The URL can be used to link to this page

MUP 2004-536• City of La Quinta nNAWX Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 60) 777-7125 FAX: (760) 777-1233 ftek OFFICE USE ONLY Case No. IM U P a y- 5 36 Date Recvd. 101141. Fee: .435— Related Apps.: GUIP 80-1051 -011 L Cts Ppq Ad— Logged in by: �AM({i:►f, f �pMtNS. ',rC1Ll� (L(CBti'siG"9 OM�nNEPA►CATION FOR MINOR USE PERMIT APPROVAL MINOR USE PERMIT applications are reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director pursuant to Section 9.210.020, of the Zoning Code. The purpose of the review is to ensure that land uses requiring the permit do not have an adverse impact on surrounding properties, residents, or businesses. APPLICANT i aT N (Pri116aKAW MAILING ADDRESS 11 __ �� Phone No. j(,p — 5;(pg'�� CITY, STATE, ZIP: LA a \)1916 t MqZZEA Fax No. `7(p(j- Cj --7(5W PROPERTY OWNER (If different): SAS£ (Pri�Iwl"Aw MAILING ADDRESS:Phone No. IM 04_3S 3 CITY, STATE, ZIP: L�S C,jy1 rgp l• CA Fax No. -760—lap PROJECT LOCATION: -71-7_9f' O I t-4wAL4 1II CA QQ i N7� PROPOSED USE AND/OR CONSTRUCTION (Including operational information): At 7lcel G1F f- 7£ ►Got, 21� ,ugt S7crtA6§ (usrarn►�-►f-1 �T�- t th i t Nd Ya I Z% ?. ( 1A. lib QwsW_ cy2 �60 & J 1 aD . (attach sheets if needed) LEGAL DESCRIPTION (LOT & TRACT OR A.P.N.):_LrnA-riRp ISS a Nig IM AI Minor Use Permit 'OL. Zzg t SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS® 1 ❑ Plot Plan, floor plans and elevation plans (as determined by Community Development Department staff). Five (5) sets of plans on 8'/z" x 11" sheet or folded down to 8'/z" x 11". ❑ Filing fee for Minor Use Permit. If filing multiple applications, the most expensive application will be charged full fee, with remaining related applications discounted 50% for each. This discount does not apply to Environmental Information form. NAME OF APPLICANT (CUOLI J:AJ (Please Pri SIGNATURE OF APPLICANT ATE 41, NAME OF PROPERTY OWNER — !meq (PleasjPrin SIGNATURE OF PROPERTY OWNER(S IF NOT SAME AS APPLICANT: A DATE O (Signature provides consent for pplicant use site for proposed activity). DATE (Separate written authority by owner to submit application may be provided) NOTE: FALSE OR MISLEADING INFORMATION GIVEN IN THIS APPLICATION SHALL BE GROUNDS FOR DENYING APPLICATION. A I Minor Use Permit • STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: OCTOBER 12, 2004 CASE NO: MINOR USE PERMIT 2004-536 APPLICANT/PROPERTY OWNER: WAL-MART STORE #1805 FILE COPY REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST TO ALLOW 62 METAL CONTAINERS FOR THE TEMPORARY STORAGE OF HOLIDAY MERCHANDISE FROM OCTOBER 1, 2004 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2004, ON THE SOUTH AND EAST SIDES OF THE EXISTING WAL-MART SUPER CENTER STORE LOCATION: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: BACKGROUND: 78-950 HIGHWAY 1 1 1, WITHIN THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15304 (CLASS 4) IN THAT THE STORAGE CONTAINERS ARE TEMPORARY AND WILL HAVE NO PERMANENT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT. REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR) The new Wal-Mart Super Center opened in early 2004 and is located at the southeast corner of Auto Center Drive and La Quinta Drive (Attachment 1). In the past four years, the Planning Commission approved Wal -Mart's Conditional Use Permits to allow the use of metal storage containers during the holiday season at their previous facility within the One -Eleven at La Quinta Shopping Center. The following is a list of the previous approvals: P:\Reports - PC\10-12-2004\MUP 04-536 Wal-Mart\PC Stfrpt MUP 04-536 Wal Mart. doc • 6 Date CUP # Permit Time # of # of Resolution # Period . Containers Containers Requested Approved 11/28/00 CUP 2000-052 09/01 /00 to 35 35 Resolution 2000-085 01/15/01 08/28/01 CUP 2001-065 09/01 /01 to 43 43 Resolution 2001-107 01/15/02 09/03/02 CUP 2002-071 09/05/02 to 55 43 Resolution 2002-084 01/15/03 09/09/03 CUP 2002-080 09/15/02 to 55 55 Resolution 2003-073 01/15/03 During the review of plans for the Wal-Mart Super Center, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution 2002-026 recommending to the City Council approval of the Site Development Permit (SDP 2002-728) with Conditions of Approval (Attachment 2). Condition No.88 stated that storage and storage containers can be permitted along the rear of Building "B" (See Attachment 3) provided a Minor Use Permit is granted by the Planning Commission as a business item. The City Council adopted Resolution 2002- 41, approving said permit with the conditions as recommended by the Planning Commission. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting approval of a Minor Use Permit to allow the placement of 62 temporary metal storage containers on the south and east sides of the new Wal- Mart to store holiday merchandise from October 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 (Attachment 4). Due to the timing and scheduling of this application, it is before the Planning Commission after the requested date of October 1, 2004; therefore, the effective date will changed to October 13, 2004 (Condition No. 2). The containers will be removed by January 7, 2005 (Condition No. 2). Each metal storage container measures 10 feet wide, by 40 feet long, by eight feet high. Staff evaluated the aesthetic impact of these storage containers along the southern side of the building from Avenue 48, Aventine Apartments and the Lake La Quinta residential development. A block wall along the southern boundary of the site is approximately eight feet in height on the Wal-Mart side. With the storage containers at eight feet in height, there will be minimal visual impacts from the storage containers from Avenue 48 and the residential development. The Riverside County Fire Department has requested the applicant maintain a 20 -foot minimum drive aisles for emergency/fire access at all times to the rear and sides of the PAReports - PC\10-12-2004\MUP 04-536 Wal-Mart\PC Stfrpt MUP 04-536 Wal Mart.doc building and that any storage containers that block a required fire access lane to existing commercial buildings shall be relocated within 24 hours of a written notice from the Fire Marshal. This has been added as a condition of approval (Condition No. 3). Public Notice: Under the Zoning Code, Business Items are not subject to the Public Notice requirements, therefore, no notices were sent out regarding this Minor Use Permit. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to approve this request per Section 9.210.020 (Minor Use Permit) of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained below. 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the property is designated Regional Commercial which permits the temporary use proposed by this applicant. 2. Consistency with the Zoning -Code: The proposed project is consistent with the development standards outlined in Section 9.100.120 (Outdoor Storage and Display) of the Zoning Code because merchandise will be stored in enclosed metal containers placed immediately outside of the building. 3. Compliance with CEQA: The proposed project is in compliance with CEQA in that the project the La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that this project is Categorically Exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15304 (Class 4) in that the storage containers are temporary and will not have an effect on the environment. 4. Surrounding Uses: Approval of the Minor Use Permit will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare or be injurious to, or incompatible with, other properties or land uses in the vicinity in that the storage bins are placed in areas away from customer traffic and public view. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 20047._, approving Minor Use Permit 2004-536, subject to Findings and the attached Conditions of Approval. . PAReports - PC\1 0- 1 2-2004\MUP 04-536 Wal-Mart\PC Stfrpt MUP 04-536 Wal Mart.doc 0 • Attachments: 11. Site Location Map 2. February 26, 2002 Planning Commission meeting minutes 3. March 19, 2002 City Council Conditions of Approval 4. Wal-Mart Site Plan 5. Storage Container Location Map Prepared by: 44ii—IG�a Martin, Magan Associate Planner P:\Reports - PC\10-12-2004\MUP 04-536 Wal-Mart\PC Stfrpt MUP 04-536 Wal Mart.doc 0 • PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTE MOTION 2004 - MINOR USE PERMIT 2004-536, WAL-MART CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL -RECOMMENDED OCTOBER 12, 2004 GENERAL 1. The storage containers shall be located as illustrated on the site plan, unless otherwise amended by the Conditions of Approval. 2. This Minor Use Permit shall allow a maximum total of 62 temporary metal storage containers to be located on the site to be used for the storage of holiday merchandise between October 13, 2004 and December 31, 2005. The storage containers shall be removed by January 7, 2005. 3. A minimum 20 foot wide drive aisle for emergency/fire access shall be maintained at all times to the rear of the building. Any storage containers that block a required fire access lane to existing commercial buildings shall be relocated within 24 hours of a written notice from the Fire Marshal. 4. Recycled cardboard and excess shopping carts shall be stored within the appropriate designated areas on the south and east sides of the building. The outdoor storage area shall be cleaned daily of debris and litter. 6. Nothing shall be stored on top of the metal storage containers. All storage shall be within the enclosed metal storage containers. 7. The City reserves the right to add Conditions to this application request to mitigate any problems that arise not previously addressed herein. 8. The applicant/property owner agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees. The City of La .Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. 9. No sign are allowed on these containers. IR6 'V Rri HRIgtO la ISS r IIINI PA 9MOILTASSi so UAPAWL $ , 5$ , , R . H "A 1001 o rm In� emRIL ar ret Aeu snR+. Isstss0i•s neat .CITY OF INdI LA OUINTA uls lot cmule n x tau tat-snn a alnlnxc sist anlxutts. I ' _ I S yPAR I- 2 A 71 fAR] fARJ a)�C 2A i 5 I R PARI 643 �yy ..AC 3' 9 1 LA 843 LAr aUI� pa'o� n11 A5521�i'S Ainn�h Coanl P, Calll. _� n S) s -----ATTACHMENT 41 T49—:X PN 1906142 PY 28422 I Joe 2001 ATTACHMENT #2 Planning Commission Minutes February 26, 2002 or letter of credit, and the proceeds shall be utilized to the extent needed to correct the landscaping. deficiencies. If, after five years, the landscaping has been properly maintained, the City shall release the bond or letter of credit. If, in the determination of the Community Development Director, the landscaping has not been properly maintained, the bond or letter -of credit shall be renewed and maintained for an additional five year period. 2. For the entire Planning Area III, the landscaping and irrigation system shall be well maintained and any dead plant material shall be promptly replaced. If the landscaping is not properly maintained, and if the condition is not cured within 30 days of the notice of the deficiencies, the City shall have the right to cause the correction of the deficiencies in the landscaping, and the applicant/owner agrees that the costs of the correction shall be recorded as a lien against the property. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedies the City has by law." H. Conditions #82-83: eliminated and replaced with a condition to require all signs to come back to the Planning Commission at a future date as a Business Item. I. Condition #86.A.b: "M an option agreement, satisfactory to the City..." J. Add a new Condition #88: "No outdoor storage or outdoor storage containers will be permitted on the vacant area of Phase II for Building "B". However, storage and storage containers can be permitted along the rear of Building "B" provided a Minor Use Permit is granted by the Planning Commission as a business item review process." K. Add a new Condition #89: "The rear elevations of Buildings "A" and "B" shall include visual interest as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director." L. Add a Condition 'regarding the right -in off Highway 111 to be properly signed as a one-way. M. Add all conditions received from the Coachella Valley Water District ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. G:IWPDOCSIPC Minutesl2-26-02.wpd 13 09 Resolution No. 2002-41 Conditions of Approval - Approved Sits Development Permit 2002-728 Stamko Development Co. Adopted: March 19, 2002 Page 21 ® ATTACHMENT #3 87. Once the business locating in Retail Building "B" is fully operational, noise monitoring shall be conducted on one to two occasions, at the Applicants expense, under the supervision of the City, to ensure that the typical operational noise does not violate the City's noise ordinance standards. The monitoring shall be conducted at one or more locations chosen by the City at the perimeter of the property. WelffAel 88. No outdoor storage or outdoor storage containers will be permitted on the vacant area of Phase II for Building "B". However, storage and storage containers can be permitted along the rear of Building "B" provided a Minor Use Permit is granted by the Planning Commission using the business item review process. ARCHITECTURE 89. The rear elevations of Buildings "A" and "B" shall include. visual interest as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director. COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DEPARTMENT 90. The developer shall pay all fees and charges associated with providing domestic water and sanitation service in accordance with the current regulations of the District. Such fees and charges are subject to change. 91. The developer shall provide land on which a well site will be located. This site shall be shown on the tract map as a lot to be deeded to the District for such purpose. 92. Additional domestic water pipelines shall be installed by the subdivider in order for the District to provide service to all parcels. 93. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the District for sanitation service. ("18 w ATTACHMENT #4 - — -- — -- — -- 1-HY/Y III ENTRY MONUMEN1 SErBACK HIIC�HWA� �111 aR A=ESS 1 (EAST) A— LIICSC�PE SED R*NT IN CNLY PROPOSED Bus sTop HWY M ENTRY MONUMEN SIGN (WEST) GAS cz T;,Ti'vP.l PAIFICEEL.11 S Gli f U RE 66ECOPMEN7 Ij PAFCa 7 .res .AC . EXISTING AIM-, rr�lrnr i0 `I O(irrf ) I 1 1.!:; 11 crwss Tw No VIAL-Mt3-I 7c RETAIL 'E' 14%551 SF PHASE 1 RETAIL 'A' 86,554 EF P, VIC E64- E -E PACO 3' p 62 FR�EL 12 P:1RC4L 2 . ......... =F- =P.z VIAL-Mt3-I 7c RETAIL 'E' 14%551 SF PHASE 1 RETAIL 'A' 86,554 EF P, VIC E64- PACO 3' p 62 P:1RC4L 2 . ......... FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREA f - , 1 !9 F.' zz. IF l lb: ., tf>CATY:D IN THF: N F. I/4 OF' SEC 29. T5S. R7p:. SBM LEGEND FOR PROPOS® L#'POYB.E PAWU4T Ja+a.LEO M, M r / • WE ANALYM TA WAL.-1644RT PAFKM 11 RATIO 6- I m z 1�1 Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2004 VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: t`LL 60 A. Minor Use Permit 2004-536; a request of Wal-Mart Super Center for consideration of a request to allow 62 metal containers for the temporary storage of holiday merchandise from October 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 on the south and east sides of the existing Super Center Store. 1 . Chairman Kirk asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Martin Magana 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 Daniels asked the process for approving a Minor Use Permit. Interim Community Development Director Oscar Orci stated the Minor Use Permit process is administrative. The previous requests were subject to a Conditional Use Permit requirements. However, under the Site Development Permit approval for Wal-Mart Super Center, the Commission added a condition that required the seasonal storage bins come back to the Commission as a Minor Use Permit under Business Items. 3. Commissioner Quill stated that the 2003 minutes should reflect the discussion regarding the number of bins on this site. 4. Commissioner Daniels stated that what staff has provided as Attachment 2 are the conditions for this new site. Accordingly he believes the containers are allowed in the area proposed, subject to a Minor Use Permit being approved by the Commission. 5. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated one of the findings must be that the application will not create conditions that are materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare and is compatible with other properties and land uses in the general vicinity. 6. There be no further questions of staff Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mickey Anderson, representing Wal-Mart, gave a history of the prior approvals. Mr. Anderson noted Target currently has the containers in place. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 10- 1 2-04.doc 0 i Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2004 7. Commissioner Ladner stated she does not understand what the issue is and she does understand the need. 8. Commissioner Quill stated that last year he remembers asking if they would need the additional bins and believes they stated no. He does not like it and it is not a temporary situation. It is permanent and exists for three months out of every year for the life of the Super Wal-Mart. In addition, he does. not believe the areas where it will exist have been prepared well enough to remove the unsightliness of the containers in a permanent way. If they are to remain for three months of every.year for the rest of the life of Wal-Mart, then they should be set up in such a way that they are screened from any public view and the future view from the people developing behind, to the right, to the left and any other direction. He cannot in good conscience in any way support this. 9. Commissioner Ladner stated she does not know what will be developed behind the Wal-Mart, but this request will come back to the Commission each year and they may at some time have to make the determination that it is too much an impact on the adjoining neighbors. 10. Commissioner Quill asked what the process will be in the future since it is being reviewed as a Minor Use Permit.. Staff stated the Commission has the discretion to determine whether or not the activity is a detriment to the surrounding communities. -'.Mitigation measures can be established -to mitigate the concerns. 11. Commissioner Ladner asked the size of the containers. Mr. Anderson. stated the retaining wall is 20 feet and the containers are ten feet. Staff noted the wall is eight feet on the Wal-Mart side and approximately ten feet on the other side. 12. Commissioner Daniels stated it seems this was an anticipated use and is the place the condition refers to. In his opinion they are in compliance with the conditions. He would like to request that when this request is submitted next year, he would like to see pictures of this year's event to see if screening would help to hide the containers. Staff noted they would take pictures of the containers and see if additional screening would make a difference. GAWPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 10- 1 2-04.doc 10 Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2004 13:- Chairman Kirk stated he too believes the discussion last year was different. He. thanked Mr. Anderson for being responsible to apply for the proper permits. He does, however, believe the building should have been constructed to accommodate the holiday merchandise. He believes this can work without the containers. Other retail businesses will have to comply as well. This has been an issue the Commission has never liked and has allowed it under duress. He just does not believe itis an appropriate way to store merchandize. 14. Commissioner Quill stated that if they knew 62 containers would be needed, then why was the building not built to address this need. 'Mr. Anderson stated. that for the Christmas rush they will need to hold on site $12, million worth of merchandise and they do not have the space. 15. Chairman Kirk asked if every retail business should be granted this use. Mr. Anderson stated he does not believe every retail business will need it. Mr. Anderson noted Target already has 11 containers on site. Staff noted Code Compliance was following up on this violation. 16. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment, the public participation portion was closed and opened to Commission discussion. 17. Commissioner Quill stated it is three months out of every year and the areas to place them are not prepared to hide them. They should be screened from any view of anyone on all sides. He cannot support this request in any way. 18. Chairman Kirk asked what the outcome would be if it were a two to two vote. City Attorney Kathy Jenson noted it would be a failed vote and if a member is absent, it would be brought back at the next meeting hoping all members would be present. She would recommend they continue the issue. 19. Commissioner Quill asked if this would go to the Council if they denied it. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated it would only go to Council if it was appealed within a15 day period. It would come G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 10- 1 2-04.doc 11 Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2004 back to the Commission before it would be placed on the Council agenda. It is unlikely it will be on the.. Council agenda even if an appeal was filed tomorrow before the first meeting in November and more likely it would be the second meeting in November. Mr. Anderson stated it is a nature of the beast.. It might be error of the company for not planning on these storage containers, but he would like to make a plea for the Commission to understand. He filed the application for a Conditional Use Permit in August and the Minor Use Permit the first of October. 20. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Ladner/Daniels to adopt. Minute Motion 2004-015, approving Minor Use Permit 2004-536, as recommended. The motion failed with Commissioners Ladner and Daniels voting yes and Commissioners Kirk and Quill. voting no. 21. Commissioner Daniels asked that Commissioner Krieger be given a copy of the tape and be prepared to make a decision. 22. Staff asked if it would make any difference if staff worked with applicant to develop additional screening for the containers. Chairman Kirk stated probably not with his or Commissioner Quill's vote. 23. Commissioner Quill stated that if .this is to be a problem with all the retail stores, he would request the application come before the Commission earlier in the year to give the applica,nt's time to address the decision of the Commission. It is unfair to the applicant to be before the Commission at this late - a date with anticipation that he would have an approval. B. Sign Permit 2004-786, Amendment #1; a request of- Thomas Enterprises/Signarama for consideration "of an Amendment to an exist sign program for The Pavilion at La Quinta project, located at the northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street: 1. Chairman Kirk 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. There be no further questions of staff, -Chairman Kirk asked if .the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Bob Duarte, G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 10- 1 2-04.doc 12 Planning Commission Minutes February 26, 2002 44. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Robbins/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-026 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-728, subject to the findings and conditions as amended: A. Condition #10: eliminate the sentence referring to the meandering wall. B. Condition #50.A.1.b. ''IThe developer is required .to pay 50% of the landscape median improvements at their own expense pursuant to Specific Plan 97-029. The remaining 50% of the landscape median improvements will be reimbursed from the City's Development Impact Fee Fund in accordance with policies established for that program.)" C. Condition #58: Change 30 -feet to 90 -feet. D. Condition #64: The final landscape plan shall include an enhanced landscape entry statement at the intersection of Auto Centre Drive and La Quinta Drive. The enhancements are for the access lane east of La Quinta Drive only. E. Condition 50.A.1: "...and widen the north half as required for the widened section." F. Condition #65: The final landscape plans shall be reviewed by the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee and the Planning Commission prior to the issuance of any permit for the construction of the parking lot. The review by the Planning Commission will be conducted as a business item. G. Condition #67: The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all private on-site improvements, perimeter and interior landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. 1. For the Retail Building "B" site, a $25,000 bond or letter of credit in a ' form acceptable to the City Attorney, shall be posted prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the Retail Building "B". The bond or letter of credit shall initially remain in effect for a period of five years. During that period, if the City determines that the landscaping is not being properly maintained, it shall provide notice, at the addresses to be provided by the applicant or owner, of the need to correct the specific deficiencies. If the deficiencies in the landscaping are not corrected within 30 days of the mailing of the notice, the City shall have the right to call the bond G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\2-26-02.wpd 12 1 1 Planning Commission Minutes February 26, 2002 9 or letter of credit, and the proceeds shall be utilized to the extent needed to correct the landscaping deficiencies. If, after five years, the landscaping has been properly maintained, the City shall release the bond or letter of credit. If, in the determination of the Community Development Director, the landscaping has not been properly maintained, the bond or letter of credit shall be renewed and maintained for an additional five year period. 2. For the entire Planning Area III, the landscaping and irrigation system shall be well maintained and any dead plant material shall be promptly replaced. If the landscaping is not properly maintained, and if the condition is not cured within 30 days of the notice of the deficiencies, the City shall have the right to cause the correction of the deficiencies in the landscaping, and the applicant/owner agrees that the costs of the correction shall be recorded as a lien against the property. This remedy shall be in addition to any other remedies the City has by law." H. Conditions #82-83: eliminated and replaced with a condition to require all signs to come back to the Planning Commission at a future date as a Business Item. I. Condition #86.A.b: "(i) an option agreement, satisfactory to the City..." J. Add a new Condition #88: "No outdoor storage or outdoor storage containers will be permitted on the vacant area of Phase II for Building "B". However, storage and storage containers can be permitted along the rear of Building "B" provided a Minor Use Permit is granted by the Planning Commission as a business item review process." K. Add a new Condition #89: "The rear elevations of Buildings "A" and "B" shall include visual interest as deemed appropriate by the Community Development Director." L. Add a Condition regarding the right -in off Highway 111 to be properly signed as a one-way. M. Add all conditions received from the Coachella Valley Water District ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC M1nutes\2-26-02.wpd 13 0 Martin Magana From: Greg Butler Sent: Friday, September 10, 2004 2:47 PM To: Martin Magana; Oscar Orci Subject: CUP 2004-086 Wal -.Mart storage trailers Importance: High Gentlemen, I noticed in the 1O1's for 9/3/04 that Wal-Mart is requesting permission for storage trailers behind their store. We should be very wary of this request. Here is what I wrote last week to Deby Conrad regarding a similar situation at Target: "78-935 Highway 111 (Target): Numerous roll -off storage bins are sitting on the paved area behind (south of) the store. This needs to be nipped in the bud. The Building Code has specific provisions in order to allow a mercantile occupancyAo be as large as this store. One of the critical provisions is the maintenance of clear yards on all sides of the building which are not less than 60 feet deep. The theory is that these deep yards reduce the fire exposure of adjacent structures and make for easy fire department access. Permanent storage is one of the specific things NOT allowed in that 60 -foot yard. Consequently, they are in violation of the very provision that allowed the store to qualify to be this big. This situation will only be worsened once additional structures are built to the south. (This is the same problem that has been occurring for years at the west side of Home Depot.)" Wal-Mart would fall under the same Code provisions. I am available if you need to discuss this further with me. Greg • YARD WIDTH TO BE USED FOR AREA INCREASES LINE f MEASUREMENT OF YARDS FIGURE 505-1 SECTION 505 — ALLOWABLE AREA INCREASES 505.1 General. The minimum requirement of the code insofar as siting a building is concerned is that it have access on at least one side to a street or yard. Thus, it could extend completely be- tween side property lines and to the rear property line and have access from only one side. It, therefore, follows that if a building is provided with yards or open space on two or more sides, some benefit should accrue based on better access for the fire depart- ment. Also, if the yards or streets are wide enough, there will be a benefit due to the decreased exposure from adjoining properties. Because of the beneficial aspects of open space adjacent to a building, the UBC permits increases in the basic areas estab- lished from Section 504 based on the number and width of the yards and streets around the building. For yards to be effective for use by the fire department, it is a good idea that they be con- nected to a public way so that the fire department will have ac- cess to that portion of the perimeter of the building that is adja- cent to open space. However, the code does not require this condition. Yards and public ways—What can and can't be used. By definition, a yard is an open, unoccupied space from the ground to the sky that is located on the lot on which the building is si- tuated. This definition precludes the storage of pallets, lumber, manufactured goods or any other objects that similarly obstruct the yard. Most jurisdictions, however, do permit automobile parking, low -profile landscaping, fire hydrants, light standards and similar features to occupy the yard. Since a yard must be un- obstructed from the ground to the sky, yard widths should be measured from the edge of roof overhangs or other projections as shown in Figure 505-1. Something that seems to cause confusion is what width of public way should be used for determining area increases. Do you use the full width of the public way or only the distance to the center line? The confusion evolves from Section 503.1, which states "For the purpose of this section, the center line of an adjoining public way shall be considered an adjacent proper- ty line." The key words here are "for the purpose of this section." Thus, the requirement to use the center line is limited to Section 503 and is not applicable to Section 505. For determining area increases for open space, the full width of the public way may be used by buildings located on each side of the public way. • 1997 UBC HANDBOOK The following type of question is sometimes asked: "Why can't I use the big open field next door for area increases?" Re- member that by definition a yard must be on the same lot as the building, so an adjoining area that is not a part of the lot upon which the proposed building is situated may not be used. There is a good reason for this—the owner of one parcel lacks control over a parcel owned by another and, thus, a yard can disappear when the owner of "the big open field" decides to build on it. One way some jurisdictions have allowed such "big open spaces" to be used is by accepting joint use of shared yards when a recorded restrictive covenant is executed to ensure that the shared space will remain open and unoccupied as long as it is required by the Building Code. This does not seem unreasonable since the aim is to maintain open spaces between buildings. Any covenant should be reviewed by counsel to be sure it will accom- plish what is intended and should clearly describe the reason and code section applicable so that any future revisions or deletions may be considered if the owners wish to terminate such an agreement. In such an event, each building should be brought into current code compliance or the agreement would be required to remain in effect. Prior to the 1985 edition, the code referred to "public space, streets or yards." Reference to "public space" was deleted be- cause the building official usually has no control over the long- range use of publicly owned property and there is little assur- ance that such property will be available as open space for the life of the building. Remember that what is today's publicly owned open parking lot could become tomorrow's new city hall and the open space used to justify area increases would no longer exist. The term "public way" was used in place of "streets" be- cause its definition in Chapter 10 allows the use of a broad range of publicly owned open space while still allowing the building official some discretion as to the acceptability of a particular parcel. "Public way" usually conjures up visions of streets and alleys, but how about other open spaces such as power line right of ways, or flood -control channels or railroad right of ways? Many such open spaces are generally acceptable provided there is good probability that they will remain as open space during the life of the building for which they will serve. Power lines and flood -control channels are usually good bets for longevity, but railroads are often abandoned and, therefore, may not be as good a bet. 85 1997 UBC HANDBOOK • • FLOOD -CONTROL CHANNEL, POWER LINES, ETC. - F—— —— R YARD SHARED YARD WITH RECORDED R COVENANT' YARD BUILDING R i I i I — — — YARD — PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AVAILABLE STREET WAY FOR AREA INCREASE 'May be used when approved by the building official. YARDS AND PUBLIC WAYS AVAILABLE FOR AREA INCREASES FIGURE 505-2 Figure 505-2 provides a visual summary of yards and public ways that could be used for open space area increases. How much increase? In the case where streets or yards ad- join two sides of the building, the code permits an increase in area of up to 50 percent. It should be noted that such yards need not be on adjacent sides of the building. Where streets or yards exist on three or four sides, the code for most occupancies and types of construction permits an area increase of up to 100 percent. Where yards exist on four sides, the code does allow extra area increases for three cases where the amount of combustibles and, consequently, potential fire severity is relatively low. Also, the height of the building is limited to either one or two stories. In these three cases, the area may be increased beyond 100 per- cent, provided, of course, the minimum width yard or street ex- ceeds a width of 40 feet (12 192 mm). This is based on the code criterion of permitting a rate of increase equal to 5 percent for each foot (304 mm) that the minimum width yard or street ex- ceeds 20 feet (6096 mm). See Application Examples 505-3, 505-4 and 505-5. 505.2 Unlimited Area. There are many cases where very large undivided floor areas are required for efficient operation in such facilities as warehouses and industrial plants. The Uniform Building Code recognizes this necessity and allows unlimited areas for these uses under two different sets of circumstances. The first case is for buildings up to a maximum of two stories in height when the building is completely surrounded by streets or yards not less than 60 feet (18 288 mm) in width and protected throughout by an automatic fire sprinkler system. The first case applies to any business'(Group B), factory and industrial (Group F), mercantile (Group M) or storage (Group S) occupancy and to an aircraft repair hangar (Group H, Division 5). The code as- 86 sumes in this case that the amount of combustibles and, conse- quently, the potential fire severity is relatively low. In addition, the protection provided by the automatic fire sprinkler system plus the fire department access furnished by the 60 -foot (18 288 mm) yards or streets surrounding the building reduce the poten- tial fire severity to such a level that unlimited area is reasonable. The second case involves a Group F, Division 2 or a Group S, Division 2 Occupancy in a one-story building of Type II, Type III One-hour or Type IV construction. Both Group F, Division 2 and Group S, Division 2 Occupancies by definition are low - hazard uses, which the code considers to be low fire risks. Fire risk is further reduced by limiting the provision to buildings of noncombustible construction that are otherwise protected (one- hour or heavy timber) to reduce structure contribution to any fire. This second case also requires that the building be sur- rounded by yards or streets with a minimum width of 60 feet (18 288 mm), but does not require the installation of an auto- matic fire sprinkler system. There is also a third case where unlimited areas are permitted but are not discussed in this section of the code. This is the Type I building except when it houses Group H, Divisions 1 and 2 Occupancies. The restriction of areas for the Group H, Divisions 1 and 2 Occupancies is based on the explosive, highly flam- mable and combustible contents exemplified by these uses. In all other cases the Type I building enjoys an unlimited floor area regardless of the number of streets or yards around the building and regardless of whether or not an automatic fire sprinkler system is installed. The rationale for permitting an un- limited area for a Type I building is based on the highly fire - resistive nature of the Type I building and the compartmentation provided by the fire -resistive floors. Thus, it is assumed that a complete burnout of the contents on any given floor may occur U without causing the collapse of the building and without the fire spreading to any other floors or to adjacent buildings. 505.3 Automatic Sprinkler Systems. Because over the years automatic fire sprinkler systems have exhibited an excellent re- cord of in-place fire suppression, the UBC allows area increases where an automatic fire sprinkler system is installed throughout the building. In this case the area of a one-story building may be tripled, and for a building of two or more stories in height, the area may be doubled. This restriction of permitting only a 100 percent increase in area for multistory buildings protected by an automatic fire sprinkler system is based on the assumption by the code that the fire department suppression activities are still going to be required even when an automatic fire sprinkler sys- tem is installed. Therefore, a multistory building presents more problems to the fire department than a one-story building, and a smaller increase in area is permitted. The Uniform Building Code permits area increases for sprin- klers, provided that the systems are not otherwise required by the code in the following cases: 1. To increase the allowable number of stories. 2. Group H, Divisions 1 and 2 Occupancies. 3. Substitution for one-hour fire -resistive construction. • 1997 UBC HANDBOOK 4. Buildings with atria. In these cases the code considers than the conditions and haz- ards requiring the installation of fire sprinklers are such that the sprinkler system should not also be used to increase the allow- able area. In recognition of the excellent fire record in buildings pro- tected throughout with fire sprinkler systems, the UBC further intends that the area increases permitted for sprinkler systems be compounded with the increases outlined in Section 505.1 for spatial separations consisting of public ways or yards on two or more sides of a building. Consider a two-story office building of Type III -N construc- tion protected with an automatic fire sprinkler system and sit- uated on a lot that has a 60 -foot (18 288 mm) street across the front. There is one 60 -foot (18 288 mm) yard on one side of the building. The allowable area would be computed as follows: 1. Determine the basic allowable area for a one-story Group B Occupancy of Type III -N construction from Table 5-B. Basic area = 12,000 square feet (1114.8 m2). 2. Determine the allowable increase in area due to 60 -foot (18 288 mm) yards on two sides from Section 505.1. Application Example 505-3 i 130 FT. YARD i 5 FT. YARD —� PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING GROUP B OCCUPANCY ONE STORY TYPE V -N CONSTRUCTION FLOOR AREA = 10,200 SQUARE FEET For SI: I foot = 304.8 mm, 1 square foot = 0.093 m2. – – 20 FT. YARD – – STREET (80 FT. WIDE) AREA INCREASES FOR OPEN SPACES FIGURE 505-3 55 FT. YARD 'P 44 FT. YARD i GIVEN: Information in Figure 505-3. DETERMINE: If building may be of Type V -N construction as proposed. SOLUTION: Basic allowable area for a Group B Occupancy of Type V -N construction (Table 5-B) is 8,000 square feet. The provisions of Section 505.1 are permissive; therefore, any combination of yards that results in the largest increase may be used. In evaluating yard increases for conditions with varying yard widths, the minimum width within each configuration to be checked should be used, but all available yards need not be used. For this example, there are two possible yard configurations that should be checked. Option 1—Two 44 -foot yards (44 -foot right side and 100 -foot front yard/public way) (44 feet – 20 feet) x 11/4 percent = 30 percent increase Option 2—Three 30 -foot yards (30 -foot rear yard, 44 -foot right side and 100 -foot yard/public way) (30 feet – 20 feet) x 21/2 percent = 25 percent increase Option 1, the two -yard condition, will permit the greater area increase. Therefore, the maximum allowable floor area per story will be: 8,000 square feet x 1.30 = 10,400 square feet > 10,200 (Type V -N O.K.) 87 1997 UBC HANDBOOK • 0 '. 60 FT. YARD For Sl: I foot = 304.8 mm, I square foot = 0.093 m'-. 88 Application Example 505-4 40 FT. YARD , 40 FT. 50 FT. , BUILDING 1 YARD BUILDING 2 YARD i I I ' 10 FT. YARD- - - - STREET (60 FT. WIDE) AREA INCREASES FOR OPEN SPACES FIGURE 505-4 GIVEN: BUILDING 1 Group B Occupancy Type III -N Construction One Story BUILDING 2 Group B Occupancy Type V -N Construction One Story DETERMINE: Maximum allowable floor area for each building. SOLUTION: Since both buildings are located on the same lot, both buildings may use the 40 -foot yard that separates them for area increases. As a result, each building may use four 40 -foot yards for area increase. Building 1—Basic allowable area for a Group B Occupancy of Type III -N construction (Table 5-13) is 12,000 square feet [(40 feet - 20 feet) x 5 percent = 100 percent increase]. Allowable Area = 12,000 square feet x 2.0 = 24,000 square feet Building 2—Basic allowable area for a Group B Occupancy of Type V -N construction (Table 5-B) is 8,000 square feet [(40 feet - 20 feet) x 5 percent = 100 percent increase]. Allowable Area = 8,000 square feet x 2.0 = 16,000 square feet Increase = (60 - 20) x 11/4 percent = 50 percent = 6,000 square feet (557.4 m2). 3. Add the increase in area from Step 2 to the basic area de- termined from Step 1. Area = 12,000 + 6,000 = 18,000 square feet (1114.8 + 557.4 = 1672 m2). 4. Multiply the area for Step 3 by 3 for the single -story con- dition. Area = 18,000 x 3 = 54,000 square feet (1672.2 x 3 = 5016.6 m'-). This is the maximum allowable area for any single story in the three-story building. 5. Multiply the area from Step 3 by 2 for the multistory con- dition. Area = 18,000 x 2 = 36,000 square feet (1672.2 x 2 = 3344.4 m2). 6. Multiply the area determined in Step 5 by 2 in accordance with Section 504.2 for a multistory sprinklered building. Area = 36,000 x 2 = 72,000 square feet (3344.4 x 2 = 6688.8 m'-). 7. The area determined in Step 6 is the total allowable area permitted for the building. Any single story, however, may have an area of 54,000 square feet (5016.6 m2), pro- vided the area of both stories does not exceed 72,000 square feet (6688.8 m2). Once again there are a myriad of situations that can arise in- volving the determination of the allowable area for a building.3 Also, as illustrated in Application Example 505-5, the introduc- tion of an area separation wall in a large -area building will result in the loss of a yard on one side for one section of the building. Figures 505-6 and 505-7 present two further examples of the determination of allowable areas. SECTION 506 — MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF BUILDINGS ANDINCREASES The Uniform Building Code limits the maximum height and number of stories for similar reasons as discussed under "Area Limitations." In addition, the higher the building becomes, the more difficult access for firefighting becomes. Furthermore, the time required for the evacuation of the occupants increases, and therefore, the fire resistance of the building should also be increased. The code presumes that when the height of the highest floor used for human occupancy in Group R, Division 1 Occupancies and Group B office buildings exceeds 75 feet (22 860 mm), the life -safety hazard becomes even greater because most fire de - u �,,b-_ ` � �� -.-�_' _ '*1 fi P s=�s-=.- �� !- �- (� J 1 1 �� '*1 fi P s=�s-=.- -low s ti r' / ML 3L- 14J- - r�� 410 Ll Aall • li1f,w O�- 'tom $'f*v-- OCA V4A %P(K fool -A pN e.4T1 t4&- AQ r5 . Y_J7 OF W . I. _f City of a Quinta OFFICE USE ONLY APKACommunity Development Department Case No. &AP 64 s 36 78-495 Calle Tampico Date Recvd. loll -d0% La Quinta, California 92253 Fee:r— (760) 777-7125 FAX: (760) 777-1233 Related Apps.: *up 6 4 -OF Logged in by: FINN= PC 29 �-(Cross out one that does not apply) Application for p E0 L I V E ppeal of Findings And/Or Conditions 200 U OCT i km _ ' 111 Date dQ-T lJ4,c.�'-� M � - -1 --1Vlailg A r -7-15 4414 kL-A K 1 i 1 (fid QlrcrA, !� GtZZS3 Phone: (AQ) 5CP+3613 Resolution # and Condition(s) of Approval being appealed 0( - S5Uo )Itag. jjf VaLmi-T Any development review action may be appealed pursuant to Section 9.220.120 of the Zoning Code. Please identify the type of application: Type of Appeal: Change of Zone Specific Plan Conditional Use Permit Variance Minor Use Permit Tentative Tract Map Tentative Parcel Map Site Development Permit Temporary Use Permit Other Please provide sufficient information so as to make clear the substance of each of the grounds for appeal. If applicable, indicate the number of the specific condition which is being protested. C -%'t%4 JjA^44024C- L •-� 1a -,4-g;4, Use additional sheets if necessary. of Appellant B6\Appeal Finds-Cond City Council Minutes • 10 • October 19, 2004 4. CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL BY WAL-MART STORES, INC., REGARDING MINOR USE PERMIT 2004-536 TO ALLOW 62 METAL CONTAINERS FOR THE TEMPORARY STORAGE OF HOLIDAY MERCHANDISE FROM OCTOBER 1, 2004 THROUGH DECEMBER 31, 2004 ON THE SOUTH AND EAST SIDES OF THE EXISTING SUPER WAL-MART CENTER LOCATED AT 78-950 HIGHWAY 111 WITHIN THE CENTRE AT LA O.UINTA. APPELLANT: WAL-MART STORES, INC. (MICKEY ANDERSON). Interim Community Development Director Orci presented the staff report. In response to Council Member Sniff, Mr. Orci stated the eight -foot high containers are about the same height as the back wall. Council Member Henderson asked Associate Planner Magana to review how the containers would be placed along the back wall to provide some perspective on the 62 containers. In response to Council Member Perkins, Mr. Magana confirmed this has been reviewed by the Fire Department, and they are requiring a 20 -foot wide access to the building. Mr. Orci indicated there will be sufficient access for loading and unloading, and access will be enforced by the Fire Department and Code Enforcement Department. Council Member Perkins stated he doesn't want to see any of the exits blocked as they had been in the old building. Council Member Osborne asked if the use of storage containers was envisioned in Wal -Mart's original plans, and if screening would be needed in the future. Mr. Magana confirmed the storage containers were part of the original planning, and they will be required to come back each year to the Planning Commission due to the potential need for screening on the south side. In response to Mayor Adolph, Mr. Orci confirmed there are provisions in the City Code for the use of storage containers. Council Member Henderson stated she understands Target is using storage containers at their facility, and Mr. Orci confirmed Code Enforcement is working on that issue. Council Member Sniff stated he doesn't have a problem with the use of storage containers if they are placed in a safe manner and out of public view. He noted it's sometimes difficult for retail businesses to plan in advance, 1 +City Council Minutes 11 0 October 19, 2004 especially at Christmas time. He expressed disappointment with the Planning Commission's decision on this, and indicated he feels the presence of only four members at the meeting was a real problem. He stated he supports the appellant's request. Mickey Anderson, representing Wal-Mart Stores, thanked the Council for considering this matter. MOTION — It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Osborne to approve the appeal by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. for Minor Use Permit 2004-536. Council Member Henderson suggested modifying the motion to direct staff to start looking at the landscaping issue for next year. Mr. Orci noted option 3, under Findings & Alternatives, allows staff to work with the applicant as to what may be required in future years. Council Member Sniff indicated he doesn't see a need to modify the motion. Council Member Henderson stated she hopes the applicant will consider the issue even though it's not part of the motion. Motion carried unanimously. MINUTE ORDER NO. 2004-126. Mayor Adolph stated he hopes the applicant will take the Council's concerns into consideration. He stated other things can be brought in as they are developing screening devices to protect the ambiance of surrounding properties. Mr. Anderson requested the Council call him directly if they have any issues with the facility because he wants to cooperate with the City. 5. SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE NO. 409 ORDINANCE NO. 409 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2003-006 BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA AND CP DEVELOPMENT LA QUINTA, LLC. It was moved by Council Members Sniff/Henderson to adopt Ordinance No. 409 on second reading. Motion carried by the following vote: Tit,, 4 s(PQ" COUNCIL/RDA MEETING DATE: October 19, 2004 Consideration of an Appeal by Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Regarding Minor Use Permit 2004-536, to Allow 62 Metal Containers for the Temporary Storage of Holiday Merchandise from October 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004, on the South 'and East Sides of the Existing Super Wal-Mart Center, Located at 78- 950 Highway 1 1 1, Within the Centre at La Quinta. Appellant: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. (Mickey Anderson) RECOMMENDATION: As deemed appropriate by the City Council. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: AGENDA CATEGORY: BUSINESS SESSION: CONSENT CALENDAR: STUDY SESSION: PUBLIC HEARING: There are no direct fiscal implications to the City as a result of this Minor Use Permit application. However, if the Minor Use Permit is denied, it may impact sales at the Wal-Mart Super Center Store and indirectly impact sales tax proceeds to the City. CHARTER CITY IMPLICATIONS: None. BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. ("Appellant") has applied for a Minor Use Permit to allow the placement of 62 metal storage containers on the south and east sides of Wal-Mart to store holiday merchandise from October 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 (Attachment 1). Due to the standard application processing requirements, including the solicitation of comments from other City departments, such as the Fire Department, the effective start date would be changed accordingly, if the Council approves the- request. The containers would be removed by January 7, 2005. Each metal storage container measures 10 feet wide, 40 feet long, and eight feet high. S:\CityMgr\STAFF REPORTS ONLY\ 10- 1 9-04\B 7 WalMart Appeal.doc A block wall along the southern boundary of the site is approximately eight feet in height on the Wal-Mart side. With the storage containers at eight feet in height, there would be minimal visual impacts from Avenue 48 and the residential development. The Riverside County Fire Department has requested the applicant maintain a 20 -foot minimum drive aisle for emergency/fire access at all times and that any storage containers that block an access must be relocated within 24 hours of a written notice from the Fire Marshal. At its October 12, 2004 meeting, the Planning Commission voted 2-2-1 (one Commissioner absent), tor approve the Minor Use Permit (Attachment 2). Because of the 2-2 tie vote, the motion failed. In the normal course, the item would be continued to the next Planning Commission meeting (October 26 1h). It is anticipated the fifth Planning Commissioner will have returned from his vacation, and that the matter could be reexamined at that time. However, due to Wal -Mart's stated need to begin its stocking of holiday merchandize, the Appellant filed an appeal of the matter on October 14, 2004. In summary, the appellant's concern is that it will not be able to meet the holiday merchandising needs of the community as it will not be able to store the additional merchandise. As a condition of approval of Site Development Permit for the Wal-Mart Super Center, (No.2002-728), the following requirement was added regarding outdoor storage: "88. No outdoor storage or outdoor storage containers will be permitted on the vacant area of Phase II for Building "B". However, storage and storage containers can be permitted along the reach of Building "B" provided a Minor Use Permit is granted by the Planning Commission using the' business item review process." Pursuant to La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.210.020(F)(4), in order to approve a minor use permit, the decision-making authority must find that the approval of the application "will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare or injurious to or incompatible with other properties or land uses in the vicinity." FINDINGS AND ALTERNATIVES: The Alternatives available to the Council include: 1. Grant Appellant's appeal and approve Minor Use Permit 2004-536. 2. Grant Appellant's appeal and approve Minor Use Permit 2004-536, with any conditions the Council deems appropriate to mitigate the impacts of the storage containers. S:\CityMgr\STAFF REPORTS ONLY\1 0-1 9-04\B 7 WalMart Appeal.doc 02 0 3. Grant Appellant's appeal, approve Minor Use Permit 2004-536, and provide the Applicant guidance as to what may be required in future years as the areas to the south and east of the site is developed. 4. Require that the Applicant complete the Minor Use Permit process before the Planning Commission on October 26, 2004. 5. Deny the Applicant's appeal. 6. Provide staff with alternative directions. Respectfully submitted, Li Oscar Orci, Interim Community Development Director Approved for submission by: Thomas P. Genovese, City Manager Attachments: 1. Letter from the Appellant 2. Draft Planning Commission Minutes of October 12, 2004 S:\CityMgr\STAFF REPORTS ONLY\10-19-04\B 7 WaNart Appeal.doc 03 • Mr. Thomas P. Genovese- City Manager City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Ca 92253-1504 October 14th, 2004 Al IAL;HMtN1 91 Mickey Anderson Store Manager 79-295 Highway 111 La Quinta, Ca 92253 760-564-3313 I am requesting to file an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision during the October 12th Planning Commision meeting to not allow temporary storage containers on the Wal-Mart property at 79-295 Highway 111. This appeal is being filed with consideration of the following points: - The decision may not be legal: Outside storage containers are allowed on this site per SDP 2002-728 #88, and a minor use permit must be obtained prior to such container storage. The planning commission accepted this condition prior to approval of the project, and now is denying the right to exercise this condition. Outside council is currently investigating this matter. - The city has made numerous errors costing precious time: The original application was filed in August as a conditional use permit under City employee direction. The application was to provide trailer storage October 1 st to December 31 st 2004. It was later found that the application should have been filed as a minor use permit causing delay for Planning Commision review to October 12th, 11 days after the original date of request. - As a result of the October 12th decision and the delay in the application process, I now have a concern for employee and public safety. The merchandise is now here, and without the additional square footage for storage I am running out of safe options for merchandise storage. - The sales tax revenue that Wal-Mart collects for the City of La Quinta will be reduced by not allowing on-site storage. Estimated losses to sales tax revenue are $4,000 in layaway sales and $20,000 is net sales. Total loss to sales tax revenue could be in excess of $24,000. - The past three years, I have acted in good faith and filed the necessary permits. All three years, the planning commission has approved the request. I would have never expected not to receive the same approval this year. INr�Nu.- �J ti 04 • Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2004 VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: ® ATTACHMENT 2 A. Minor Use Permit 2004-536; a request of Wal-Mart Super Center for consideration of a request to allow 62 metal containers for the temporary storage of holiday merchandise from October 1, 204 through December 31, 2004 on the south and east sides of the existing Super Center Store. 1. Chairman Kirk asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Martin Magana 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 Daniels asked the process for approving a Minor Use Permit. Interim Community Development Director Oscar Orci stated the Minor Use Permit process is administrative. The previous requests were subject to a Conditional Use Permit requirements. However, under the Site Development Permit approval for Wal-Mart Super Center, the Commission added a condition that required the seasonal storage bins come back to the Commission as a Minor Use Permit under Business Items. 3. Commissioner Quill stated that the 2003 minutes should reflect the discussion regarding the number of bins on this site. 4. Commissioner Daniels stated that what staff has provided as Attachment 2 are the conditions for this new site. Accordingly he believes the containers are allowed in the area proposed, subject to a Minor Use Permit being approved by the Commission. 5. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated one of the findings must be that the application will not create conditions that are materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare and is compatible with other properties and land uses in the general vicinity. 6. There be no further questions of staff Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Mickey Anderson, representing Wal-Mart, gave a history of the prior approvals. Mr. Anderson noted Target currently has the containers in place. GAWPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 10- 1 2-04.doc 0.5 Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2004 7. Commissioner Ladner stated she does not understand what the issue is and she does understand the need. 8. Commissioner Quill stated that last year he remembers asking if they would need the additional bins and believes they stated no. He does not like it and it is not a temporary situation. It is permanent and exists for three months out of every year for the life of the Super Wal-Mart: In addition, he does not believe the areas where it will exist have been prepared 'well enough to remove the unsightliness of the containers in a permanent way. If they are to remain for three months of every year for the rest of the life of Wal-Mart, then they should be set up in such a way that they are screened from any public view and the future view from the people developing behind, to the right, to the left and any other direction. He cannot in good conscience in any way support this. 9. Commissioner Ladner stated she does not know what will be developed behind the Wal-Mart, but this request will come back to the Commission each year and they may at some time have to make the determination that it is too much an impact on the adjoining neighbors. 10. Commissioner Quill asked what the process will be in the future since it is being reviewed as a Minor Use Permit. Staff stated the Commission has the discretion to determine whether or not the activity is a detriment to the surrounding communities. Mitigation measures can be established to mitigate the concerns. 11. ' Commissioner Ladner asked the size of the containers. Mr. Anderson stated the retaining wall is 20 feet and the containers are ten feet. Staff noted the wall is eight feet on the Wal-Mart side and approximately ten feet on the other side. 12. Commissioner Daniels stated it seems this was an anticipated use and is the place the condition refers to. In his opinion they are in compliance with the conditions. He would like to request that when this request is submitted next year, he would like to see pictures of this year's event to see if screening would help to hide the containers. Staff noted they would take pictures of the containers and see if additional screening would make a difference. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\10-12-04.doc ; �� Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2004 13. Chairman Kirk stated he too believes the discussion last year was different. He thanked Mr. Anderson for being responsible to apply for the proper permits. He does, however, believe the building should have been constructed to accommodate the holiday merchandise. He believes this can work without the containers. Other retail businesses will have to comply as well. This has been an issue the Commission has never liked and has allowed it under duress. He just does not believe it is an appropriate way to store merchandize. 14. Commissioner Quill stated that if they knew 62 containers would be needed, then why was the building not built to address this need. Mr. Anderson stated that for the Christmas rush they will need to hold on site $12, million worth of merchandise and they do not have the space. 15. Chairman Kirk asked if every retail business should be granted this use. Mr. Anderson stated he does not believe every retail business will need it. Mr. Anderson noted Target already has 11 containers on site. Staff noted Code Compliance was following up on this violation. 16. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment, the public participation portion was closed and opened to Commission discussion. 17. Commissioner Quill stated it is three months out of every year and the areas to place them are not prepared to hide them. They should be screened from any view of anyone on all sides. He cannot support this request in any way. 18. Chairman Kirk asked what the outcome would be if it were a two to two vote. City Attorney Kathy Jenson noted it would - be a failed vote and a member is absent, it would be brought back at the next meeting hoping all members would be present. She would recommend they continue the issue. 19. Commissioner Quill asked if this would go to the Council if they denied it. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated it would only go to Council if it was appealed within a15 day period. It would come back to the Commission before it would -be placed on the Council agenda. It is unlikely it will be on the Council agenda even if an appeal was filed tomorrow before the first meeting in November G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 10- 1 2-04.doc 07 • Planning Commission Minutes October 12, 2004 • and more likely it would be the second meeting in November. Mr. Anderson stated it is a nature of the beast. It might be an error -of the company for not planning on these store containers, but he. would like to make a plea for the Commission to understand. He filed the application for a Conditional Use Permit in August and the Minor Use Permit the first of October. 20. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Ladner/Daniels to adopt Minute Motion 2004-015, approving Minor Use Permit 2004-536, as recommended. The motion failed with Commissioners Ladner and Daniels voting yes and Commissioners Kirk and Quill voting no. 21. Commissioner Daniels asked that Commissioner Krieger be given a copy of the tape and be prepared to make a decision. 22. Staff asked if it would make any difference if staff worked with applicant to develop additional screening for the containers. Chairman Kirk stated probably not with his or Commissioner Quill's vote. 23. Commissioner Quill stated that if this is to be a problem with all the retail store stores, he would request the application come before the Commission earlier in the year to give the applicant's time to address the decision of the Commission. It is unfair to the applicant to be before the Commission at this late a date with anticipation that he would have an approval. B. Sin Permit 2004- 6, Amendment #1; a request of Thomas Enterprises/Signarama f consideration of an Amendment to an exist sign program for The Pa ' ion at La Quinta project, located at the northeast corner of Highway1 and Adams Street, within The Pavilions at La Quinta. 1. Chairman Kirk asked for the s ff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information ontained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in th Community Development Department. 2. There be no further questions of staff, Chai%the rk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commisr. Bob Dawd, representing the applicant, gave a history ooject. 08 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\ 10- 1 2-04.doc • 4ey Anderson Store Manager WAL*MART 79-295 Highway 111 La Quinta, Ca 92253 760-564-3313 OCT �4 4 2004 Mr. Thomas P. Genovese- City Manager City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Ca 92253-1504 October 14th, 2004 I am requesting to file an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision during the October 12th Planning Commision meeting to not allow temporary storage containers on the Wal-Mart property at 79-295 Highway 111. This appeal is being filed with consideration of the following points: - The decision may not be legal: Outside storage containers are allowed on this site per SDP 2002-728 #88, and a minor use permit must be obtained prior to such container storage. The planning commission accepted this condition prior to approval of the project, and now is denying the right to exercise this condition. Outside council is currently investigating this matter. - The city has made numerous errors costing precious time: The original application was filed in August as a conditional use permit under City employee direction. The application was to provide trailer storage October 1st to December 31st 2004. It was later found that the application should have been filed as a minor use permit causing delay for Planning Commision review to October 12th, 11 days after the original date of request. - As a result of the October 12th decision and the delay in the application process, I now have a concern for employee and public safety. The merchandise is now here, and without the additional square footage for storage I am running out of safe options for merchandise storage. - The sales tax revenue that Wal-Mart collects for the City of La Quinta will be reduced by not allowing on-site storage. Estimated losses to sales tax revenue are $4,000 in layaway sales and $20,000 is net sales. Total loss to sales tax revenue could be in excess of $24,000. - The past three years, I have acted in good faith and filed the necessary permits. All three years, the planning commission has approved the request. I would have never expected not to receive the same approval this year. V „J I Mr. Thomas P. Genovese- City Manager City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Ca 92253-1504 October 14th, 2004 1 am requesting to file an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision during the October 12th Planning Commision meeting to not allow temporary storage containers on the Wal-Mart property at 79-295 Highway 111. This appeal is being filed with consideration of the following points: - The decision may not be legal: Outside storage containers are allowed on this site per SDP 2002-728 #88, and a minor use permit must be obtained prior to such container storage. The planning commission accepted this condition prior to approval of the project, and now is denying the right to exercise this condition. Outside council is currently investigating this matter. - The city has made numerous errors costing precious time: The original application was filed in August as a conditional use permit under City employee direction. The application was to provide trailer storage October 1 st to December 31 st 2004. It was later found that the application should have been filed as a minor use permit causing delay for Planning Commision review to October 12th, 11 days after the original date of request. - As a result of the October 12th decision and the delay in the application process, I now have a concern for employee and public safety. The merchandise is now here, and without the additional square footage for storage I am running out of safe options for merchandise storage. - The sales tax revenue that Wal-Mart collects for the City of La Quinta will be reduced by not allowing on-site storage. Estimated losses to sales tax revenue are $4,000 in layaway sales and $20,000 is net sales. Total loss to sales tax revenue could be in excess of $24,000. - The past three years, I have acted in good faith and filed the necessary permits. All three years, the planning commission has approved the request. I would have never expected not to receive the same approval this year. 1Hr�Nu— ��J 1 Ockey Anderson Store Manager 00 WAL*MART 79-295 Highway 111 La Quinta, Ca 92253 760-564-3313 Mr. Thomas P. Genovese- City Manager City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, Ca 92253-1504 October 14th, 2004 1 am requesting to file an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision during the October 12th Planning Commision meeting to not allow temporary storage containers on the Wal-Mart property at 79-295 Highway 111. This appeal is being filed with consideration of the following points: - The decision may not be legal: Outside storage containers are allowed on this site per SDP 2002-728 #88, and a minor use permit must be obtained prior to such container storage. The planning commission accepted this condition prior to approval of the project, and now is denying the right to exercise this condition. Outside council is currently investigating this matter. - The city has made numerous errors costing precious time: The original application was filed in August as a conditional use permit under City employee direction. The application was to provide trailer storage October 1 st to December 31 st 2004. It was later found that the application should have been filed as a minor use permit causing delay for Planning Commision review to October 12th, 11 days after the original date of request. - As a result of the October 12th decision and the delay in the application process, I now have a concern for employee and public safety. The merchandise is now here, and without the additional square footage for storage I am running out of safe options for merchandise storage. - The sales tax revenue that Wal-Mart collects for the City of La Quinta will be reduced by not allowing on-site storage. Estimated losses to sales tax revenue are $4,000 in layaway sales and $20,000 is net sales. Total loss to sales tax revenue could be in excess of $24,000. - The past three years, I have acted in good faith and filed the necessary permits. All three years, the planning commission has approved the request. I would have never expected not to receive the same approval this year. 1Hr�Nu— ��J 1 1111111111u�nismg9l Token Project Type MUP Project# 2004-535 La Quinta Box# 35 Ticket -Box 9307- 0 r) D O D O c. n 8 U 364 HERMITAGE MR. & MRSm LARRY MCNABB 8 U 364 HERMITAGE _.I I Z I I I ♦, QUINTAm CAL.IFORNIA 156.56' SITE PLAN SCALE: 1/8" = 1'-0" I w 0 V M PF DRAWN CHECKED DATE JUNE 3, 2004 SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0" JOB NO. 9 0 1. 1 9 3 SHEET OF SHEETS U I co _.I I Z I I I PF DRAWN CHECKED DATE JUNE 3, 2004 SCALE 1/8" = 1'-0" JOB NO. 9 0 1. 1 9 3 SHEET OF SHEETS 21'-0" 28'-0" 2'-0" 7'-9" 16'-9" 1'-6" LLJ � IQ �I 156.56' �I{1 ■ o < i w N v I IL c I Z Eolv '4 p azcv I �y 11- H— w o rn FAU FIRE = LL w i RING U r I BEDROOM NOW z i 16'-3" X 16'-0" BATH0 0 V W N ■ GV> CoQ I ■ NEW PATIO W SIMILAR TO W ol rEl CONCRETE IN p J I � BACK YARD ® 4 CLOSET J • ■ REF. El I co rn u • I � i I ■ I I ■ I • ■ I ' 1 • I I ■ I ■ EXISTING RESIDENCE ' m m oz LL- �j � �cr(-D� c� J LJ Q 0 Z ti � ti I p Q Z co J I I DRAWN i ICHECKED DATE N 0 R T H F L 0 0 R P L A N JUNE 3, 2004 SCALE � 5 !4 = - 1/4" = 1'-0" I JOB NO. 9 0 1 . 1 9 3 SHEET INk AV i OF SHEETS 4n I CLAY TILE & ROOF SLOPE TO MATCH EXISTING RESIDENCE STUCCO COLOR & FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING El 00 o IInnnnl�a Cl ❑ SOUTH ELEVATION GUEST HOUSE ADDITION SCALE: 1/4" = V-0" / 1 \ WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SCALE: I/4" = 1'-0" CLAY TILE & ROOF SLOPE TO MATCH EXISTING RESIDENCE STUCCO COLOR & FINISH TO MATCH EXISTING / / N O R T H E L E V A T 10 N GUEST HOUSE ADDITION SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" Ar REVISIONS I BY DRAWN CHECKED DATE JUNE 15, 2004 SCALE 1/4" = 1'-0" JOB NO. 9 0 1 . 1 9 3 SHEET OF SHEETS N u P 6c(— 53�o SEPARATOR SHEET i P, viii im 10 1 SOURCE: Kehh International, Inc., January 18, 2002 HW'f 111 ENTRY MONuME] SIGN (WEST) i GAS STATION -� S!GN i EXISTING AUTO CENTRE AT LA OUINTA GAS STATION F HWY 111 ENTRY MONUMENT '7 / C:('\i /C ACT1 _ • AVFRM,F i ANnsraPc PROPOSED BUS STOP FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AREA FIGURES Proposed Site Pl-ari