2004 10 26 PCI I �
Planning Commission Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-guinta.org
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
OCTOBER 26, 2004
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2004-081
Beginning Minute Motion 2004-017
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled
for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your
comments to three minutes.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of the Minutes for the Special Joint Meeting of September
28, 2004 and the Regular Meeting of October 12, 2004.
B. Department Report
S:\Website Updates\Community DevelopmentTCAgendaW10-26.doc
V. PUBLIC HEARING:
For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must
be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission
consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested
the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time.
Any person may submit written comments to the La Quinta Planning Commission
before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to,
the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any
project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City
at, or prior to the public hearing.
A. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-812
Applicant.......... Chick-Fil-A
Location........... North side of Highway 1 1 1, east of Adams Street within
The Pavilion at La Quinta project
Request............ Consideration of development plans and signs for a 4,694
gross square foot restaurant with a drive through lane
Action .............. Resolution 2004-
B. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-816
Applicant.......... K. Hovnanian Homes/Forecast Homes
Location........... Northwest corner of Avenue 52 and Monroe Street within
Tract 30092
Request............ Consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for
three new single-family prototype residential units, each
with three different elevations, for Tentative Tract Map
30092
Action .............. Resolution 2004-
VI. BUSINESS ITEM: None
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
Vlll. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Review of City Council meeting
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular
Meeting to be held on November 9, 2004, at 7:00 p.m.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare
that the foregoing agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of
Tuesday, October 26, 2004, was posted on the outside entry to the Council
Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico, the bulletin board at the La Quinta Post Office,
Chamber of Commerce, and Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 1 1 1, on Friday, October
22, 2004.
DATED: October 22, 2004
BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
Public Notices
The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special
equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at
777-7025, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations
will be made.
If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning
Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by , contacting the City
Clerk's office at 777-7025. A one (1) week notice is required.
If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a
Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all
documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for
distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00
p.m. meeting.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
October 12, 2004 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Ladner to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Rick Daniels, Kay Ladner, Paul Quill, and
Chairman Tom Kirk. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Daniels/Ladner to excuse Commissioner Krieger.
C. Staff present: Oscar Orci, Interim Community Development Director, City
Attorney Kathy Jenson, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, Principal
Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, Associate Planners Wallace Nesbit,
Martin Magana, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of the
regular meeting of September 28, 2004. There being no corrections, it
was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to approve
the minutes as submitted.
B. Department Report. City Attorney Kathy Jenson noted a correction on
the Agenda that was pointed out by a member of the public. The
Declaration of Posting should have stated the meeting of October 12,
2004.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Continued - Environmental Assessment 2004-516 and Site Development
Permit 2004-81 1; a request of Rich Boureston for consideration of
development plans to construct a 42,000 square foot medical office
building on 3.44 acres for the property located at the southeast corner of
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 0-1 2-04.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
Washington Street and Lake La Quinta Drive.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and 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. Staff noted a change
to Condition 33.A.1.a.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Daniels asked if the conditions were all corrected.
Staff stated yes.
3. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Rich Boureston, the applicant, stated they have
reviewed the conditions and have no objections.
4. Chairman Kirk noted the building was moved 15 feet out of the
Washington Street setback, but he sees there is an easement on
the plans he did not see on the prior submittal. Mr. Boureston
stated this is a proposed utility easement line.
5. Commissioner Quill stated he had spoken with Mr. Boureston prior
to the meeting. He requested the wainscoat be stone and stone
be added around the north entry doors.
6. Commissioner Daniels asked for clarification on Commissioner's
Quills recommendation. He asked what the cost might be. Mr.
Boureston stated it would be very costly. The problem is that
there will be shrubs planted around the building in front of the
wainscoat and the stone will be lost. He would have no problem
doing the north face around the door, but this is not an entry door.
It is an employee entrance and he does not want to• accentuate
this door.
7. Commissioner Quill stated he would still prefer to see it on this
doors.
8. Chairman Kirk stated he would not want to see it around the
employee entrance. He asked if a vertical element would help,
such as palm trees. Mr. Boureston stated a traffic study had been
completed for this project and that study stated there is no need
for a deceleration lane. The City's staff conditioned them for this.
Now in addition to that, the Commission is asking for the extra
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\10-12-04.doc 2
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
cost of the stone work. He is trying to keep his costs down.
9. Commissioner Quill stated he understands his request. The
deceleration lane is a request of the City Council and not an issue
for the Commission. He does not think the ledger stone is that
much of a cost. Mr. _Sakahara, the architect, stated they could
use a low seat wall, with stone on the ledger wall surrounded by
landscaping to enhance the patio area.
10. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being no further comment, the public participation portion of
the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion.
11. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Ladner/Daniels to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-076 approving Site
Development Permit 2004-81 1, as recommended/amended:
a. Condition #33.A.1.a: amended to read 58 feet instead of
66 feet.
b. Condition added: applicant shall install ledger stone with
benches and tall canopy trees at the northern entrance to
accentuate the patio area..
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, Quill and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Krieger.
ABSTAIN: None.
B. Continued - Village Use Permit 2004-019; a request of Dr. John Dixon
for consideration of development plans for construction of a 4,494
square foot addition to an existing 1,450 square foot building for medical
and office uses for the property located at the northeast corner of Desert
Club Drive and Calle Cadiz.
1. Chairman Kirk excused himself due to a potential conflict of
interest due to the location of his home and left the dais.
2. Vice Chairman Quill 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.
3. Vice Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Daniels asked if staff had any response to the letter
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 0-1 2-04.doe 3
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
received from Mr. Tom Kirk. Staff stated they had asked the
applicant to make some of the changes noted in the letter. In
regard to the parking reduction, staff believes this is what the City
is trying to achieve in the Village. In regard to the noise, staff
asked the applicant to move the air conditioning units and he
indicated they could be moved further from the property line along
with the trash enclosure to create enough room on the west side
of the building. In regard to Mr. Kirk's request to view the
landscaping, staff noted they are a public file and anyone can
review them. Unfortunately, staff does not know when they will
be submitted. A condition could be added that the three adjacent
property owners be notified when they are received.
4. Vice Chairman Quill asked about the parking requirement. Staff
noted this was a general office, not a medical office so the number
of required parking spaces is reduced. Vice Chairman Quill asked
about the lighting plan. Staff noted the lighting on the site plan
and stated there is no overhead lighting proposed. Vice Chairman
Quill asked if this was to be a general office use and not a medical
office. Staff confirmed this was true.
5. Commissioner Ladner asked about the existing eucalyptus trees.
Staff stated they are on the property line. Staff has asked the
Building and Safety Department about alternative materials and
construction for the wall and they recommended some materials to
be used and construction alternatives. The wall would be
reviewed during the landscape plan review. The wall could be
constructed to go around the trees.
6. Vice Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address
the Commission. Mr. Skip Lynch, representing the applicant,
gave a presentation on the project. In regard to the letter from Mr.
Kirk, they have reviewed the request with staff and as noted by
staff, have made changes based on the requests. They will
relocate the air conditioning units and move the trash enclosure.
In regard to the landscaping, they have no issues and can
accommodate the request. They are looking into different wall
materials to not damage the trees and have discussed the trees
with Mr. Kirk.
7. Vice Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. Commissioner Daniels asked if the applicant had
received the Fire Department comments. Mr. Lynch stated yes,
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\10-12-04.doc 4
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
and they have no objections.
8. Commissioner Ladner asked if anyone knew the condition of the
trees. Mr. Lynch stated they have not had the opportunity to
address the health of the trees.
9. Vice Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment.
Mr. Tom Kirk, 78-105 Calle Cadiz, thanked staff for addressing his
concerns correctly. His only issue outstanding is the wall and
trees. He stated speaking to an arborist is a good idea to see if
they are worth trying to keep. Generally, staff has done a good
job addressing his concerns and he looks forward to working with
Mr. Lynch and staff to resolve the issues.
10. Vice Chairman Quill closed the public participation portion of the
hearing and opened it for Commission discussion.
11. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-077, approving
Village Use Permit 2004-019, as recommended/amended:
a. Condition added: the applicant shall move the air
conditioning units and trash enclosure. The applicant will
look into materials for the wall that will not damage the
trees.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, and Vice Chairman
Quill. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Kirk and
Krieger. ABSTAIN: None.
Chairman Kirk rejoined the Commission.
C. Conditional Use Permit 2004-086; 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 informed everyone no action was necessary as the
application had been withdrawn.
D. Tentative Tract Map 30185, 1st Time Extension; a request of T D Desert
Development for consideration of a time extension to subdivide
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\10-12-04.doc 5
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
approximately 3.62 acres into seven single-family residential lots, one
open space lot, and a well site, for the property located at the southwest
corner of Cabrillo Way and Mission Drive West, within Rancho La Quinta.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and 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 about the subdivision criteria for this
application.
3. Commissioner Quill stated they are given two years and they can
be granted three extensions. Staff noted no changes can be made
to the map during this process. The Commission should determine
if there are any changes and add any changes they believe are
necessary.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant or if there was any other
comment. There being none the public participation portion of the
hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion.
5. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-078, recommending
approval of Tentative Tract Map 30185, Vt Extension of Time, as
recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, Quill, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Krieger.
ABSTAIN: None
E. Environmental Assessment 2004-521 and General Plan Amendment
2004-102; a request of the City for consideration of adopting a Negative
Declaration of environmental impact and Amendment to the General Plan
Housing Element.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information
contained in the report a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department. Staff introduced Colin Drukker, The
Planning Center, the City's consultant.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\10-12-04.doc 6
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
2. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if
there was any other public comment. Mr. Arturo Rodriguez,
representing California Rural Legal Assistance (CRLA), stated he
had appeared at the Commission meeting of September 28, and at
that time he was given two weeks to review the September draft
Housing Element. He noted he received the packet on Monday, for
the October 12th meeting. He will be submitting written comment
before the City Council meeting of October 19th. His comments
today are limited to the history of CRLA's participation. He noted
that a page is missing between Pages 42-43 of the comment
letters. He also noted they do not agree with staff's Response to
Comments.
3. Commissioner Daniels noted Southern California Association of
Governments (SCAG) assigns the numbers the City must meet for
its affordable housing quota and the City has worked toward
meeting that quota and it is his understanding the City has met
their quota. He asked Mr. Rodriguez if he was saying the City has
not. Mr. Rodriguez stated that what they have seen in the
Housing Element, not all the concerns have been addressed. For
example, the Hammer property is stated to be owned by the City
and will accommodate 300 + units, but they do not know if this is
true. This is a large number. He noted 92 units will be lost at the
Vista Dunes Mobile Home Park (VDMHP). These units need to be
replaced and are not a part of the SCAG numbers. Commissioner
Daniels asked if he was implying the loss of the VDMHP units
should be added in to the SCAG numbers and CRLA does not
believe the other programs the City has will accommodate them.
Mr. Rodriguez stated most of the affordable housing needs are
being met strictly by City's Redevelopment funds. No outside
funds are being used to meet the low income housing needs and
they believe that is a concern. The City's Housing Element is
supposed to be in compliance by June of next year and next year
the process will be repeated all over again. Commissioner Daniels
noted however the City has achieved its numbers regardless of
what method is used. Mr. Rodriguez stated his concern is that the
City needs to identify other revenue available to them instead of
depending on the Redevelopment Agency for the funding of
housing projects. He notes the Housing Element states that the
City does not qualify for State and Federal funds and they are not
sure this is true. He needs more time to review the responses.
Commissioner Daniels asked how La Quinta's Housing Element
compares to the other communities in the Valley for compliance.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\10-12-04.doc 7
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
The feedback they have received is that they are doing very well.
Other cities have stated they are struggling and doubt they will
ever meet their quota. Mr. Rodriguez stated most cities have
problems constructing affordable housing because of cost and
there is no desire to build affordable housing. There is another city
in the Coachella Valley that does not address any affordable
housing in their Housing Element. He noted the City is way above
the housing numbers allocated for moderate and above moderate.
4. Chairman Kirk stated this public hearing process was continued to
allow Mr. Rodriguez time to review the document and provide
comment. To some degree he believes this was a waste of the
Commission's time as he has not provided any comment. He has
had the material for two weeks and still provides no comment.
Mr. Rodriguez stated the City's Responses to Comments were just
received yesterday with the staff report for this meeting.
5. City Attorney Kathy Jenson noted for the record the City's
Redevelopment Agency acquired the Hammer property in March,
2004. The Specific Plan for the residential portion of this site will
be before the Commission very shortly. It is for 300 very low
rental units.
6. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Quill to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004-079 recommending
to the City Council certification of a Negative Declaration of
environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2004-0521,
as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, Quill, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Krieger.
ABSTAIN: None
8. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/ to adopt
Planning Commissioner Resolution 2004-080 recommending to the
City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 2004-102, as
recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Ladner, Quill, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Krieger.
ABSTAIN: None
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\10-12-04.doc 8
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
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
Magaha 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\10-12-04.doc 9
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 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 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 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\10-12-04.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 an 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 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. 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\10-12-04.doc 12
Planning Commission Minutes
October 12, 2004
Sign -a -Rama, representing the applicant, gave a history of the
project.
3. There being no other public comment, the public participation
portion was closed and open to Commission discussion.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if exceptions had been approved prior. Staff
stated yes.
5. Commissioner Quill asked if it was any problem for the larger
tenants to come before the Commission for approval of a sign
larger than a 100 square feet in size. Staff stated no.
6. Chairman Kirk stated he would not want to see a small tenant with
a 150 square foot sign. Mr. Duarte stated the smaller tenant
would still have to comply with the sign standards.
7. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Daniels/Quill to
adopt Minute Motion 2004-016, approving Sign Permit 2004-786,
as recommended. Unanimously approved.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Interim Community Development Director Oscar Orci asked the status of
the Commissioners attendance at council meeting. Staff would see that
the Commissioners receive the schedule in the next packet.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Daniels/Quill to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on October 19, 2004, at 7:00 p.m.
This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:47 p.m., on October 12,
2004.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\10-12-04.doc 13
SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE
LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING COMMISSION
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE
COMMUNITY SERVICES COMMISSION
CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION
INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD
MINUTES
SEPTEMBER 28, 2004
A special joint meeting of the La Quinta City Council and La Quinta Boards,
Commissions, and Committees was called to order at the hour of 5:00 p.m. by
Mayor Adolph.
PRESENT: Council Members - Henderson, Osborne, Perkins, Sniff, Mayor Adolph
ABSENT: None
Mayor Adolph led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
PUBLIC COMMENT — None
BUSINESS SESSION
1. CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FROM COACHELLA VALLEY ARTS
ALLIANCE REGARDING SPONSORSHIP OF A ROSE PARADE FLOAT.
Assistant City Manager Weiss presented the staff report and introduced
Darlene Dolan and Elsa Loudon, representing the Coachella Valley Arts
Alliance, present for the purpose of answering Council's questions.
Darlene Dolan in response to a question from Council Member Sniff stated
she will be presenting this request to each City in the Valley. She said she
has been invited to make a presentation to the Coachella City Council next
week.
Council Member Sniff stated he has not found a public purpose that would
benefit each citizen of La Quinta. Mrs. Loudon responded that this is a
wonderful opportunity for La Quinta and the whole Coachella Valley to be
recognized on one of the most -watched programs on television every year.
Minutes of Joint City Council Meeting 3 September 28, 2004
with City Boards, Commissions, and Committees
Commissioner Quill stated he has had discussions with Council Member
Henderson and felt a summary, regarding the status of annexations, from her
would be very helpful. Council Member Henderson advised that in order to
take an annexation request to LAFCO, a fiscal analysis must be prepared and
submitted with the annexation application. The analysis must show the area
in question can be financially solvent. She explained that the settlement
reached in Proposition 1 A, will take two-thirds of the Vehicle in Lieu Fees,
(VLF) from the Cities for a period of two years. At the end of that period the
amount of the funds taken away will be returned to the cities, but not by
way of the VLF. It will be returned in the form of increased property tax
revenues. She further explained areas wishing to annex into existing cities
have currently not been receiving VLF and therefore would be unable to
include them as a revenue source in their fiscal analysis to LAFCO. She said
the cost of providing infrastructure and services not adequately funded by
income generated in those areas, places an unfair burden on existing city
residents.
Council Member Sniff stated he and Council Member Henderson have been
serving on a City Council Sub -committee meeting with staff and Council
Members from the City of Coachella to discuss annexations. He said the City
of Coachella has indicated a willingness to reduce their Sphere of Influence
basically to Jackson Street. He reported activity generated by the County
Redevelopment Agency and the Enterprise Zone creates problems because
developments in these areas will require infrastructure such as streets,
sewers, etc. He referenced two attempts by Bermuda Dunes residents to
annex into the City of La Quinta, reporting that studies showed this would
not be a viable proposal.
Commissioner Quill asked what the north/south and east/west boundaries for
the Coachella Sphere of Influence would be. Council Member Sniff advised
the boundary running north/south would be at Jackson Street and the
east/west boundaries have not been discussed to date.
Mayor Adolph reported he has been approached by the Torres Martinez Band
of Indians and they are interested in discussing the subject of the City
boundaries.
STREET NAME CHANGES
Interim Director Orci advised the matter of the process for street name
changes came up recently and suggested the need for a possible change in
policy to allow better input from the Planning Commission.
Minutes of Joint City Council Meeting 5 September 28, 2004
with City Boards, Commissions, and Committees
Commission both read and valued that input and agreed much stricter
controls on the design were needed.
Commissioner Ladner said she felt it looked like a "tilt -up" building but as a
newly appointed member of the Planning Commission was unsure if that was
a permitted use in the proposed area. She was happy when the other
Planning Commissioners took action to require firmer design standards.
Council Member Osborne commented on the need to look at the commercial
building guidelines. He stated this was established as a goal at last year's
joint meeting.
Council Member Henderson inquired as to why the planning staff allowed
that project to go forward to the ALRC and Planning Commission.
Interim Director Orci replied the staff is trying to balance the requirements to
be a user-friendly department as well as trying to have developments that
meet the high standards for the City. He related at times developers are
adamant about their designs and will not listen to staff's suggestions. When
that occurs, they (staff) simply need to let the projects go forward to have
the legislative bodies of the City re -enforce the standards they have
established.
Council Member Perkins encouraged the ALRC members to be extremely
vocal about the recommendations they make to the Planning Commission.
Committee Member Frank Christopher felt staff has the ability to put a
developer on notice even without adopting formal standards and guidelines.
He said this would, however, be a very helpful tool.
Council Member Henderson asked if it should be a guideline or a standard.
City Attorney Jenson stated the Municipal Code already provides the
guidelines contained within Chapter 9.10 and she read some of the
applicable sections (9.210.010 and 9.200.060 E).
Commissioner Ladner thanked the City Council for the opportunity to have
this joint discussion. She felt it was very helpful.
Mayor Adolph thanked the Commission and Committee members and
declared a recess at 6:38 p.m.
Minutes of Joint City Council Meeting 7 September 28, 2004
with City Boards, Commissions, and Committees
Director Horvitz answered they do close down completely but La Quinta is
trying some experimental methods for over -seeding and turf maintenance.
She also reported the new Recreation Supervisor is attending the user group
meetings and trying to let them know what is needed to keep the fields in
top condition. She outlined some of the outside sources of funding the
Community Services Department will be utilizing this year.
Council Member Sniff said the City needs to be on the lookout for additional
property to use for park sites.
Commissioner Hackney said he feels interaction with the people is very
valuable. He spoke to the traffic complaints he hears, saying he would like
to be able to give a positive answer. Council Member Henderson suggested
it would be good to point out such things as Miles Avenue is about to reopen
which will take traffic pressure off of the intersection of Washington Street
and Highway111. She also advised the widening of Jefferson Avenue is
about to start and will take a good deal of traffic from Highway 111 to the I-
10 freeway when it is completed.
Council Member Sniff stated he could also reply to traffic comments that the
City is planning ahead to address traffic problems.
Mayor Adolph added the City's planning has included adding entrances to
businesses located on Highway 111 from streets like Avenue 47, Avenue
48, and Adams Street.
Commissioner Hackney asked about the bus routes. She feels a need to
install bus shelters as soon as possible at locations on Highway 1 1 1. City
Manager Genovese responded and explained the reason for the lag time on
Highway 111 and the steps being taken to plan ahead for when the
necessary approvals from Cal Trans are received to erect these bus shelters.
Mayor Adolph recessed the meeting at 7:18 p.m.
COUNCIL MEMBER OSBORNE left the meeting at 7:20 p.m.
Minutes of Joint City Council Meeting 9 September 28, 2004
with City Boards, Commissions, and Committees
Commissioner Reynolds announced that local author Joyce Spicer will have
one of her works performed at the McCallum Theater, October 81h and 9",
2004. She also distributed flyers for the Lake Arrowhead Little Theater and
encouraged the Council to visit it. She felt it is a beautiful addition to that
community and stated it is even used as a place for the City Council to
meet.
Mayor Adolph asked staff if the maintenance program the Council put in
place a year ago is still being followed. City Manager Genovese confirmed
the program is still in effect and when lights go out at that art work location
a regular inspection program assures they are replaced in a prompt manner.
Council Member Henderson said she would like to reply to the "How are we
doing" question. She stated the Commission is a difficult one because it is
hard to harness the talents, enthusiasm and energies the five members
possess. She said she feels at this time funding is not available to do the
scale of events the Commission would like to undertake.
Chairperson Loudon responded the Commission is not thinking about
spending a lot of money. She said they would like to use local talent for
these events.
Council Member Sniff said he feels the Commission can do more but their
programs need to be tailored to the community with emphasis on seniors and
young children.
Council Member Perkins stated this is a young city with a young population.
He feels it will be very hard to compete with other cities who have
established cultural events and facilities.
Commissioner Lane said she believes the Commission can find a venue to
make La Quinta as well-known as some of the other cities in the valley.
Mayor Adolph recessed the meeting at 8:08 p.m.
1-D. DISCUSSION OF MATTERS OF JOINT INTEREST TO THE MEMBERS OF THE
CITY COUNCIL AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION.
PRESENT: Commissioners Sharp, Wright, and Chairperson Wilbur
ABSENT: Puente (excused) and Mouriquand (excused)
Mayor Adolph opened the meeting at 8:12 p.m. and turned it over to
Chairperson Wilbur to begin the Commission comments.
Minutes of Joint City Council Meeting 1 1
with City Boards, Commissions, and Committees
September 28, 2004
1-E. DISCUSSION OF MATTERS OF JOINT INTEREST TO THE MEMBERS OF THE
CITY COUNCIL AND INVESTMENT ADVISORY BOARD.
PRESENT: Board Members, Moulin, Olander, Mahfoud and Chairperson
Lewis
ABSENT: Deniel (excused)
Mayor Adolph called the meeting back to order at 8:48 p.m. He asked that
the Board address any issues they would like to discuss.
Chairperson Lewis'asked about the status of the Investment Advisory Board
(IAB) work plan. Council Member Henderson stated she felt it was on -hold
pending this meeting and a discussion of the Board's position regarding a
money manager.
Board Member Olander stated the IAB has spent a good deal of time during
the past year investigating whether or not to recommend the City retain a
money manager. He also addressed the Fanny Mae "situation" and stated
the Board has been watching it for some time.
Chairperson Lewis stated he felt the Board is not suggesting the City go out
and hire a money manager but feels it is prudent to look into this and
understand the pros and cons. He explained the City's portfolio is growing
and becoming more complex.
Council Member Perkins questioned if a money manager would be someone
who would be employed by the City.
Board Member Moulin stated that on advice from the City Attorney,
recommendations regarding a money manager were eliminated from the
work plan because, pursuant to the Municipal Code, such a position would
report to the City Treasurer. He felt since the City Treasurer is presently
performing the money management of the City's portfolio, having an outside
money manager reporting to him would be redundant.
Chairperson Lewis said, in response to a question from Council Member
Henderson, using a money manager would not represent a loosening of the
safeguards that the Board has put in place. He explained his discussion with
City Treasurer John Falconer has been that only a portion of the City's
portfolio would be turned over to a money manager. He felt that portion
would only include the very long term funds.
Minutes of Joint City Council Meeting 13 September 28, 2004
with City Boards, Commissions, and Committees
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, it was moved by Council Members Sniff/Perkins to
adjourn. Motion carried unanimously.
Respectfully submitted,
JUNE S. GREEK, City Clerk
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 26, 2004
CASE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-812
APPLICANT: CHICK-FIL-A
REPRESENTATIVE: KERR PERMIT SERVICES
LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 1 1 1, EAST OF ADAMS STREET IN
THE PAVILION AT LA QUINTA PROJECT
REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND SIGNS FOR A 4,694 GROSS
SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE-THRU LANE.
ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSESSED
IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2003-481, PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066, WHICH
WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 7,
2003. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE
PROPOSED, NOR HAS ANY NEW INFORMATION BEEN
SUBMITTED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF
A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. THIS REQUEST
IMPLEMENTS THE APPROVED SPECIFIC PLAN.
ZONING: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
SURROUNDING
ZONING AND
LAND USES: NORTH: CP / MINI STORAGE FACILITY AND CR / POST
OFFICE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND GYM
SOUTH: CR / AUTO CENTER
EAST: CR/VACANT
WEST: CR / ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER
P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 2004-807 pc rpt.doc
BACKGROUND
The proposed site is part of a 17.5-acre commercial project located at the
northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street (Attachment 1). The
commercial project, which has not yet begun construction, is called the "Pavilion at
La Quinta".
Specific Plan 2003-066 was approved for this property on October 7, 2003 and
allows the construction of a 175,200 square foot shopping center, including five
detached pad buildings, varying from 3,900 to 9,000 square feet in size.
Site Development Permit 2004-807 for the first phase of construction and the sign
program (SA 2004-786) was approved by the Planning Commission on June 8,
2004. This phase consists of three major tenants (A (Henry's Market), B (Bed,
Bath and Beyond) and C►, Shops 1, 2, 3 (Catherine's) and Pads 1 and 3. An
amendment to the sign program was approved by the Planning Commission on
October 12, 2004.
PROJECT PROPOSAL
The architectural and landscaping plans have been submitted for a 4,694 square
foot Chick-fil-A restaurant on Pad 2, located just north of Highway 1 1 1, across the
street from Torre Nissan (Attachment 2).
The approved Specific Plan for this Center indicates the following design guidelines:
Buildings will be "traditional Mediterranean Tuscany village";
• Formula, strongly themed or "corporate" architecture is prohibited;
• Hip, gable and shed tile roofs, or combinations thereof are encouraged for
main building masses;
• Flat roofs with a parapet in combination with the other types of roofs are
permitted;
• Deep set windows and covered plastered arcades are encouraged; and
Exterior wall materials are to consist of an exterior plaster finish.
The proposed restaurant has been designed with the general guidelines noted
above. Exterior materials consist of clay the roofing, a sand finish plaster, some
decorative tile, stacked El Dorado stone wainscot as well as on towers and
arcades. Colors are proposed to include a red blend clay tile, and tan to light
brown plaster and stone. The plaster colors will be used in multiple combinations
on each building to provide a varied streetscape. The colors and materials comply
with those specified in the Specific Plan except for the cornice color which
proposed to be a "brick" red. This color is the same as their corporate sign color
and was accepted by the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC)
since it is used as an accent color only.
p \stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 2004-812 pc rpt.doc
The main building is 20-feet high. The three tower elements are higher with a
maximum of 26-feet high. Section 9.90.050 allows architectural features not
containing usable floor space, such as chimneys, towers, gables and spires to
extend fifteen feet above the maximum structure height if approved as part of a
site development. The restaurant is within 150-feet of Highway 1 1 1, but complies
with the Code height limits.
The project site is adjacent to the 50 foot landscape setback on Highway 111.
The south side of the drive-thru lane abuts the Highway 111 property line.
A conceptual landscaping plan for the restaurant site has been submitted. The
drive -through lane screening is not addressed in the landscape plan. Screening of
the lane and vehicles is typically done with a design that incorporate a retaining
wall/wall, berm and or landscaping. At the ALRC meeting the applicant indicated
the screening would be provided. However, the plan indicates this area will be
landscaped by the master developer of the Center. Staff discussed this matter
with the applicant and they have indicated that they will work with the master
developer to provide it. In order to properly screen the drive -through and minimize
the aesthetic impacts, the applicant will need to provide the screening and have it
installed prior to the restaurants opening. Staff has included a condition requiring
the applicant to submit a plan to screen the drive -through to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Director prior to issuance of a building permit.
Parking lot lighting will consist of shoe -box style lights with flush lenses and 20-
feet in height, These lights will match other lights used in the center. Building wall
lights are shown that appear similar to those approved for the Phase I buildings.
A trash enclosure is shown near the northeast corner of the building. The
enclosure details are not provided.
The specific plan identified this site for restaurant use and included adequate
parking for it. Some parking is provided on the west side of the building, but the
majority of the parking is located to the north in the main parking lot.
SIGN PROPOSAL
The applicant also request approval of signs for the restaurant, which includes
three main building wall signs, directional signs and two menu boards. The
applicable sign provisions from the approved sign program for the center are as
follows:
• One identification sign per side of a building (four maximum) is permitted
when the building is occupied by one tenant.
p \stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 2004-812 pc rpt.doc
• One square foot of sign per linear foot of lease frontage is permitted up to a
maximum of 50 square feet, including logo.
• Supplemental signs such as directional and menu board signs are permitted
for restaurants having drive-thru service subject to approval
• Halo illuminated letters are specified as acceptable. Standard acrylic -faced
illuminated channel letters are allowed with approval on a case -by -case
basis.
The primary internally illuminated wall sign is on the west elevation of the building
on the tower and will read "Chick-fil-A" (1 1'-5" long by 2'-8" and 5-1 " high) in
script. Below Chick-fil-A will be "The Original (9.5" long by 9'-2" high) Chicken
Sandwich" (7'-5" long by 6" high) on two lines in a two -plane cabinet.
Incorporated into the first "C" in chick is a chicken's profile. The total sign area of
this sign will be 50 square feet which is the maximum size allowed by the sign
program. The "Chick-fil-A" face and trim will be red with the returns or sides
white. "The original" letters will be white in color with a red background.
"Chicken Sandwich" will also have white letters with a black background.
On the north -facing building wall tower will be "Chick-fil-A" at 39 square feet (11'-
5" long by 2'-8" and 5-1" high). On the south -facing building wall tower will be
"Chick-fil-A" at 45.1 square feet (12'-3" long by 2'-10.5" and 5'-5" high). These
signs will use the same colors, construction, etc. as the west -facing sign.
Three three -square feet red internally illuminated directional signs are proposed on
the site to direct drivers to the drive-thru lane.
A pre -order menu board at 2"-6" long by 3'-4" high is proposed on the south side
of the building before the order station. To the east adjacent to the building is the
main menu board (6'-10" long by 4' high). Attached to and over the order station
is a red canopy.
The signs will be consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and Pavilion at La
Quinta sign program, and will be in harmony and visually related to the proposed
architecture of the buildings, with the approval of the Planning Commission.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 16,
2004. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the
Public Hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. As of this
writing, no comments have been received.
p \stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 2004-812 pc rpt.doc
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE:
The Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee reviewed this request at their
meeting of October 6, 2004 and adopted Minute Motion 2004-028, recommending
approval of the architectural plans, subject to conditions (Attachment 3).
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS:
The findings needed to approve this Site Development Permit, as noted in the
Zoning Code, can be made as stipulated in the attached Resolution with the
Conditions of Approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- , approving Site Development
Permit 2004-812, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Development Plans
3. Minutes of Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee meeting of
October 6, 2004
Prepared by:
Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner
p \stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 2004-812 pc rpt.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-
A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS
FOR A RESTAURANT WITH A DRIVE -THROUGH LANE
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111
EAST OF ADAMS STREET
CASE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-812
APPLICANT: CHICK-FIL-A
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California did, on the 26' day of October, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing
to consider a request by Chick-Fil-A for approval of a Site Development Permit to
allow a restaurant with a drive -through lane located at the north side of Highway
111 east of Adams Street in The Pavilion at La Quinta center, in the CR (Regional
Commercial) zone district, more particularly described as:
PORTION OF APN: 649-020-063
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published a
public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on the 161h day of October,
2004, as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also
mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site; and
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has
determined that the request has been assessed in conjunction with Environmental
Assessment 2003-481 prepared for Specific Plan 2003-066, for which a Mitigated
Negative Declaration was certified on October 7, 2003. No changed
circumstances or conditions are proposed, nor any new information submitted
which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental review in
accordance with Section 15162 of the Guidelines for Implementation the California
Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify
approval of said Site Development Permit:
1. The project site has a Regional Commercial General Plan designation. The
proposed restaurant is consistent with this land use designation.
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fi1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-Fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
Page 2
2. The proposed restaurant is designed to comply with the Zoning Code and
Specific Plan requirements, including, but not limited to height limits,
parking, lot coverage, and signs.
3. The Community Development Department has determined that this request
has been ,assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2003-
481, prepared for Specific Plan 2003-066, which was certified by the City
Council on October 7, 2003. No changed circumstances or conditions are
proposed, nor has any new information been submitted which would trigger
the preparation of a subsequent environmental review.
4. The architectural design of the project, including, but not limited to the
architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural
details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with the
surrounding development in the center and with the quality of design
prevalent in the City.
5. The site design of the project, including, but not limited to project entries,
interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities,
screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site
design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the
quality of design prevalent in the City.
6. Project landscaping, including, but not limited to the location, type, size,
color, texture, and coverage of plant materials has been designed and
conditioned to provide relief, compliment buildings, visually emphasize
prominent design elements and vistas, provide a harmonious transition
between adjacent land uses and between development and open space,
provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual continuity of the
project, and compliment the surrounding project area, ensuring lower
maintenance and water use. A condition has been included that will require
screening of the drive -through lane from Highway 111 and surrounding
public view.
7. The building signs will comply and be consistent with the intent of the
Zoning Code and Center's sign program.
8. The signs will be consistent with the intent of the Zoning Code and Pavilion
at La Quinta sign program, and will be in harmony and visually related to the
proposed architecture of the buildings, with the approval of the Planning
Commission.
P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 04-812 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-Fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
Page 3
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission
of the City of La Quinta, California as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings
of said Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby acknowledge that Environmental Assessment 2003-
481 has determined that no significant effects on the environment have
been identified and mitigation measures have been imposed; and
3. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2004-812, for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions
of Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission, held on this 26th day of October, 2004, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
OSCAR ORCI, Interim
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\stan\sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 04-812 pc res.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-812
CHICK-FIL-A
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 26, 2004
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site
Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense
counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City,
the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the
following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• SunLine Transit Agency
• SCAQMD Coachella Valley
• Caltrans
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances
from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of
improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when
submitting those improvements plans for City approval.
3. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater
Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water),
LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457, the State Water Resources Control
Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ and conditions of Specific Plan 2003-066 and
Site Development Plan 2004-807.
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
PROPERTY RIGHTS
4. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer
easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper
functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include
irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for
emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of
essential improvements.
5. The applicant shall offer for dedication all public street right-of-ways in
conformance with Specific Plan 2003-066 and Site Development Permit 2004-
807.
6. Direct vehicular access to Highway 1 1 1 is restricted, except for those access
points identified on the Specific Plan 2003-066 and/or SDP 2004-807, or as
otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval.
7. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as
appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading,
retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will
occur.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as
"engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed
to practice their respective professions in the State of California.
8. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the
provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC.
9. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review
and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for
each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the
minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in
writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan
clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other
improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other
agencies and utility purveyors.
P:\Reports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fi1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 2
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
A. On -Site Commercial Precise Grading Plan
B. PM 10 Plan
C. SWPPP
D. Storm Drain Plans
1 " = 20' Horizontal
1 " = 40' Horizontal
1 " = 40' Horizontal
1 " = 40' Horizontal
E. Off -Site Street Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1
4' Vertical
The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan sheet(s) (drawn
at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design
in the combined parkway and landscape setback area.
Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not
listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to
commencing plan preparation.
All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans shall show all existing improvements for
a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient
to show any required design transitions.
"Precise Grading" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements
including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters,
building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements,
retaining and perimeter walls, etc. ADA accessibility to public streets, adjacent
buildings and existing handicap parking shall be shown on the Precise Grading
Plans at a scale to be determined by the Public Works Department.
10. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the
applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction
notes from the City.
11. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all approved
improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The
files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully
retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program.
At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the
improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order
to reflect the as -built conditions.
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fil-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 3
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD
format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City
Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
12. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development, or
fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the City
shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final building
inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project,
or call upon the surety to complete the improvements.
GRADING
13. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC and conditions of Specific Plan 2003-066 and Site
Development Permit 2004-807.
14. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes,
the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer.
15. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain
approval of all of the following:
A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect,
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified
engineer,
C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16,
(Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and
D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with
Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit
and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC.
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary
Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by
an engineering geologist.
The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust
Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit.
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fi1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 4
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
16. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to
prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped
land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such
other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control
Plan.
17. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating
terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F)
except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum
slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for
the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not
exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first
six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of
sidewalk is within six (6) of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the
right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the
curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen
inches (18") behind the curb.
18. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the
site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations
shown on the Preliminary Grading Plan submitted with this Site Development
Permit, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City
Staff for a substantial conformance finding review.
19. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall
provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or
surveyor.
r1RAIK]Ar.p
20. "Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage
report for Parcel Map No. 29351, or as conditioned and modified for SP 2003-
066 and SDP 2004-807 or this Site Development Permit. Nuisance water shall
be disposed of in an approved manner." The tributary drainage area shall extend
to the centerline of adjacent public streets. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in
a trickling sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City
Engineer.
UTILITIES
21. The applicant shall conform with all applicable conditions of SP 2003-066 and
Site Development Permit 2004-807.
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fi1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 5
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
22. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street
Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access
For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and
Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are
proposed.
23. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan street type noted in parentheses.
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Highway 1 1 1 (Major Arterial - State; 140' R/W):
a► No widening of the north side of the street along all
frontage adjacent to the Site Development Permit is required
for its ultimate width as specified in the General Plan and
the requirements of these conditions except at locations
where additional street width is needed to accommodate
conditions of SP 2003-066 and SDP 2004-807.
2) General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited
to those approved by SP 2003-066 and SDP 2004-807.
The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to
ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic
control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets
and sidewalks).
24. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design
procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength
and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum
structural sections shall be as follows:
Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
25. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the
time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete.
The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design
P:\Reports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fi1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 6
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include
recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation
test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current
production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix
designs are approved.
A. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs,
markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs
and sidewalks.
26. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by
the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking
areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
PARKING LOT AND ACCESSWAYS
27. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150, and
conditions of the approved SP 2003-066 and SDP 2004-807; especially the
parking stall and aisle widths and the parking stall striping design. As per the
LQMC Chapter 9.150, the following conditions should apply:
A. Parking aisle widths should be a minimum of 26 feet.
B. Stall lengths where curbs are not provided should be a minimum of 19
feet.
C. The design of the row of stalls and sidewalk along the west side of the
building shall take into account curb overhang requirements and ADA
clearance widths.
D. Parking stall striping shall be the City of La Quinta double striped hairpin
design.
E. All entry doorways shall be ADA accessible and shall be approved in the
precise grading plan process.
CONSTRUCTION
28. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the
buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly-
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fi1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 7
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control
devices, pavement markings and street name signs.
LANDSCAPING
29. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping)
LQMC, as well as all applicable conditions of SP 2003-066 and SDP 2004-807.
30. The applicant shall submit a preliminary level landscape plan (1 "=30' minimum)
for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan
checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been
completed by CDD, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the
Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner.
31. The applicant shall provided or provide written proof that screening of the drive-
thru lane from Highway 111 shall be provided by a combination of earth
berming, planting and/or a short decorative wall. Installation of the approved
screening shall be provided prior to opening of the restaurant.
PUBLIC SERVICES
32. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine
Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
33. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet
with the approval of the City Engineer.
34. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such
other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with
which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate
construction supervision.
35. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements,
sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program,
but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction
materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and
other applicable regulations.
36. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick+i1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 8
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by
the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or
"As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor
certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant
shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City,
revised to reflect the as -built conditions.
MAINTENANCE
37. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance), LQMC.
38. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual
maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access
drives, and sidewalks.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
39. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and
Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City
for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall
be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and
permits.
40. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at
the time of issuance of building permit(s).
FIRE MARSHAL
41. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be
located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the
buildings as measured along outside travel ways.
42. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the
side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations.
43. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run
concurrent with the City plan check.
44. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building
P:\Reports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fi1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 9
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
permit.
45. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
material being placed on an individual lot.
46. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of
the 1 st. floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. Minimum road width is
20 feet clear and unobstructed with a vertical clearance of 13 t/2 feet clear.
Turning radiuses shall be no less than 38 feet outside.
47. Any commercial operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a
Hood/duct system for fire protection (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.).
48. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department for
approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane
painting and/or signs. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of
13"6" clear and unobstructed.
49. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial building (Contact the fire
department for an application).
50. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code.
51. Any submissions to the Fire Department are the responsibility of the applicant.
52. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 2500 gpm
and the actual fire flow from two adjacent hydrants shall be 1500 gpm for a 2-
hour duration at 20-psi residual operating pressure.
MISCELLANEOUS
53. Color of all poles and exterior lighting fixtures shall be approved by the
Community Development Department. Lighting fixtures shall comply with City
outdoor lighting requirements and match those used in the balance of the
shopping center.
54. Comments from the Police Department in their letter dated August 15, 2004 on
file in the Community Development Department shall be considered and
implemented where feasible.
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fi1-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 10
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-812 - Chick-fil-A
Adopted: October 26, 2004
file in the Community Development Department shall be considered and
implemented where feasible.
55. Exterior sills on windows and doors shall match those used in balance of the
center.
56. Crape Myrtle trees shall be replaced with an alternative similar evergreen tree.
57. The major trellis material if wood shall be pressure treated.
58. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide plans and
written proof to the Community Development Department that the drive-thru
lane and vehicles using it shall be screened from view of Highway 111.
Screening shall be provided by the use of a combination of berming, walls,
and/or landscape planting and shall be installed prior to opening of the
restaurant.
59. The outside face of the trash enclosure shall be provided with articulation using
the stone veneer to the satisfaction, due to its exposed location.
P:\Reports - PC\10-26-2004\Chick-Fil-A\sdp 2004-812 pc coa.doc 11
CASE No.
amcem
VICINITY MAP
CASE MAP
ATTACHMENT #1
cc
co
a
w
o z
a �
0
46 ST. AVE.
PROJECT
SITE
® I HIGHWAY 111
ORTH
' SCALE:
SDP 2004-812 NTS
ATTACHMENT
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
October 6, 2004
I. CALL TO ORDER
10►.�00 a.m.
A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscapin eview Committee
was called to order at 10:04 a.m. by Principal P nner Stan Sawa who
led the flag salute.
B. Committee Members present: Bill Bo itt, Frank Christopher, and
David Thorns.
C. Staff present: Principal Plan r Stan Sawa, Associate Planners
Wallace Nesbit and Martin agana, and Executive Secretary Betty
Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF TH GENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT CALEND .
A. Staff ask if there were any changes to the Minutes of September 8,
2004. There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by
Com ittee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to approve the Minutes as
su itted. Unanimously approved.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Site Development Permit 2004-812; a request of Chick-Fil-A for
consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a restaurant
with a drive -through located on the north side of Highway 1 1 1, east
of Adams Street in the Pavilion at La Quinta Center.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department. Staff introduced Debra
Kerr, Kerr Project Services, and Greg Lollis, with Chick-Fil-A,
project representatives, who gave a presentation on the project.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\10-6-04 WD.doc
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
October 6, 2004
2. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if there was a way to make a
provision for the developer's landscaping plans be noted to
address the landscaping for the screening of the drive through
so this will be picked up. Are there any other drive-throughs?
Staff stated yes, and it will have a similar landscaping issue.
Mr. Lollia explained the reason for the long drive through is to
separate the drive through first for safety and second to remove
it from the Center's circulation pattern.
3. Committee Member Christopher asked if the berming/landcaping
to screen the drive through was a requirement prior to opening.
Staff stated yes, it is a condition of approval.
4. Committee Member Thorns recommended berming be required.
Staff stated the developer is required to include berming, but
staff is unaware of the exact location. Committee Member
Thorns stated the Crepe Myrtle trees should be replaced with a
tree that will be green more often. Mr. Lollia stated they would
refer the Committee's recommendation to the landscape
architect.
5. Committee Member Bobbitt noted the Crepe Myrtle tree is
beautiful, but agreed it will be bare from November to April. He
stated the Melalucas may be a better tree. The beds proposed
where the Crepe Myrtle are proposed shows a planter five feet
wide, the width of the planting island will create problems later
on if it is not wide enough. If it were possible in the future, he
would ask that the developers provide a wider planting strip.
6. Committee Member Christopher asked how consistent the
colors are with the main building. Staff stated they are
consistent. Committee Member Christopher stated the plans
shows the window sill caps and other capping details as interior
and exterior. This could be a reflection problem if it is not
brushed stainless steel. Mr. Lollia stated they typically are a
bronze, anodized treatment. Committee Member Christopher
stated he would prefer it is the same treatment as the main
buildings.
7. Committee Member Thorns stated that if the Highway 111
landscaping plans do not cover the drive through, a short wall
could be used. Staff stated that will be an option.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\10-6-04 WD.doc 2
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
October 6, 2004
8. Committee Member Bobbitt asked that the berming be pushed
away from the drive -through. He then asked what material
would be used on the trellis over the drive -through. Ms. Kerr
stated they propose the glu-Ism beams.
9. Committee Member Christopher stated his concern regarding
the location of the trash enclosure at the main entry to the
Center. The strip in front of it should be buffered with planting.
Mr. Lollia stated they would see that it is planted whether or
not it is on their property or in the common area.
10. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to
adopt Minute Motion 2004-028 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2004-812, as recommended by staff and
amended:
a. Condition added: All exterior window and door sills shall
match the rest of the Center.
b. Condition added: An alternative evergreen to the Crepe
Myrtle trees shall be used.
C. Condition added: Any wood trellis material shall be
pressure treated.
Unanimously approved.
B. Site De"V elo ment Permit 2004-814; a request of Rich Entin Family
Trust/War Malcomb Architects for consideration of architectural and
landscaping ans for a ± 23,760 square foot two-story general office
building on a ldrated at 43-576 Washington Street, on the east side
approximately 96 eet north of Fred Waring Drive.
1. Associate PIanne Wallace Nesbit presented the information
contained in the sta report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Developme Department. Staff introduced Cesar
Romero, applicant, who ga a presentation on the project.
2. Committee Member Christopher asked if it was a tilt -up
building. Mr. Romero stated ye Committee Member
Christopher asked if there was any add material used to give
dimension to the building. Staff stated t e is a dimensional
aspect.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\10-6-04 WD.doc 3
PH #B
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 26, 2004
CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-816
APPLICANT: K. HOVNANIAN HOMES/FORECAST HOMES.
PROPERTY OWNER: FORECAST HOMES
REQUEST: ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR THREE
NEW SINGLE-FAMILY PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS,
EACH WITH THREE DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS, FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT 30092
LOCATION: THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF AVENUE 52 AND
MONROE STREET WITHIN TRACT 30092, (ATTACHMENT
1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2001-417, FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT 30092, WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY
COUNCIL ON JULY 3, 2001 (RESOLUTION 2001-91). NO
CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS EXIST
WHICH WOULD REQUIRE THE PREPARATION OF ANY
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 15162 OF THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT.
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
Tentative Tract Map 30092 was originally approved on July 3, 2001, incorporating
97 single-family lots within ± 37 gross acres. Subsequently, two time extensions for
this tract have been approved; the map's current expiration date is July 3, 2005.
Forecast Home purchased the property earlier this year, and has been going through
the plan check process on the tract map.
To date, no homes have been previously approved within this tract; therefore, the
units under review are not subject to the compatibility provisions of the Zoning
Code, but are being reviewed under the provisions of Section 9.60.330 (Residential
Tract Development Review).
Project Background
The applicant has submitted prototypical plans for three unit designs, illustrated in
Sections 5 and 6 of the design review document (Attachment 1). Each plan is single -
story, and designed with three front elevation treatments and three roof plans. The
plans generally employ and blend Spanish, Ranch and Mediterranean styles of
architecture. The floor plans have the following general characteristics:
Plan 1 - Ranges from 2,690 to 2,903 s.f. - 4 BR/3 BA, with 5th BR or 4-car
garage options.
Plan 2 - Ranges from 2,903 to 3,148 s.f. - 4 BR/3.5 BA, with 51h BR or 4-car
garage options.
Plan 3 - Ranges from 3,066 to 3,516 s.f. - 4 BR/3.5 BA, with 5" BR/den
option and 4-car garage with side -entry, or guest suite option.
A material and color board, along with a full-size color illustration, will be provided at
the meeting. A color reduction of the material board is included in the design review
document submitted by the applicant. The proposed architectural elements provide
several different color and material options to go along with the variations to window
treatments, entry and roof designs of the elevations. There is a graduating use in
stone veneer, from elevations A through C, for each floor plan, that will provide a
more pronounced variation in the units while still maintaining a compatible
appearance throughout the tract.
Section 7 of the design review document includes exhibits to illustrate the proposed
typical plant palette and landscape improvement layouts for the individual homes,
streetscapes, common areas and proposed model location. It also includes conceptual
entryway design and planting plans for the entire tract. It is anticipated the perimeter
parkway concept shown on the preliminary landscape plan for the model complex will
be followed for those areas along Avenue 58 and Monroe Street.
Existing tract conditions that apply to this request are:
Condition #58 - Applicant shall landscape required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) Action -
On October 6, 2004, the ALRC reviewed these prototype architectural plans. The
ALRC unanimously recommended approval of the Site Development Permit by
Minute Motion 2004-031 (Attachment 3), subject to the following recommended
conditions:
• Removal of the Mesquite species from the landscape palette;
An alternative to the wildflower seed mix for retention basin hydroseeding
shall be used;
• Block wall color/design shall be submitted to be reviewed by Planning
Commission; and
• Plan 3 shall incorporate a minimum three color roof tile blend.
The applicant has provided a wall plan detail (Section 8 of design review document)
to illustrate the perimeter wall design as well as to address the concern of the ALRC
as noted above. The plan shows the wall only as it will be designed adjacent to the
main entry. The remaining perimeter wall areas along Avenue 58 and Monroe Street
will be split -faced block with a precision block banding, and will incorporate stone
veneer pilasters placed at 100-foot intervals. The north and west perimeter walls will
not continue the stone veneer treatment, and will be precision block with a concrete
roll cap. The applicant will be required to prepare wall plans based on this sectional
plan, to include any modifications as may be specified by the Planning Commission.
Staff has no specific issues with this conceptual design for the wall as submitted.
Residential Tract Development Review Requirements - Each prototype plan and
elevation meets the standards as specified by Section 9.60.330.D of the Zoning
Code. The landscaping as conditioned is required to be consistent with the
requirements specified in Section 9.60.330.E.
MANDATORY FINDINGS
As required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning Code,
findings to approve Site Development Permit 2004-816 are incorporated into the
attached Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- _, approving Site Development
Permit 2004-816, subject to findings and conditions.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Tract 30092 layout
3. ALRC Minutes of October 6, 2004
Prepared by:
Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ARCHITECTURAL
AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR THREE NEW SINGLE-FAMILY
PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, EACH WITH THREE
DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 30092
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-816
APPLICANT: K. HOVNANIAN HOMES/FORECAST HOMES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 261h day of October, 2004, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing
to consider a request by K. Hovnanian/Forecast Homes, for approval of architectural
and landscaping plans for three new single-family prototype residential units, each
with three different elevations, for Tentative Tract 30092, located at the northwest
corner of Avenue 52 and Monroe Street, more particularly described as follows:
PORTION OF THE SW '/4 OF THE SW '/4 OF SECTION 22, T6S, R7E - S.B.B.M.
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee of
the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 61h day of October, 2004, hold a public
meeting to review and recommend approval of architecture and landscape plans for
said prototype residential units for Tentative Tract 30092; and,
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2001-417) was
adopted by the City Council for Tentative Tract Map 30092 under Resolution No.
2001-091. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information,
which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis
pursuant to Section 15162 of the Guidelines for implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to
Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code to justify approval of said Site Development
Permit:
1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed Site Development Permit is
consistent with the La Quinta General Plan LDR (Low Density Residential)
designation, as it proposes single-family homes in an approved residential
tract.
1-PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\ForecastSDP04816\peresosdp816.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2004 —
Site Development Permit 2004-816
K. Hovnanian Homes/Forecast Homes
October 26, 2004
2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed project, as conditioned, is
consistent with the development standards of the City's Zoning Code, in
terms of architectural style, building heights, building mass, parking, and
landscaping. The Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta
Zoning Map, as it proposes single family homes in an approved residential
tract zoned for RL (Low Density Residential) development.
3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The
proposed Site Development Permit is subject to the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). However, Environmental
Assessment 2001-417 was adopted by the City Council on July 3, 2001
(Resolution 2001-091) for this property. No changed circumstances or
conditions exist which would require the preparation of any subsequent
environmental evaluation.
4. Architectural Design: The architectural design aspects of the proposed Site
Development Permit provide interest through use of three varied roof element
heights, enhanced building entries, stone veneer wainscot and facade
treatments, horizontal banding, minimum three color roof tile blend and other
design details which will be compatible with, and not detrimental to,
surrounding development, and with the overall design quality prevalent in the
City.
5. Site Design: The site design aspects of the proposed Site Development
Permit will be compatible with, and not detrimental to, surrounding
development, and with the overall design quality prevalent in the City, in
terms of interior circulation, and pedestrian access.
6. Landscape Design: The proposed project is consistent with the landscaping
standards and plant palette and implements the standards for landscaping
and aesthetics established in the General Plan and Zoning Code. The project
landscaping for the proposed Site Development Permit, as conditioned, shall
unify and enhance visual continuity of the proposed homes with surrounding
development. Landscape improvements are designed and sized to provide
visual appeal. The permanent overall site landscaping utilizes various tree and
shrub species to accentuate views and blend with the building architecture.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
P:\Reports - PC\10-26-2004\ForecastSDP04816\peresosdp816.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2004 —
Site Development Permit 2004-816
K. Hovnanian Homes/Forecast Homes
October 26, 2004
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Site Development Permit.
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2004-816, subject to
conditions, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 26th day of October, 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
OSCAR ORCI, Interim
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\ForecastSDP04816\peresosdp816.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-816
K. HOVNANIAN HOMES/FORECAST HOMES
OCTOBER 26, 2004
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site
Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its
defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim,
action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. This Site Development Permit is valid for one year, unless an extension is
applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section
9.200.080 of the Zoning Code.
3. SDP 2004-816 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation
measures, which are incorporated by reference herein, for the following
related approvals:
• Environmental Assessment 2001-417
• Tentative Tract Map 30092
In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions
of these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine
precedence. No development permits will be issued until compliance with
these conditions has been achieved.
4. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the
City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from
the following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Coachella Valley Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• SunLine Transit Agency
P:\Reports - PC\10-26-2004\ForecastSDP04816\pccoasdp816.doc
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-816
K. Hovnanian Homes/Forecast Homes
October 26, 2004
Page 2
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or
clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include
approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such
approvals when submitting those improvement plans for City approval.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
5. Applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted
Art in Public Places program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
6. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at
the time of issuance of building permit(s)
7. Prior to building permit issuance, parkland dedication fees shall be paid
unless these fees are paid during recordation of the subdivision map.
8. Model home sales complexes shall comply with the requirements of Section
9.60.250 of the Zoning Ordinance during on -site sales activities. A $1,000-
per-unit cash bond shall be posted to convert garages, parking areas, etc.,
from sales office use to residential.
LANDSCAPING
9. Final front yard landscaping plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
professional and submitted to the Community Development Department for
review and approval prior to issuance of any building permit for units
authorized by this approval in compliance with Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient
Landscaping) of the Municipal Code. The landscape and irrigation plans shall
be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County
Agriculture Commissioner prior to submittal of the final plans to the
Community Development Department.
10. Front yard landscaping for each dwelling shall consist of two trees (i.e., a
minimum 1.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade level after
planting), ten 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Palm trees may count as a
shade tree if the trunk is six feet tall. Double lodge poles (two-inch diameter)
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\ForecasaSDP04816\pccoasdp816.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-816
K. HOVNANIAN HOMES/FORECAST HOMES
OCTOBER 26, 2004
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site
Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its
defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim,
action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. This Site Development Permit is valid for one year, unless an extension is
applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section
9.200.080 of the Zoning Code.
3. SDP 2004-816 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation
measures, which are incorporated by reference herein, for the following
related approvals:
• Environmental Assessment 2001-417
• Tentative Tract Map 30092
In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions
of these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine
precedence. No development permits will be issued until compliance with
these conditions has been achieved.
4. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the
City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from
the following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Coachella Valley Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• SunLine Transit Agency
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\ForecastSDP04816\pccoasdp816.doc
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-816
K. Hovnanian Homes/Forecast Homes
October 26, 2004
Page 2
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or
clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include
approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such
approvals when submitting those improvement plans for City approval.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
5. Applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted
Art in Public Places program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
6. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at
the time of issuance of building permit(s)
7. Prior to building permit issuance, parkland dedication fees shall be paid
unless these fees are paid during recordation of the subdivision map.
8. Model home sales complexes shall comply with the requirements of Section
9.60.250 of the Zoning Ordinance during on -site sales activities. A $1,000-
per-unit cash bond shall be posted to convert garages, parking areas, etc.,
from sales office use to residential.
LANDSCAPING
9. Final front yard landscaping plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
professional and submitted to the Community Development Department for
review and approval prior to issuance of any building permit for units
authorized by this approval in compliance with Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient
Landscaping) of the Municipal Code. The landscape and irrigation plans shall
be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District and Riverside County
Agriculture Commissioner prior to submittal of the final plans to the
Community Development Department.
10. Front yard landscaping for each dwelling shall consist of two trees (i.e., a
minimum 1.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade level after
planting), ten 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Palm trees may count as a
shade tree if the trunk is six feet tall. Double lodge poles (two-inch diameter)
P:\Reports - PC\10-26-2004\ForecastSDP04816\pccoasdp816.doc
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2004-816
K. Hovnanian Homes/Forecast Homes
October 26, 2004
Page 3
shall be used to stake trees. Future home buyers shall be offered a no -turf,
desert landscape option in front yards.
11. The developer shall submit complete landscaping plans for all retention
basins and interior common areas to the Community Development
Department for review, prior to issuance of any precise grading permits. No
mesquite tree species are permitted in any of the landscaping plans for
common and perimeter landscaped areas. Wildflower seed mixes shall not be
used in any hydro -seed operations. An alternative seed mix which will
achieve erosion and dust control, with minimal weed growth, shall be
approved by the Public Works Department.
BUILDING DESIGN
12. The applicant shall submit perimeter block wall plans and details, to include
exterior color and finish, as per the conceptual detail reviewed and approved
by the Planning Commission. The block wall construction plans shall be
approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of
any building permits for wall construction.
13. Final location of all structures submitted for plan check shall be reviewed
against and meet all setback standards of the RL zoning district. Developer
shall submit a preliminary unit siting plan to the Community Development
Department prior to issuance of any dwelling ' unit permits. Minor
amendments to the development plans (e.g., architectural details, house
plotting, etc.) shall be subject to approval by the Community Development
Director.
14. Front yard setbacks along streets where five or more homes have frontage,
shall be staggered at a range between 20 — 25 feet, in accordance with
Section 9.50.030.13 (Table 9-2) of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
15. Plan 3 shall incorporate a minimum three -color roof the blend.
PAReports - PC\10-26-2004\ForecastSDP04816\pccoasdp816.doc
m
INDIO
1
WTERSTATE 10
CASE MAP
ATTACHMENT 1
COACHELLA
cnseNo. SDP 2004-816
HOVNANIAN/FORECAST HOMES SCALE:
ouvvn ovn .7/U1v1IV-%L
ATJrACHMENT 2
AM
e
a 4
a. m
m�
lift
eI
_ cc
^
Wl
ar
S�y�ti:o
a�
will
0`5 Fg =
pg
all
c..' > 1 y
tl� 0 5$F
ATTACHMENT 3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
October 6, 2004
5. Committee Member Christopher noted a elevation facing
Avenue 48 needs special attention g' n to the landscaping to
buffer the view corridor for the ho s to the south. He asked if
there was a lighting plan su itted. Mr. Gray stated the
lighting was already install on the site and any additional
fixtures needed would be a same.
6. There being no fur er questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to
adopt Minut otion 2004-030 recommending approval of Site
Developm t Permit 2004-815, as recommended and amended:
on added: Center tower shall have stone added.
mously approved.
D. Site Development Permit 2004-816; a request of K. Hovnanian
Homes/Forecast Homes for consideration of architectural and
landscaping plans for three prototypical residential plans for Tentative
Tract Map 30092 located at the northwest corner of Avenue 58 and
Monroe Street.
1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department. Staff introduced Steve
Chaparro and Angela Wilson, of Forecast Homes, who gave a
presentation on the project.
2. Committee Member Thorns asked why there were no swimming
pools. Mr. Chaparro stated they typically do not show a pool.
Committee member Thorns asked if the developer's
responsibility was only to landscape the front yard. Mr.
Chaparro stated yes, the rear yard is the property owners.
3. Committee member Bobbitt asked if there was a HOA and what
was their responsibility. Mr. Chaparro explained. Committee
Member Bobbitt stated the Phoenix should be planted away
from any traffic area. They should be nursery grown or
inspected by the landscape architect before installation. He
then asked about the retention basins.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\10-6-04 WD.doc 6
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
October 6, 2004
4. Committee Member Christopher asked what would be used to
cover the retention basin. Ms. Wilson stated wildflowers.
5. Committee Member Bobbitt stated wildflowers will deteriorate
and become infested with weeds and be a maintenance
problem. He would suggest an alternative be used.
6. Committee Member Thorns asked about the trees at the main
entrance. Mr. Chaparro stated they would have to refer to the
landscape architect.
7. Committee Member Bobbitt went over the proposed plant list
and made recommendations.
8. Committee Member Thorns asked about the perimeter wall. Mr.
Chaparro stated it was a combination of precision and split face
block with horizontal banding. Color is yet to be determined.
9. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Christopher to
adopt Minute Motion 2004-031 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2004-816, as recommended and amended
by staff.
a. Condition added: remove Mesquite trees and use
alternative seed mix for hydroseeding retention basins.
b. Condition added: final review of block wall shall be by the
Planning Commission for color contrast.
c. Condition added: Plan 3 shall have a three color mix
roof.
Unanimously approved.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VII. COMMdTTEE MEMBER ITEMS:
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no fu her business, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Christopher homs to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural
and Landscaping Review ommittee to a regular meeting to be held on November
3, 2004. This meeting was 'ourned at 1 1: 41 a.m. on September 8, 2004.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\10-6-04 WD.doc 7
Verbatim Excerpts of Minutes from Planning Commission Meeting of
September 9, 2003, regarding WalMart storage containers:
Chairman Kirk: Are there any questions of staff. All right, no
questions of staff. Would the applicant like to
address the Commission? Name and address
please.
Applicant: Mickey Anderson. I live at 45-450 Durbrick Circle
in La Quinta. Thank you Mr. Chairman,
Commissioners Quill, Commissioner Tyler. Just
two brief points I'd like to make. This is the third
year that I've stood here with the same request.
You remember. Just the one point I'd like to make
is last year I requested 55. Granted 43. Thankful
for that, however, logistically it's a nightmare. I
was in 20 units with Storage USA last year, going
east and west across Adams. Commissioner Quill
mentioned earlier about how tough it is to go north
and south on Adams. Try to cross that going east
and west. It's very difficult.
Secondarily, aesthetically I don't believe it makes a
difference, 55 or 43, because the containers are
placed in a linear fashion. I don't believe it takes
away any more than it does to have 55 versus 43.
Being a resident of the City, loving the City, hoping
to be here a long, long time I understand the
concerns of it looking like a railroad yard if I can
quote from last year, but I don't know aesthetically
if it makes a whole lot of difference. Chairman
Kirk made that comment I believe.
Chairman Kirk: It's a nasty comment.
Applicant: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. It's logistically very tough to do
business that way with 375 people running across
the street. That's all I have to say.
Unknown: Will you be here next year?
Applicant: Yes, sir.
Commissioner Quill: So, what about the problem?
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\Walmart Containers 9-9-03 excerpts.doc 1
Chairman Kirk: Not will you live here next year. Will you make
this request again next year?
Unknown: Will WalMart be here. Will this request be made
next year?
Applicant: This Walmart will be there without our name on it.
Someone else will be in that building, as you know.
Will this request be made next year? I would say,
and I said this last year, as well, I believe it will.
They build the buildings for the norm and not the
exception and the holiday merchandise is an
exception. My inventory right now is $4.9 million
and in the holiday I'll go $1 1 to $12 million. The
building doesn't get bigger.
Commissioner Tyler: We put the restrictions on the Super Walmart on
where they might be placed as I recall.
Commissioner Quill: I should have driven that today, but it seemed to
me that if it was going to be a regular occurrence
that maybe some enhancements to the landscaping
at the top of the dike, to ultimately grow up and
screen the back of the house from across the wash
because those are the only people who really
would have any objection, he would think.
Commissioner Tyler: I think we discussed that last year and maybe
before.
Commissioner Quill: I mean that would be my only comment. If this is
a regular occurrence to get rid of the freight car
look.
Jerry Herman This will probably be the last year for this
Walmart?
Commissioner Quill: This WaIMart. Right? So, maybe we can make
sure we condition the CUP for whoever moves in
to do that later?
Chairman Kirk: Or expand the store.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\Walmart Containers 9-9-03 excerpts.doc 2
Commissioner Quill: Or blow the back of the store out. Yea, ok.
Mickey Anderson: All of those issues are well above me, I might add,
but all I request is please don't make me run across
that street so many times a shift.
Chairman Kirk: So you want 55? Robert, what's your inclination
on this?
Commissioner Tyler: Well, coming in my inclination was to stay at the
43, but seeing as how WalMart's earnings last year
were higher than anybody else in the business and
seeing as how this is the last year, and seeing as
how it's a safety hazard to run across Adams I
might be ...
Commissioner Quill: You don't own any stock in this?
Commissioner Tyler: No, I don't. ...cohearsed into a somewhat higher
number than 43.
Chairman Kirk: And seeing as how Mr. Anderson waited until
11:00 p.m., patiently, I like you, Robert, were
inclining towards the 43 number again and
continuing to give Mr. Anderson a hard time, but I
think he's made a pretty good case and I sure am
hopeful that the new owner, or new user of this
site doesn't need any containers next year.
Mickey Anderson: Hopefully, not.
Chairman Kirk: The record will again reflect the concerns I think
we all have with using the containers. Paul, you
have any strong feelings about the numbers?
Commissioner Quill: No.
Chairman Kirk: Let's entertain a motion to give this man what he
wants this year. Robert, do you want to make it?
Or are you reluctant to do so?
Commissioner Tyler: Well, I was going to pick a number between 43
and 55.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\Walmart Containers 9-9-03 excerpts.doc 3
Chairman Kirk: It's your discretion.
Commissioner Tyler: Mr. Chairman, I move that we give WalMart, Mr.
Anderson's request. Approve the request for 53,
no its 55 temporary outdoor metal storage
containers for the period from September 151h to
January 15 at the WalMart Store #1805.
Chairman Kirk: Paul
Commissioner Quill: Second
Chairman Kirk: Any discussion? Hearing none, please vote. Have
a good holiday season.
Mickey Anderson: Thank you.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\Walmart Containers 9-9-03 excerpts.doc 4