Loading...
2004 01 13 PCPlanning 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 JANUARY 13, 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 2004-001 Beginning Minute Motion 2004-001 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 meetings of December 23, 2003 B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARING: A. ITEM ................ ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 2003-080 Applicant .......... City of La Quinta Location ........... City-wide Request ............ Consideration of an Amendment to the La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.160.080 — Semi - Permanent Downtown Village Directional Signs to allow more sign panels and other minor amendments. Action .............. Resolution 2004- VI. BUSINESS ITEM: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VIII. 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 January 27, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. PC/AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA December 23, 2003 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Tyler to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Rick Daniels, Paul Quill, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Tom Kirk. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Oscar Orci, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, Associate Planners Wallace Nesbit and Martin Magana, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of November 25, 2003. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 1 be corrected to read, "Continued - Environmental Assessment 2003-484, Conditional Use Permit 2003-081, and Site Development Permit 2003- 788; a request of ASL La Quinta Family Apartments, L.P."; Page 12, insert Public Hearing Resumed; Page 13, Item 3, add "City of Indio limits". There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abets to approve the minutes as corrected. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of December 9, 2003. Commissioner Daniels asked that Page 1 be corrected under Roll Call, to show that he was absent. There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Daniels to approve the minutes as corrected. 2. Department Report: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Continued - Environmental Assessment 2003-486, General Plan Amendment 2003-096, Zone Change 2003-117, Specific Plan 2003- 069, and Tentative Tract Map 31798; a request of Robert Selan for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to change the land use and zoning designations from Neighborhood Commercial to Medium High Density Residential and the subdivision of approximately 21 acres into 250 condominium units for the property located at the northwest corner of Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Daniels thanked staff for the report on the amount of commercial land that had been lost through zone changes. He further stated he had met with the applicant prior to this meeting and discussed the project and raised a number of issues. His concern has been the loss of commercial land throughout the city and noted the areas where the zoning had been changed. This issue of commercial land was an issue during the joint meetings with the City Council in regard to the loss of sales tax revenue and how critical commercial land is to the survival of cities. He asked staff to address the justification of how this property could be redesignated from commercial to residential after such a short period. It would seem that a mistake was made in originally designating this site commercial or some reason has come to light that it no longer should be designated commercial. He would like some justification as to why this property should be redesignated. Staff stated it is a valid concern and staff has the same concerns. He went on to give the history of the site. In regard to the zoning designation, the market does drive the demand for the conversion from commercial to residential. The City does not require market studies to make focused decisions on all zone changes. Commissioner Daniels stated he understands how as planners, you look at the end result and yet in reality the land develops to the demand of the market; however, today's demand for residential may not be what is needed next year. If this density conversion is G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 approved he would like to know if there are other areas that could be redesignated to make up for the loss of commercial development. 3. Commissioner Tyler noted there is an approved plan for commercial on the southeast corner. Staff stated there has been no desire on the part of the property owner to develop the commercial and there is now a proposal to construct residential units. It is staffs understanding the northeast corner will remain as commercial. Staff did a review of the surrounding land uses before making this recommendation for the land use conversion. 4. Commissioner Daniels asked if the tunnel was a reality. Staff stated it is unknown until they go before the Redevelopment Agency and get their approval. Commissioner Daniels asked if a condominium project is built and rented out, will it create Transient Occupancy Tax for the City. Staff stated yes. 5. Chairman Kirk asked if under the Specific Plan they would be able to go ahead with the rental units. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated yes. 6. Commissioner Quill stated he too had met with the applicant and it was his understanding they did intend to make these rental units. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked why a conditional use permit was not required. Staff stated that during the review of the project it was determined a conditional use permit was not needed. The lighted tennis courts are included in the Specific Plan and therefore approved along with the Specific Plan. Commissioner Tyler asked if the main access onto Avenue 52 is a right turn in only as it is a long distance before you can make a U-turn. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated they were encouraged to have an access off of Jefferson Street. Commissioner Tyler asked if the right turn into the project would have a deceleration lane. Staff stated they could be required to comply with the recently adopted Deceleration Lane Policy. Commissioner Tyler expressed his concern over the letter from the Citrus Course Homeowners' Association. He then noted changes that should be made to the 'Environmental Checklist. He then went over suggested condition changes. He asked why they were being required to install a golf G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 cart path on the north side of the street when the General Plan designated the south side as having a golf cart path. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated that if the General Plan requires the south, it is a mistake and the condition would be corrected accordingly. Commissioner Tyler stated Conditions #82 and #62 should be combined. He also asked about a parking analysis. Staff stated until more information is received on the unit sizes, there is nothing to analyze. 8. Chairman Kirk asked if it was staff's request or the applicant's to prepare a Specific Plan. Staff explained there isn't anything they are deviating from by using the Specific Plan. Staff took no stand either way. Chairman Kirk asked the height of a Medium High Density unit. Staff stated 28 feet. Chairman Kirk asked why this project was being limited to 26 feet. Staff stated it was believed that with some of the units not being in a symmetrical setting, it would be best to limit all of the units to the same height to preserve the views of the neighboring homes. Chairman Kirk noted he too had met with the applicant. 9. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Matthew Hladek, the applicant gave a presentation on the project. 10. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Daniels asked if this development was conceptually similar to the Desert Willow project. Mr. Hladek stated it is not because it is a whole ownership and not a timeshare. Commissioner Daniels asked if it would be managed and available for rentals. Mr. Hladek stated yes, and they would be subject to the TOT for revenue replacement. Commissioner Daniels asked if they would want the deceleration lane on Jefferson Street. Mr. Hladek stated they would not. They only want the one gated entrance. They are only asking for the height of 28 feet rather than staff's recommendation of 26 feet. 11. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant had any confirmation as to the TOT being greater than the sales tax. Mr. Hladek stated he did not, but was available to answer any questions. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 12. Commissioner Quill asked if they took any issue with the letter from the Citrus Course Homeowners' Association. Mr. Hladek stated only with the way some of the issues were worded, but in concept they have no problem with their requests. Commissioner Quill asked about maintaining the date palms in a producing manner. Mr. Hladek stated the intent was to keep them in a healthy condition, not producing. Staff clarified the intent was that they could produce dates, but not for production. Commissioner Quill asked if the applicant was intending to assume the complete cost of developing the tunnel. Mr. Hladek stated yes. 13. Commissioner Tyler clarified theJefferson Street entrance was a right in, right out. Mr. Hladek stated yes. Commissioner Tyler stated the Zoning Code allows the tennis court lights to be lit till 10:00 p.m., but if they desire to comply with the agreement made with the Citrus Course Homeowners' Association, they could require the earlier time of their residents. 14. There being no further questions of the applicant, Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. There being none, the public participation portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. . 15. Commissioner Abels stated this was a quality project and he is pleased to hear about the tunnel. He believes they have addressed the loss of revenue with the redesignation. 16. Commissioner Quill stated he too believes they have met his concerns on the tax revenue. Commissioner Daniels agreed. 17. Commissioner Tyler asked if this issue of a rental pool and TOT would require a Tourist Commercial designation. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated it could be redesignated as Tourist Commercial, or it could be handled similar to the Puerta Azul project where a component was added requiring that the CC&R state that all rentals are subject to the TOT and the City would want to be sure that all prospective owners are aware of the condition. A condition should be added to the Specific Plan and Tract Map stating this. Commissioner Tyler stated he would like it to go on the record that the developer is willing to pay for the G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 tunnel. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated the tunnel would require the Agency to dedicate land for the tunnel and she would not want to put the Agency in a place to require this without their approval. A condition could be added to require the tunnel, upon approval by the Agency approval as long as the cost of the land was taken into account. Staff noted the conditions exclude the tunnel and require it to be addressed under a different method that is not related to this project's development at this time. 18. Chairman Kirk agreed this is an outstanding project. He also agrees that General Plan Amendments should be seriously addressed and it appears this project has made the justification for the change. His only criticism is that the Specific Plan, as written, is weak. 19. Commissioner Tyler asked why not included the HOA letter in the Specific Plan. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated a condition should be added that the text of the Specific Plan be corrected to contain all the text changes and the final conditions as approved by the City Council and resubmitted to staff within a specified time frame. The text requirements would be included in the final document. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern was the difference between what the City requires and what has been agreed to between the two developments. 20. Chairman Kirk suggested the agreement between the two developers be included in the site development permit when it is submitted for approval. 21. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-1 10, recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2003-486. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 6 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 22. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-1 1 1, recommending approval of General Plan Amendment 2003-096, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 23. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-112, recommending approval of Zone Change 2003-1 17, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 24. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-113, recommending Specific Plan 2003-069, as amended: a. Condition #6.D. Deleted. b. Condition #6.A. Delete the following sentence: "In addition, the letter from the Citrus Course Homeowners' Association, dated 12/10/03, shall also be incorporated in the appendix." Add the following sentence: "The HOA bullet points shall be considered as part of subsequent approvals." C. Condition added: The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions for the project shall include a provision which states that the project is subject to Transient Occupancy Tax. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. 25. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-114, recommending approval of Tentative Tract map 31798, as amended: a. Condition added: The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions for the project shall include a provision which G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 7 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 states that the project is subject to Transient Occupancy Tax. b. Condition #51.A.1).a).ii.: Deleted C. Condition #51.A.2). a). ii.: Add: "...along the easterly boundary of the Tentative Tract Map and warp around to the tunnel on Avenue 52, if approved and built." d. Condition #55.A: delete, "Right turn in" e. Conditions #62 and #82: Combined. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. B. Continued Sign Application 2003-734; a request of Neil Kleine for consideration of a planned sign program for two commercial buildings in the La Quinta Corporate Centre on a 1.13 acre site for the properties located at 79-215 and 79-245 Corporate Centre 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. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked if this was similar to the request of La Quinta Plaza approved at the last meeting. Staff stated that was correct. 3. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. O'Neil stated he was available to answer any questions. 4. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 5. Commissioner Tyler stated the two monument signs were too much and should be combined into one eight foot sign. Chairman Kirk reopened the public participation portion. Mr. Neil Klein stated the two monument signs were needed for the two different parcels. Chairman Kirk closed the public participation. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abels to adopt Minute Motion 2003-021 approving Sign Application 2003-734, as amended: a. Condition added: one monument sign allowed. 7. Commissioner Quill stated there are two separate parcels and each does have the opportunity to have its signage. He asked if they were approving two separate sign program. Planning Manager Oscar Orci stated it was common to combine parcels into one sign program. Should the applicant, at some future time, decide to spin off one of the parcels they would be allowed to have their own signage. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated the applicant could be required to record something on the property that gives Parcel 2 a recorded right to have their own monument sign. Planning Manager Oscar Orci indicated that a sign program can be amended at any time in the future to add or delete signs; therefore, the signs can be included or excluded from the sign program. 8. Commissioner Abels asked the location of the monument signs. Staff indicated the location on the site map. 9. Commissioner Tyler suggested the monument sign be placed on the west entry. Staff stated that both signs were on the west side. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioner Tyler and Chairman Kirk. NOES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 10. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Quill to adopt Minute Motion 2003-021 approving Sign Application 2003- 734 as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Quill, Abels, Daniels. NOES: Commissioner Tyler and Chairman Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. C. Environmental Assessment 2003-492 and Tentative Tract Map 31732; a request of Michael La Melza, for consideration of a subdivision of 43.8 gross acres into 197 single family lots in the Medium Density Residential zones for the property located at the southeast corner of Monroe street and Avenue 60. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 9 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Oscar Orci 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 Tyler asked if this project still falls under the original Coral Mountain Specific Plan. Staff stated that was correct. Commissioner Tyler asked if it would be card entry only and no guard. Staff stated that was correct. Commissioner Tyler asked if the main entry to this project would like up with the entry to the Coral Option so, when warranted, a signal could be installed. Staff clarified it is adjacent to, but not lined up. Commissioner Tyler questioned why it was being off -set and requested they be required to line up. 3. Commissioner Tyler questioned Condition #16 that it should be Avenue 60 not 61. He then questioned Condition #36 in regard to building pad elevations as it appears to be different than what was stated in the report. Planning Manager Oscar Orci clarified that the report describes the general characteristics of the property. In the conditions it pertains to specific grade pads once they are graded. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated the condition was addressing the heights of the adjacent pads. Commissioner Tyler asked the need for Conditions #55 and #56. Staff explained it was needed for the guests entering at the gate. Commissioner Tyler asked that Condition #59 should specify the alignment of the two entries. Also Condition #67 should be corrected to state, "City's' Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance" and delete the last two sentences. Condition #84 should delete any reference to Tentative Tract Map 31733. Condition #93 should be changed to reference the "south" boundary of the tract. Condition #100 needs to be clarified to read that an additional six feet are required for back-up purposes. Condition #101 cleaned up to read "processing of a Site Development Permit application." 4. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Don Vita, VITA Planning and Landscape Architecture, landscape architect for the project, gave an explanation of the project. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 10 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 5. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Quill clarified the trash pick-up would be in the alley/lane. Mr. Vita stated yes. Commissioner Quill asked if the drainage would also be handled in the lane and street. Mr. Vita stated yes. Commissioner Quill asked what the proposed front setbacks on the street. Mr. Vita stated on both the main street, the central main street that bisects the properties, they are proposing a street section that has 32 foot travelway, including parking, a five foot parkway, five foot sidewalk and ten foot setback to the building face. The rear yard setback would be the six feet. They will be walled with some two story units. There may be some porches or courtyards with parking on one side. Commissioner Quill asked how the slopes would be handled. Mr. Vita stated he would ask their civil engineer to answer the question. 6. Chairman Kirk asked why they did not add some commercial to the project. Mr. Vita stated this development could not support the commercial on its own. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked how the houses that are adjacent to the open space take access. Mr. Vita stated there is vehicle access behind the unit and a connecting sidewalk, where the front door is located. Commissioner Tyler clarified the only access between the two tracts is the open space area. Mr. Vita stated yes; there is no vehicular access. Commissioner Tyler asked if they had any objection to lining up their entry with the one across the street. Mr. Vita stated they could make it work. 8. Chairman Kirk asked where the access was to the garage for Lot 197. Mr. Vita stated it is off the lane to the north. The facade facing the knuckle would have a look similar to the front of the house, therefore no wall would be constructed, only landscaping. Chairman Kirk asked about the use of the perimeter park areas. Mr. Vita stated they wanted to have each cul-de-sac end in a landscape area. The lots around the perimeter are not lane loaded lots, but front loaded lots and they wanted to break up the long run of lots with some meaningful open space between buildings. Chairman Kirk asked why they did not use a specific plan. Mr. Vita stated they wanted to meet the original Specific Plan requirements and not have to go through a new specific plan process. Chairman Kirk asked if the City's Code could accommodate new traditional/urbanism development within its G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doe 11 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 existing zoning code. Were they looking to have street wells encroaching in right of ways, other traffic calming measures, narrowing street corners, etc. Mr. Vita stated there are some compromises they would like to have, but in terms of working within the Specific Plan they do not think the minor compromises detract from the liability of doing this type of project. Chairman Kirk asked if the 20 foot lane meets the City's Code. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer stated no and he is not aware if the original Coral Mountain Specific Plan contained any requirements for lanes. 9. Commissioner Quill asked where the utilities would be located. Mr. Robert Eisenbeisz, engineer for the project, stated the water mains would be in the front street area. Some of the other passive utilities would be in the lane. 10. Commissioner Tyler asked their opinion on Condition #84. Mr. Eisenbeisz stated they would like to work this through with the Fire Department. Staff stated they too have been trying to get clarification from the Fire Department. It is staffs understanding they have concerns with the length of "flag lots". Staff is trying to work with the Fire Department to understand and mitigate their concerns. 11. Commissioner Quill stated he likes the development, but questioned the tentative map showing a curb adjacent sidewalk and about ten feet to the public easement. He would like to see that the map be revised that the curb adjacent sidewalk would not occur, but a parkway be added between the walk and curb. 12. Chairman Kirk asked the applicant to explain the park located between Lots 153 and 154. Mr. Vita explained this park has the ability to have a pedestrian connection to the project to the south. 13. Commissioner Quill asked how are the retention basins were going to handle the nuisance water? Mr. Vita explained the circular park will be a lawn or park area. The two finger parks to the north and south would be more desert landscaping that would receive the nuisance water. If dry wells are needed they will install them. 14. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project for Commission discussion. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 12 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 15. Commissioner Quill stated this is an interesting opportunity to see something new. He would like to see some of the issues raised addressed in the conditions like the sidewalk and lining up the two intersections. 16. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-115 recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2003-492, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, and Tyler, Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. 17. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-1 16, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 31732, as amended: a. Condition #16: Change Avenue 61 to Avenue 60 b. Condition #59.A.: Modified to specify the alignment of the entries. C. Condition #67: Corrected to state, "City's' Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance" and delete the last two sentences. d. Condition #84: Delete any reference to Tentative Tract Map 31733. e. Condition #94: Changed to reference the "south" boundary of the tract. f. Condition #100: Clarified to read that an additional six feet are required for back-up purposes. g. Condition #101: Clarified to read "processing of a Site Development Permit application." ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, and Tyler, Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. E. Environmental Assessment 2003-4923and Tentative Tract Map 31733; a request of Michael La Melza, for consideration of a subdivision of 37 gross acres into 127 single family lots in the Medium Density Residential zones for the property located at the northeast corner of Monroe street and Avenue 61. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\l2-23-03WD.doc 13 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Oscar Orci 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 Tyler asked if CVWD had any objections to the removal of the easement and could they be conditioned to do this prior to the street improvements. Staff stated it would have to be agreed to before the project could go forward. Commissioner Tyler reviewed some condition changes. 3. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Don Vita, VITA Planning and Landscape Architecture, landscape architect for the project, stated he was available to answer any questions. 4. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Quill noted there was a clubhouse and pool on this tract and there is access to the tract to the south, are the two tracts intended to become one development? Also, would both projects have access to the pool. Mr. Vita stated no; two separate HOA. Commissioner Quill asked if the easement for CVWD is for existing irrigation main for agricultural purposes. Mr. Eisenhack stated it is CVWD's main drain line and there is a process for removing them. 5. There being no other public comment, Chairman Kirk closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project for Commission discussion. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-117 recommending certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 2003-493, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, and Tyler, Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 14 Planning Commission Minutes December23, 2003 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-1 18, recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map 31733, as recommended/amended: a. Condition #55: Corrected to read: "...on the east side..." b. Condition #68: Corrected to state, "City's' Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance" and delete the last two sentences. C. Condition #85: Delete any reference to Tentative Tract Map 31732. d. Condition #94: Corrected to read: "the north boundary of the tract." e. Condition #101: Clarified to read "processing of a Site Development Permit application." ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Daniels, Quill, and Tyler, Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None. Vill. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Daniels thanked staff for the report on Commercial land uses. B. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the Council meeting of December 2, 2003. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Quill to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on January 13, 2004, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\12-23-03WD.doc 15 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JANUARY 13, 2004 CASE NO.: ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 2003-080 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA REQUEST: AMEND THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 9.160.080, SEMI -PERMANENT DOWNTOWN VILLAGE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL SIGN PANELS AND OTHER MINOR AMENDMENTS LOCATION: CITY-WIDE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE SECTION TO BE AMENDED IS EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15061(B)(3), OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. BACKGROUND: On March 19, 1996 the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 281 creating the provisions for the Semi -Permanent Downtown Directional Sign Program as contained in Section 9.160.080 of the Zoning Code. On January 21, 1997 the City Council adopted Resolution No. 97-02 authorizing the City to enter into a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce to administer the provisions of the Directional Sign Program as permitted in Section 9.160.080 of the Zoning Code. On October 28, 2003 the Planning Commission considered a request from Old Town La Quinta (Liz Davies) requesting the name "Old Town" be added to the directional signs with the same font contained in their letterhead. The Commission determined that the panel lettering should be uniform and rejected the request. At their meeting of November 4, 2003 the City Council, pursuant to Section 9.200.120,Appeals, called -up for review the action of the Planning Commission regarding the decision pertaining to the Semi -Permanent Downtown Directional Sign Program. On November 18, 2003 the City Council reviewed the request and approved the letter style change as requested to the sign panels. In addition the Council directed staff to prepare a text amendment in consideration of the Chamber's requested changes to the Semi -Permanent Downtown Village Directional Sign Program. Request The Chamber of Commerce letter (Attachment 1) is requesting: 1. Two additional sign panels to each sign currently in place; 2. Leaving the sign panels up for a period longer than 11 months if there is no waiting list for a particular sign location; and 3. Multiple lines of copy per sign panel. Staff has prepared the attached text changes for the Commission's review and consideration. FINDINGS: The findings to support Zoning Code Amendment 2003-080 are contained in the attached Planning Commission Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2004- , approving Zoning Text Amendment 2003-080, as recommended. Attachment: 1. Chamber of Commerce letter dated October 23, 2003 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CHANGES TO SECTION 9.160.080- SEMI-PERMANENT DOWNTOWN VILLAGE DIRECTIONAL SIGNS CASE NO.: ZCA 2003-080 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of January, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for a Zoning Code Amendment to make changes to Section 9.160.080 to the Municipal Code, regarding changes to the Semi -Permanent Downtown Village Directional Sign Program; and WHEREAS, the Text Amendment is exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Zoning Code Amendment: 1. The proposed text changes are consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan, and the Land Use Map for the General Plan and surrounding development and land use designations, ensuring land use compatibility. 2. The proposed text changes will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare, as they have been designed to be compatible with surrounding development, and conform with the City's standards and requirements. 3. The proposed text changes supports the orderly development of the City. 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 constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that the Zoning Code Amendment is exempt from CEQA. Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Zoning Code Amendment 2003-080 Adopted: January 13, 2004 3. The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that the changes to this Section is exempt pursuant to Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. 4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Zoning Code Amendment 2003-080 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and contained in Exhibit "A" attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 13th day of January, 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: TOM KIRK, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Zoning Code Amendment 2002-080 Adopted: January 13, 2004 EXHIBIT "A" 9.160.080 Semi -Permanent Downtown Village Directional Signs. A. Purpose. To provide vehicular direction to specific businesses which, due to their location within the boundaries of the "Village at La Quinta" specific plan area and away from major arterials, are difficult to find. B. Definition. "Downtown Village directional sign panel" means an interchangeable sign panel which does not require a sign permit, mounted on a monument base structure. The sign panels list businesses in the Village at La Quinta area. C. Maximum Time Periods. No downtown village directional sign panel shall be installed for more than eleven consecutive months out of any twelve- month period. However, a sign may be erected for more than eleven consecutive months if there is no waiting list for commercial business. The date of installation shall be legibly marked on the lower right hand corner of the face of the sign. D. Monument Base Structure --Size and Standards. Downtown Village directional sign panels shall only be installed in approved monument base structures which conform to the following standards: 1. Structures shall not exceed eight feet in height and six feet in width. 2. Structures shall contain no more than si* eight sign panels per face or side. 3. Structures shall have no more than two faces or sides. 4. Structure shall include, at the top, a decorative cap or sign of maximum two feet six inches high and six feet wide. 5. The base shall be constructed of block, brick, wood, stone or other similar material. shall be appFOved by the planni, -7 6. No tag, sign, streamer, device, display board or other attachment may be added or placed upon the structure. Planning Commission Resolution 2004- Zoning Code Amendment 2002-080 Adopted: January 13, 2004 E. Sign Panel Size and Standards. Downtown Village directional sign panels which are mounted in the monument base structures shall be eight inches in height and five feet wide, and shall conform to the following standards: 1. The use of said sign panels shall be for the sole identification of any commercial businesses located and operating within the boundaries of the Commercial Zoning District. 2. Each sign panel shall contain the name of the business and a directional arrow on one line (multiple lines are permitted). 3. Indirect lighting may be provided as set forth in Section 9.100.150. F. Sign Locations. Five structures shall be allowed The specific location at each intersection shall be approved by the director of community development and the director of public works. The structures may be located in the city's right-of-way. If located in the right-of-way, an encroachment permit shall be obtained from the director of public works. The structures shall be located for maximum readability and traffic/pedestrian safety. G. Installation. The city shall have the discretion to contract with a nonprofit group or nongovernmental agency to install and manage the sign panels and structures. Fees may be charged only to the extent necessary to cover costs for installation and subsequent maintenance. The group or agency chosen to administer the downtown Village directional sign program shall sign a memorandum of agreement with the city setting forth the scope of responsibilities and services to be provided. H. Maintenance. The group or agency contracted to install and manage the sign panels and structures shall be responsible for maintaining the panels and structures in good order at all times. Upon request by the city, sign panels and structures shall be repaired and/or maintained within thirty days of said request. Failure to repair/maintain sign panels and structures shall be cause for city to request removal or to remove. (Ord. 284 § 1 (Exh. A) (part), 1996) ATTACHMENT October 23, 2003 Mr. Tom Kirk, Chairman Planning Commission City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico ;- La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Chairman Kirk: On behalf of the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce, I would like to request a modification to The Semipermanent Downtown Village Directional Sign 7Y cw} Memorandum of Agreement that was executed January 23, 1997. Currently, we have erected four of the five signs allowed in the Agreement. Each of these signs allows for 6 sign panels to display local businesses. �. ,; ;: Because of the increased development and occupancy of commercial businesses in Old Town La Quinta, we are experiencing a permanent wait list for access to these directional signs. Knowing that in the near future more businesses will be locating in Old Town, we would like to add 2 additional sign panels to each sign to meet the future demand. Additionally, the current MOU asks that we remove a business sign panel for a period of one month after it has been displayed for 11 months. The sign currently located at 52°d Avenue and Bermudas has only 4 of the 6 panels designated. If there is not wait list, would it be acceptable to leave these signs in place until there is a demand? I recently learned that the MOU specifies that the installation date be shown on all the panels in the lower right hand corner. This has never been done. We instructed the sign maker to include this information on all future panels. Is it the Commission's preference that we pull the current signs to add this information to existing sign panels? As regards the 2 double sided signs allowed for in the MOU, it appears that each side could reflect different businesses. Is this correct? We are in the process of ordering the fifth sign for installation and plan to make it double sided as allowed in our MOU.