be landscaped further. If there is
going to be parking, a buffer should be provided.
ROLL CALL: A YES:Commissioners Alderson, Daniels, Ladner, Quill and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
G:\WPDOCs\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
7
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
I
D. Site Development Permit 2005-827; a request of Colbourn-Currier-NolI
Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort Communities, for consideration
architectural and landscaping plans for four prototypical residential plans
and clubhouse for use in Tract 31732, located at the southeast corner of
Monroe Street and Avenue 60.
E. Site Development Permit 2005-828; a request of Colbourn-Currier-NolI
Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort Communities, for consideration
architectural and landscaping plans for four prototypical residential plans
and clubhouse for use in Tract 31733, located at the northeast corner of
Monroe Street and Avenue 61.
1. Chairman Kirk· opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2.
Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. He
asked staff to address the concerns of the ALRC and how they
were resolved. Staff discussed the streetscape, variety of garage
doors proposed, and how the elevations had changed.
I
3.
Commissioner Quill asked about the major arterial corridor that
may be planned along the alignment for Avenue 62, shifting up to
Avenue 60, going to a significant arterial at the intersection of
Monroe Street. The map has been approved for this tract, but the
right-of-way on the north side of Avenue 60 may not be adequate
for that future thoroughfare. Associate Engineer Paul Goble stated
staff has not reviewed the tracts in regard to this proposal, but
rather with how it meets the current City standards. Staff is trying
to better define the City's arterial upgrades in terms of profile as
well as structure sections and what will happen with the
Travertine development. Commissioner Quill stated this road is
not a reality, but the problem he sees is that if this arterial is not
upgraded and this thoroughfare is as substantial as what the
County is proposing along the 60th corridor, this row of lots
adjacent to Avenue 60 will go away. Community Development
Director Doug Evans stated this is a CV AG transportation staff's
. recommendation to evaluate a south Valley parkway. Staff is
concerned that a different roadway cross section might be
proposed for our community, but staff would not be able to
evaluate it as it is speculative. Discussions are still taking place
and staff is encouraging north/south linkages. Kathy Jenson, City
I
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
8
I
I
I
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
Attorney, stated it cannot be done at this time in regard to this
project. Discussion followed as to the potential location of the
roadway and its impacts on development.
4. Commissioner Alderson asked if the neighborhood around this
project was built. Staff stated to the east, north and south is
vacant. Trilogy to the west, is under construction.
5. Commissioner Daniels asked if any of these lots were prohibited
from two story. Staff stated Monroe Street may be the only street
that has a height limitation. Commissioner Daniels stated his
concern was that there were no two story units along the
perimeter lots.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Pete Bilicki, Innovative Resort Communities,
gave a presentation on the project.
7.
Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Daniels asked about the sprinkler setback. Mr.
Bilicki stated that from a design prospective, they meet CVWD
requirements. The ALRC requested the sod be brought to the curb
with sprinklers setback 18-inches from the curb. This is subject to
CVWD approval, but they will do a meandering setback for the
strip.
8. Commissioner Alderson stated there does not appear to be any
real elements to say this is a Mediterranean style. Mr. Bilicki
stated they have added curved windows, garages setback, gable
roofs, the gable with no overhang with the tile wrapping around,
color changes, and added stone.
9. Commissioner Quill asked if there was any wood fascia. Mr.
Bilicki stated they were exposed rafter tails.
10. Commissioner Alderson asked if the flat clay tile was more
Tuscany instead of Mediterranean. Mr. Bilicki stated they were
going for a variation in the roofs and color. Commissioner
Alderson noted two of the unit plans have a casita on the second
floor. Mr. Bilicki stated this has been a successful design on other
projects they have developed.
11. Commissioner Ladner asked if they are planned unit developments.
Mr. Bilicki stated yes, and the homeowner will insure the units.
G:\WPDOCs\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
9
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
I
Commissioner Ladner asked about the color palette for the rear of
the units. She also asked the price range of the units. Mr. Bilicki
stated $400,000 to $800,000.
12. Chairman Kirk asked what the logic was behind the request of the
ALRC to have a higher percentage of hip roofs rather than gable.
Staff stated they do not believe they set any requirement on the
number. Chairman Kirk asked if there was an elevation for the
clubhouse. Mr. Bilicki stated no. Chairman Kirk asked if there was
a pedestrian link between the two projects. Mr. Bilicki stated there
is none. Chairman Kirk noted on the plans when the link was
shown. He asked if there was any objection to there being no
gate between the two projects. Mr. Bilicki stated he would not,
but the HOA may choose to have it at the option of the HOA.
Chairman Kirk asked if CVWD had the right to override the City's
conditions in regard to the 18-inch setback for the sprinkler heads.
Community Development Director Doug Evans stated no. They are
to approve the water useage; the City approves the design.
13. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. I
There being none, it was open for Commission discussion.
14. Commissioner Alderson stated his initial impression of the product
was that they are lacking in design. The site layout is very well
done, but in his 0 inion the unit types still need work.
15. Commissioner Qu II agreed. He likes the idea of the second story
casitas along wi h the rear loaded garages. The elevations,
however, are lac ing. He is concerned that we are not creating
walkable, habitab e communities.
16. Commissioner D niels also agreed. In regard to the 18-inch
setback he would like to see the same treatment they required on
a previous tract; g ass to the curb, recessed two inches with a 1 %
swale back to the sprinkler.
17. Commissioner Ladner stated she also agreed. In regard to the
architectural style, she does not believe they are high end designs.
We may not like gated communities, but they do save the City
money. She would not agree with requiring an opening between I
the two tracts due to insurance issues for the HOA. She does like
the floor plans. The lack of the design is made up by the floor
plans.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
10
I
I
I
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
18. Chairman Kirk stated this project represents a turning point in
some ways. This is the only section of the City that is east of
Monroe Street and he wonders if this sets a different set of
standards. This project is surrounded mostly by agricultural land.
He too does not like all the wall compounds throughout much of
the Coachella Valley. There are too many and yet he understands
there is a demand for them. Yet, he believes there is also a
demand for more open pedestrian-friendly communities. This is
particularly the case where this City, with respect to the northern
property, has significantly increased the density. Before that
property was agriculturally zoned in the County and there was
sòme consideration for low density housing, yet today it is much
higher density. When he looks at a high density project he
believes there is a higher standard in terms of architectural detail
and pedestrian connection. The land plan is reasonable, but the
clubhouse plans and common facilities are also reasonable. Yet,
as he looks at these designs he cannot support them. Community
Development Director Doug Evans stated the applicant was
counseled by the ALRC at their first submittal to redesign the
product. From the standpoint of the Commission's action, the
Commission may want to give the applicant guidance and let him
come back without having to go to the appeal process.
19. Chairman Kirk reopened the public comment and asked the
applicant if he would prefer a vote or continuance. Mr. Bilicki
stated they spent the energy and time to redesign their project
according to ALRC's recommendation. He would be open to
constructive comments.
20. Commissioner Alderson noted his concern about the flat concrete
roof, exposed rafter tails, and wrought iron railing. The designs
are more Tuscan and he does not believe they are what he is
trying to achieve. His only concern is the front elevations.
21 . Chairman Kirk stated he would still like to see a colored elevation
of the clubhouses. He would also like to see the alley layouts as
well as the landscaping of the alleys.
22. Commissioner Daniels stated he agrees so far and would like to
see the access between the two tracts kèpt open.
23. Chairman Kirk asked if staff could set a meeting between CVWD
a.nd the Commission, at a future date, to work out these issues on
streetscape landscape. Staff would look into the request.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
11
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
I
24. Chairman Kirk reopened the public hearing and asked for a motion.
25. Following discussion, it was moved by Commissioners
Guill/Daniels to continue Site Development Permit 2005-827 t'o
June 28, 2005, subject to the following requests:
a. The applicant shall submit colored elevations of the
clubhouse and facilities;
b. Additional detail shall be added to the front elevations;
c. A description of the rear yards, alley layout as well as the
landscaping shall be submitted;
d. The pedestrian access shall be kept open; and
e. The streetscape shall have grass to the curb, recessed two
inches with a 1 % swale back to the sprinkler head.
Unanimously approved.
26. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Daniels to I
continue Site Development Permit 2006-828, to June 28, 2005,
with the following recommendations:
a. The applicant shall submit colored elevations of the
clubhouse and facilities;
b. Additional detail shall be added to the front elevations;
c. A description of the rear yards, alley layout as well as the
landscaping shall be submitted;
d. The pedestrian access shall be kept open; and
e. The streetscape shall have grass to the curb, recessed two
inches with a 1 % swale back to the sprinkler head.
Unanimously approved.
F. Site Development Permit 2004-831 and Sign Permit 2005-879; a request
of Thomas Enterprises for consideration of development plans for Phase
2 of the Pavilion at La Quinta project consisting of 72,770 square feet
and a sign permit for Best Buy for the property located at the northeast
corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street.
1 .
Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
I
G:\ WPDOCs\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
12
I
I
I
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Quill asked that detail be added to the rear
elevation. Staff has requested theft each use have a different
color. Commissioner Quill asked if the landscaping was approved
under the first phase. Staff stated the perimeter landscaping was
approved under the first phase.
3.
Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Norman Barrett, architect representing the
applicant, gave a review of the project. In regard to the rear
elevation, they are behind the Post Office and World Gym. They
are set back from Highway 111 and there is a ten foot screen wall
between the Post Office and a six foot screen wall between World
Gym. They will have a landscape strip. On the Phase 1 they did
address the rear elevations for the Henry's Market and Best Buy
buildings. There is a color change between the buildings to
contrast them. In regard to the conditions he would like
clarification to the blue background. Staff stated the blue element
that wraps around should be removed on the Best Buy building.
Mr. Barrett explained the ALRC agreed to allow it after he
explained the purpose and reduction. Community Development
Director Doug Evans stated the blue will be the fastest fading
color. Condition #3 is not an objection to the blue as much as it is
an objection to the material proposed that will hold the color. In
regard to the Best Buy sign, for the size of the tenant staff did a
comparison to other buildings with the same leaseable space.
Discussion followed.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Daniels asked if there was a gate at the end of the
cul-de-sac. Mr. Barrett stated it is an emergency access gate.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, the public hearing was closed and open for
Commission discussion.
6.
Commissioner Daniels stated he likes the overall design and agrees
with staff that some detail is needed on the rear elevation. In
regard to the blue color strip, he agrees it should be a different
material.
7.
Commissioner Quill stated he likes the design of the building, but
does not like the sign. He believes the blue color is part of the
overall sign and is too much.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
13
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
8. Commissioners Ladner and Alderson agreed that the blue should
be considered part of the sign.
I
9. Chairman Kirk stated he too believes the blue is part of the total
sign area and should not wrap around the building.
10. It was moved by Commissioners Alderson/Daniels to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-018, approving Site
Development Permit 2004-831, as recommended by staff and as
amended:
a. The rear elevations shall be painted accent colors for each
occupant and additional treatment shall be provided to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Department.
ROLL CALL: A YES:Commissioners Alderson, Daniels, Ladner, Quill and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
11. It was moved by Commissioners Alderson/Daniels to adopt Minute I
Motion 2006-008, approving Sign Permit 2006-879, as
recommended by staff and as amended:
a. The east side blue element on the Best Buy side elevation
that wraps around, shall be eliminated.
Unanimously approved with Commissioner Quill voting no.
G. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2006-082; a request of the City for
consideration of an Amendment to Title 9 of the La Quinta Charter and
Municipal Code amending Chapters 9.60 and 9.210 relating to Home
Occupations
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Community Development Director Doug Evans 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, Chairman Kirk asked if there
were any public comment. Ms. Kay Wolff asked if this was similar
to a child care facility. Staff stated they are different ordinances.
There being no further public comment, the public participation
was closed and open for Commission discussion.
I
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
14
I
Planning Commission Minutes
May 24, 2005
3. It was moved by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-019, approving Zoning
Ordinance Amendment 2005-0825, as recommended by staff and
as amended:
ROLL CALL: A YES:Commissioners Alderson, D~miels, Ladner, Quill and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A.
B.
Review of City Council meeting of May 17, 2005.
Department report: Community Development Director Doug Evans stated
at the direction of the Commission, staff would work on some proposals
to bring back to the Commission for their review on landscape
requirements. Chairman Kirk stated the concerns were more global in
regard to the current City Landscape Ordinance. Staff suggested two
Commissioners be assigned to work with staff on this subject.
Commissioners Quill and Ladner were assigned.
I
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissio ners
Ladner/Daniels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on June 14, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. This
meeting of the Plannil}g Commission was adjourned at 10:22 p.m. on May 24, 2005.
Respectfully submitted,
~
Be awyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
I
G:\ WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-24-05.doc
15