Loading...
2006 11 14 PC Minutes MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA November 14, 2006 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was reconvened at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Quill who asked Mr. Chuck Shephardson to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Katie Barrows, and Chairman Paul Quill. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Alderson to excuse Commissioners Daniels and Engle. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Planning Manager Les Johnson, Development Services Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Andrew Mogensen, Assistant Planners Jay Wuu and Eric Ceja, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Quill asked if there were any corrections to the minutes of October 24, 2006. There being none, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Barrows to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: None. A. Sign Application 2006-1015; a request of PrestIVuksic Architects for consideration of a Sign Program to serve Caleo Bay, for the property located on the west side of Caleo Bay, north of Avenue 48. 1. Chairman Quill reopened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Eric Ceja presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. r;.\wpnnrc:::, pr lAin! ,~.,.<:\ "?MR\ 11 _1.4_n~ rln... Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Alderson asked if the sign approval was for location and size restrictions and not for particular tenants. Staff stated yes. 3. Commissioner Barrows asked if the landscaping lighting would remain on all night. Staff stated no, it would be turned off at 10:00 p.m. Staff has recommended the signage be off at 9:00 p.m. and landscaping lighting be turned off at 10:00 p.m. 4. Commissioner Alderson asked if the revised sign program submitted by the applicant at this meeting, had any major changes to the program they received in their packet. Staff explained the changes being proposed by the applicant. 5. Chairman Quill asked about the parking lot lighting. Staff stated the landscape lighting included the parking lot lighting. Chairman Quill asked if public safety had any concerns. Staff stated no comments had been received. 6. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Vuksick, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the program and reviewed the revisions they were proposing. 7. Commissioner Alderson asked if the applicant had any objections to the conditions. Mr. Vuksick stated yes. 8. Chairman Quill asked if they were objecting to the parking lot lights being turned off. Mr. Vuksick stated they did not consider parking lot lighting, by itself, in regard to when they would be turned off. It is their understanding that only the landscaping and signage lighting would be turned off. 9. Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. Bill Ivy, 78-655 Descanso Lane, representing Rancho La Quinta Homeowners' Association (HOAI, thanked the applicant for working with them in regard to this application. In regard to the parking lot lighting, they would like the same type of lighting as what is installed at Walgreens. They agree with the sign program as submitted. 10. There being no further public comment, Chairman Quill closed the public participation portion of the hearing. 2 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 11 . Commissioner Alderson stated the address numbers on the building are the same color as the building making it difficult to read. There should be a contrast between the two. 12. Chairman Quill asked staff to verify the parking lot lighting was approved under the original approval for the center. Staff confirmed. 13. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Barrows/Alderson to adopt Minute Motion 2006-027 approving Sign Application 2006-1015, as recommended and amended: a. Condition added: the revised sign program submitted by the applicant was approved. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2006-876; a request of Trans West Housing, Inc. for consideration of typical landscaping plans for residential production units within Griffin Ranch located within proposed Tentative Tract Map 32879 and 34642, south of Avenue 54, east of Madison Street, west of Monroe Street, and north of the Greg Norman Course. 1 . Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Marty Butler, representing the applicant, introduced Mr. Chuck Shepardson, landscape architect, who stated they agreed with staff's recommendations and were available to answer any questions. Mr. Shepardson explained they were not providing landscape options for the property owners in order to retain continuity throughout the development. 3. Commissioner Alderson asked if the equestrian trail landscaping would be different. Mr. Shepardson stated no, it would just have less turf. 3 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 4. Commissioner Barrows asked if the sprinkler heads would be set back from the road. Mr. Shepardson stated yes, 18-inches. Commissioner Barrows asked if there was a design to have turf next to the house. Mr. Shepardson stated it is not a preferred design due to problems that have come up. 5. Chairman Quill asked if there was curb and gutter. Mr. Shepardson stated there is a rolled curb. 6. Commissioner Alderson asked if the HOA could override the applicant in regard to the landscaping. Ms. Butler stated they are the HOA and the CC&R's will dictate the design. 7. Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment. There being none, the public participation portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Alderson/Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 2006-028 approving Site Development Permit 2006-876, as recommended. Unanimously approved. C. Conditional Use Permit 2006-101; a request of La Quinta Playhouse for consideration of temporary structures to conduct seasonal live play productions, for the property located at 78-059 Calle Estado; between Desert Club Drive and Avenida Bermudas. 1 . Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Jay Wuu presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Alderson asked staff to explain the conflict between the Temporary Use Permit and Conditional Use Permit. Staff explained the reasoning for both permits. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Reg Sentell, representing the La Quinta Playhouse, gave a presentation on the project. He requested that when the 4 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 season terminates they have seven days to remove the tent and bring the lot back to its original condition. They are requesting 14 days instead of the seven required in the conditions. Second request is that the "crowd pleaser" portable toilets were unattainable and they are looking for other sources, therefore, they are requesting to be allowed to use the standard toilets until such time as they find a different source. Lastly, they are questioning whether or not they should have a re-inspection of the property and tent. Planning Manager Les Johnson stated the Building and Safety Department will not be requiring any for this season, but the Community Development Department may in regard to the aesthetics to all of the conditions. Mr. Sentell stated they would ask for the Fire Department to make a final inspection. They would also like to ask for Commission approval to install lattice work with a small gate to soften the look between the tent and the trailer. On the other side of the tent they would like to install a staggered lattice panel wall to soften this side as well. 4. Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment. There being none, the public participation portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Barrows/Alderson to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006-040 approving Conditional Use Permit 2006-101, as recommended and amended: a. Condition 24: Modified to 14 days b. Condition added: Additional lattice screening shall be allowed as requested by the applicant ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Barrows, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Daniels and Engle. ABSTAIN: None. D. Site Development Permit 2006-870; a request of Craftsmen Homes for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for three prototypical residential plan types for use in Tract 32751 located on the west side of Jefferson Street, south side of Pomelo in the Citrus Course project. 1 . Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information 5 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 contained in the staff report, "a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Alderson asked if the casitas units in conjunction with the two-story homes will violate the height limitations. Staff stated they are subject to the 22-foot height limits and the two-story units will need to be placed on the lots furthest to the west. The lots adjacent to Jefferson Street are subject to the height limit. 3. Commissioner Barrows asked about the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRCl condition for a no-turf option for landscaping if the Homeowners' Association (HOAl will not allow it. Staff stated the HOA has stated they will not allow the no turf option, but staff left the condition in, however if the HOA CC&R's do not allow it and the HOA wants to enforce it, it was their option. The City would leave the condition. 4. Chairman Quill asked if the HOA was asked about the no-turf requirement. Staff stated the HOA was present and could answer this question. 5. Commissioner Alderson noted there were several different finishes to the landscape and hardscape as noted on the elevations; were these actually going to be constructed or was it artistic license. Staff stated the applicant would need to answer these questions. 6. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Scott Shaddix representing Craftsman Homes, stated the landscaping plans will have the artistic designs as noted on the plans. In regard to the casita units, it is an option to the property owner. They also want to allow landscape options to the property owners. In regard to the wall, it was originally required to be straightened, but through the process of working wit the different agencies they resolved the issues for the fire access. To resolve these issues they made the fire access within the project and the retention basins are a major part of the overall development. In order to move forward with the tract, the retention basins design is a major improvement for the entire community. To maintain this position the retention 6 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 basins need to remain as designed. This requires the wall to remain as it is currently constructed. This is also the desire of the HOA. Another condition is the requirement for an additional noise analysis to ensure the wall height meets to comply with outdoor noise requirements. This was not in the original conditions they reviewed. In regard to the wall, it was their understanding that moving the wall does not allow the safety factor they need for the design. The staff reports states moving the wall is not a major issue. To them it is; it is a safety factor to them. Lastly, Attachment 3, paragraph 2 of the staff report, it was his understanding they could work with the City to allow for the wall relocation to be an administrative issue. Now, the report states it must be straightened out. 7. Commissioner Barrows asked staff to clarify where the conditions were in regard to the wall. Staff stated the wall condition the applicant is referring to is part of the original tentative tract map approval. The Commission has no ability to change that at this time. The applicant can apply to change the conditions to the tract map if they chose to. 8. Chairman Quill stated the wall is inside the right-of-way of the existing Jefferson Street landscaping. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated the intent of the condition is to validate that the existing wall, as old as it is, will provide enough sound attenuation to comply with State law. If the units do not meet the criteria, and the property owners will be asking the City to build the wall the applicant should have built. It is a mitigation measure. It is not something that staff would or could adjust. Mr. Shaddix stated his request was for that portion of the wall that jets out only. It is also his understanding that this portion of the wall was under the ownership of the HOA. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated the original condition was discussed at the original public hearings for approval of the tentative tract map. 9. Chairman Quill stated the City will make sure that the wall meets the noise condition and the need for the wall to jet out no longer exists. 10. Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. Robert Crowell, 79-890 Citrus Street, current President of HOA, for the Citrus Course, stated that in regard to the wall relocation, he does not understand why there is a need to move 7 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 it. It is his understanding that the applicant will need to do a noise study to determine noise levels. Why does that affect the moving of the wall? Chairman Quill stated one concern is the aesthetics and the setbacks the City wants along its Arterial streets. It is the City's desire to have a parkway that is consistent with the remainder Jefferson Street. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated it is a community design standards, and it was debated during the public hearing when the tract was approved and decided it should be moved back. Chairman Quill stated the retention basin is in a position that it could drain into the street if it exceeds its design capacity. Development Services Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer stated that in discussions with the applicant's engineer for the project, he stated the retention could comply, it would just require a redesign. Mr. Crowell stated the HOA objected was because the landscaping did not comply with the architectural standards for Citrus Course. Having turf would be consistent with the rest of the community. They went to CVWD and they stated that since there was a grandfather condition, they would allow limited turf. Chairman Quill asked if anyone came to the HOA requesting front yard desert landscaping they would be denied. Mr. Crowell stated they would deny the request. 11. Mr. Cary Smith 50-965 Mandarina, stated this developer has done a very good job on this project to date. However, in his opinion not enough attention has been given to the traffic impact to Mandarina. He would request the City take a look at the traffic concerns that these 49 homes will create on this street. 12. Mr. Mark Mandella, 51-055 Mandarina, stated he concurred with Mr. Smith's concern. This area was originally to be a golf hole. The traffic will be an awkward as well as dangerous. In addition, he does not understand the house plans with the granny flat do not qualify for a two-story home. This is inconsistent with every home in the Citrus. 13. Mr. Scott Shaddix stated that if you review the plans you will see that the plan is not a two-story unit. 14. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 8 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 15. Commissioner Alderson stated the traffic concerns would have been debated during the tract map approval. Staff stated that was correct. In regard to the casitas unit, it is only an option. Staff noted they are allowed to have this design. 16. Commissioner Barrows stated she was unsure why we were requiring a no turf option that will have no validity. Staff stated the applicant will have to accept the condition if it is placed on the project. 17. Chairman Quill asked for clarification on the roof tile; is it a two piece mudded or clay tile. Staff stated it is a one-piece mudded clay tile. 18. Chairman Quill reopened the public hearing. Mr. Shaddix stated there will be five different landscape plans. These plans were worked out with the HOA and CVWD to have symmetry and balance. He is not sure a no turf option can be used. 19. Chairman Barrows stated that in the City's standards it is a requirement and an important consideration of the City and Valley as well. 20. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Barrows/Alderson to adopt Minute Motion 2006-029 approving Site Development Permit 2006-870, as recommended. Unanimously approved. E. Right-of-Way Vacation 2006-014 and Street Vacation 2006-042; a request of East of Madison, LLC for a report of finding under California Government Code Section 65402 that the proposed Right-of- Way/Street Vacation of a :l: 3, 117-foot length of Avenue 53 is consistent with the General Plan. 1 . Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Development Services Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Alderson asked if the remainder piece would remain to service the adjacent community. Staff stated the 9 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 remainder will remain a public street and the Carmella development will take access off of it. This is an approval needed for the applicant to go ahead with their tract approval. 3. Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment. There being none, the public participation portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. . 4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Barrows/Alderson to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006-041 approving Right-of-Way Vacation 2006-014 and Street Vacation 2006-042, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Quill. NOES: None. ABSENT: and Engle. ABSTAIN: None. Barrows, and Chairman Commissioner Daniels F. Zoning Code Amendment 2006-088; a request of the City for consideration of an Amendment to Chapter 9, Section 9.140.080- Supplemental Regulations of the La Quinta Municipal Code regulating the development and usage of future condominium hotel units in Tourist Commercial Districts. 1 . Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Community DevelOPment Director Doug Evans presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Alderson asked if other cities' were dealing with the same issue. Staff noted other cities that were, or have been discussing how to handle the issue. Commissioner Alderson asked if you owned one of these units, can you legally dictate the use of the unit. Staff stated yes; the owner is not required to participate through the hotel. They can choose an independent agent, but the keys must be kept by the hotel. If they chose not to participate with the hotel. they would still be required to pay the resort fees for the expected Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) fees. 3. Commissioner Barrows asked if the revised Resolution contained the changes requested by staff. Staff stated these are refinements as dictated by th<<;! City Attorney. Commissioner 10 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 Barrows asked if this was an existing condition in other cities. Staff stated it is in Indian Wells Ordinance and other cities as well. The City would prefer they remain traditional hotels, In the City's research it was found that the gap financing to make a traditional hotel work would not be cost effective for the City. Staff reviewed a broad spectrum of financing options and believe this was the best solution. 4. Chairman Quill asked if the City has an ordinance for fractional time-share units in regard to TOT. Staff stated there are none currently in the City and this is the purpose of this ordinance. 5. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. .Rob Bernheimer, representing the Lake La Quinta Inn, stated he was also a Council Member for the City of Indian Wells and discussed how they were handling this issue. In regard to the Lake La Quinta Inn, this is a 1 2 unit Inn that has not been successful for the owner, or in regard to TOT for the City. They would ask that Section 1.1 be changed to "...all existing hotels in excess of 20 rooms". He does not want to explore what this hotel intends to do, they just want to preserve their right to do something. 6. Chairman Quill asked if the Council adopts this Ordinance as it is presented,. is there any option for an applicant to ask for an ordinance to be waived in any situation that would be unique. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston stated a variance would not be applicable in this instance. The mechanism would be to amend the ordinance. 7. There being no further public participation portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 8. Commissioner Alderson asked if this was going to the Council. Staff stated yes. 9. Commissioner Barrows asked if the Lake La Quinta Inn was a hotel. Staff stated it is a hotel. Commissioner Barrows asked if Mr. Bernheimer's request was reasonable.' Staff stated there are some fundamental difficulties to this site that make it challenging relative to the activities and intent. If a business plan does not work for'the condo hotels, as it does not work for the current use, the owners will do things that do not comply with their permits to make it survive. There are some 11 Planning Commission Minutes (Ilovember 14, 2006 challenges to this property to allow it to convert to a condominium hotel. 10. Commissioner Barrows asked if the Ordinance is approved as drafted, the Inn could come back asking it to be amended. 11 . There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Alderson/Barrows to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006-042 approving Zoning Code Amendment 2006-088, as recommended with consideration explore the ramifications of allowing the less than 20 units. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Barrows, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Daniels and Engle. ABSTAIN: None. G. Development Agreement 2006-012; a request of the City for consideration of a Development Agreement establishing the fees associated with condo-hotel occupancy at the proposed boutique hotel at SilverRock Resort located at the southwest corner of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52. 1 . Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Community Development Director Doug Evans presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Barrows asked what the water agreements entail. Staff clarified there is a Master Agreement on the site and this requires each developer to follow through with the Master Agreement with CVWD. 3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked if there was any other public comment. There being none, the public participation portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Barrows/Alderson to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006-043 approving Development Agreement 2006-012, as recommended. 12 Planning Commission Minutes November 14, 2006 ROll CAll: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Barrows, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Daniels and Engle. ABSTAIN: None. BUSINESS ITEM: None VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Staff asked if the Commission would prefer to go dark for the meeting of December 26, 2006. Commissioners unanimously voted to go dark for this meeting. B. Review of City Council meeting of November 7,2006. C. Commissioner Barrows asked about the Lighting Ordinance Work Program. Staff explained the process that was currently being considered. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Alderson to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on November 28, 2006. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:31 p.m. on November 14, 2006. Respectfully submitted, J~ yer, Executive Secretary a Quinta, California 13