Loading...
2008 09 09 PCCity of La Quinta Planning Commission Agendas are now G 45 available on the City's Web Page E`�OF Tt�'9 @ 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 SEPTMBER 9, 2008 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2008-024 Beginning Minute Motion 2008-015 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 Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of August 26, 2008. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: 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 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 2004-821, EXTENSION NO. 1 Applicant............ Mega Dealer, LLC Location ............. Southeast Corner of Adams Street and Auto Centre Drive Request ............. Consideration of a One -Year Extension of Time for Construction of an Approximately 30,000 Square Foot Auto Dealership Facility. Action ............... Resolution 2008- . VI. BUSINESS ITEM: VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: IX. DIRECTOR ITEMS: X. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on September 23, 2008, at 7:00 p.m. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, September 9, 2008 was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, on Friday, September 5, 2008. DATED: September 5, 2008 MONIKA ADEV , Secret for CAROLYN WALKER, 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 777-7123, 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 777-7123. 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. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA August 26, 2008 CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Ed Alderson who led the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Katie Barrows, Paul Quill, Mark Weber, Robert Wilkinson, and Chairman Ed Alderson. C. Staff present: Planning Director Les Johnson, Planning Manager David Sawyer, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chairman Ed Alderson asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of July 22, 2008. There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Weber to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Conditional Use Permit 2008-113; a request of Gary Steven for consideration of a Conditional Use Permit for an Ice Skating Rink in an Existing Commercial Space in the Regional Commercial (CR) District, located at 79-430 Highway 111; north of Highway 111; approximately 150 feet west of Dune Palms Road. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. PAReports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Chairman Alderson asked staff if there was any input from the neighboring community. Staff said there were no negative comments, only positive comments from the surrounding retailers. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if there were any applicant representatives or comments. Mr. Gary Steven, 79-220 Violet, La Quinta CA 92253, was introduced and provided information on the operation of the skating rink previously located in Cathedral City. He expressed his need for a larger rink and explained the new rink was not an NHL -sized rink. However, he does have plans to build a larger rink in the future. He said currently children are traveling from one rink to another to play hockey and practice figure skating. The proposed rink would be used for figure and public skating. He described the hours the rink would be used and said he plans to be operational in two weeks. He told the Commissioners the other tenants of the center are excited about having him as a tenant. Chairman Alderson asked if Mr. Steven was the applicant/owner. Mr. Steven replied he was. Commissioner Weber said he thought it was a great proposal and great for La Quinta. He asked what was the percentage of La Quinta children skating in the league. Mr. Steven said 80% of his business was from La Quinta. Mr. Steven then produced the numbers of students from elementary, middle-, and high-school who were interested in using the new facility and said they have now formed a La Quinta hockey club. He said the enthusiasm was amazing. Commissioner Weber asked if the move from full size to three-quarter size would pose any limitations. Mr. Steven explained that the old rink was actually smaller than the new one and gave the measurements of each. He explained how teams sometimes have to adjust to the different rink sizes, but noted that they would not be able to host championship games at the rink. Commissioner Weber asked if he was anticipating a higher attendance for league play or figure skating. Mr. Steven said the biggest draw would actually be birthday parties which happen during public skating. He then described some of the events which are being planned and the hours allocated to accommodate those events. PAReports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 6-26-08.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Commissioner Weber asked if any events were planned which would require a large amount of parking. Mr. Steven explained how the event parking had been handled in Cathedral City and said there had never been a problem. He added, the events are largely drop-off and pick-up with no parking problems. Commissioner Quill thanked Mr. Steven for opening this type of business. He said the City should be promoting recreational venues and applauded Mr. Steven for promoting this use. Commissioner Quill commented that if there was anything the City could do, to help this business owner financially, they should certainly do it. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the cost of public skating. Mr. Steven gave him the proposed prices of $8 per/child, $10 per/adults plus $4 for skate rental. Mr. Steven stated it was very inexpensive entertainment. Commissioner Wilkinson said he shared Commissioner Quill's enthusiasm of this new facility. Chairman Alderson asked if there would be provisions for a concession area. Mr. Steven said they would like to add a concession area in the future. Chairman Alderson said he shared Commissioner Quill's enthusiasm. There being no further applicant comments Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. There was no further discussion, and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Barrows to approve Resolution 2008-023 recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2008-113, as recommended. Unanimously approved. B. Sign Program 2003-734 Amendment No. 1; a request of Sign -A -Rama (Chad Addington) for consideration of an Amendment to update the Sign Program for the Corporate Center Professional Plaza to allow illuminated and larger signs, in the Corporate Centre Professional Plaza located at 79- 215 — 79-245 Corporate Center Drive. PAReports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Weber asked about the sign area shown on the exhibit. He asked if that was the applicant's representation of the 100 square foot sign. Staff replied that was added by staff for illustrative purposes only and explained what was shown on the Power Point exhibit. Chairman Alderson asked if the approval requested was for larger signs and illumination. He asked staff to reiterate their recommendations. Staff gave a brief overview of their recommendations. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if there were any applicant representatives or comments. Mr. Chad Addington, 80-890 Via Puerta Azul, La Quinta, the applicant's representative, was introduced, and gave the Commissioners a new exhibit. He explained the banner, in the exhibit shown, was 24 square feet. Chairman Alderson asked what area was he referring to. Mr. Addington pointed out the area. The sign originally requested was 74.8 square feet. He had copies of the sign he proposed versus the one the City would approve at 54 square feet. Chairman Alderson asked if staff could display the exhibit Mr. Addington had brought for the meeting. Staff was unable to display the exhibit and a copy was distributed to the Commissioners. Jeff Grady, Partner of Sign -a -Rama, 43-611 Corte Del Oro, La Quinta was introduced and spoke on behalf of Steve Parvero (Blood Bank). He explained he was proposing north and west facing, 38 square foot signs for the Blood Bank. He had also brought exhibits which were distributed to the Commissioners. Chairman Alderson asked about the possible expansion of the Blood Bank. PAReports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Mr. Steve Parvero, Vice President of Blood Services of the Blood Bank, was introduced and said they are currently utilizing the whole building and would not need to expand. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the size of the sign shown on The Blood Bank exhibit. Mr. Grady replied it was 37.75 square feet. Commissioner Quill asked about the name shown on The Blood Bank sign exhibit. Mr. Parvero explained they used a fictitious name, on the exhibit presented to the Commission, since they are currently going through a name change. They have a campaign planned and would like to have their new name remain a secret for now. Chairman Alderson asked if they were asking for a new sign as well as the one they currently have. Mr. Parvero said yes. Commissioner Quill asked if they were asking for the same square footage for both signs. Mr. Grady said not for the Blood Bank. Commissioner Barrows asked Mr. Grady to clarify if they were requesting two 37.75 square foot signs for the Blood Bank on two different sides of the building for a total of 76 square feet and 75 square feet for the other signs. Mr. Addington said they were actually a total of 74.8 square feet with linear footage a little over 100 feet which was based on one square foot of signage per linear foot. Chairman Alderson asked for clarification of the square footage. Mr. Addington reiterated his previous statement. Planning Director Les Johnson said with reference to the information regarding the Blood Bank, he was not aware of two signs being proposed. This was new information to staff and had only been presented at this meeting. The staff report, presented to the Commission, did not involve any information on The Blood Bank. The information presented involved only one sign per tenant. He added, if the Commission wished to entertain two signs, that would require an amendment. The original report/request clearly stated one sign allowance per tenant and the presentation from the applicant was something staff was previously unaware of. There being no further applicant comments Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. PAReports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Weber said it looked like staff determined several things were acceptable regarding illumination. He was more inclined to go along with the staff's recommendation in that they made the necessary analysis of the area. He thought the staff recommendation to maintain the 50-foot standard was appropriate. He added the size of the sign would not make much difference to anyone going down Corporate Way as they would be able to see the signs. The current sign seemed a little small but was only temporary and half the recommended standard. He said he would prefer to stay with the standard of one sign per tenant. Commissioner Barrows wanted to clarify the exhibit shown earlier identifying the sign area as 50 square feet. Assistant Planner Franco said the size of the box shown was approximate. It was only an example to show what the applicant was proposing at the location of the 50 square foot sign. Chairman Alderson re -opened the public portion of the meeting to allow a comment from Mr. Addington. Mr. Addington said the exhibit he handed out to the Commission with the 50 square foot sign was shown to scale. Commissioner Weber asked if the representation on the screen was a three foot by eight foot (a 24 square foot) sign which is a half - representation of a 50 square foot sign. Mr. Addington replied it was. Chairman Alderson re -closed the public portion of the meeting. Commissioner Barrows said she was comfortable with staff's recommendation with the 50 square foot sign. Commissioner Wilkinson asked for clarification of whether they were referring to one sign or two. He asked about a representation on the screen and the remark about a sign on the north and the west sides of the building. Assistant Planner Franco said the amendment referred to signs on the north side. As presented at this meeting, The Blood Bank, was now asking for a sign on the west side of the building. The previous recommendation was only for the north side of the building. P:\Reports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 6 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Commissioner Quill asked staff to mark (on the exhibits) where the signs would be placed and identify the buildings and number of signs requested for each. Staff said the sign program limited the applicant to one sign per tenant. Commissioner Wilkinson asked where the signs were proposed. Planning Manager Sawyer identified the location of the signs as proposed by staff versus those proposed by the applicant. Commissioner Wilkinson reiterated what staff had said. Planning Director Johnson explained the marking on the exhibits. Staff further explained the applicant showed two signs per building, but there was currently only one tenant per building. There was the potential for more tenants at a future date. Chairman Alderson re -opened the public hearing. Mr. Addington said the original amendment he proposed was just for signage on the north elevation and he was working with Dr. Hockings. The Blood Bank proposal came in after he put in the original proposal. He would like the north elevation signs approved tonight and he understood The Blood Bank could submit their sign request later. Commissioner Quill said what they were looking at tonight was if there were four tenants they could have four signs, but since there are only two tenants only two signs would be approved. Later tenants could be added and signs could be added. Staff said that was correct. Commissioner Quill asked if the Commission could discuss the addition presented by the applicant tonight. Staff said it was new information but the Commission could consider it if they so chose, Chairman Alderson asked if he understood correctly that the Commission was approving as the staff recommended. Staff said yes, as well as the new information they were considering which included the potential of more than one sign and the addition of the west elevation sign in the sign program. Commissioner Wilkinson asked how the Commission would accomplish that. Staff replied they would have to state, within their motion, staff shall work with the applicant to ensure the program was amended accordingly. Chairman Alderson asked if they would see the fifth sign. PAReports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Commissioner Quill said they could recommend that it be the same size. Staff said the sign program, as it was currently written, would not allow more than one sign per tenant. You would have to allow signage on the west elevation and also specifically identify the additional signs. Commissioner Wilkinson asked since The Blood Bank currently occupied the entire building, if they left would the replacement business have to have their sign approved by staff. Staff said the signs would not come before the Commission if they adhered to the Sign Program. Commissioner Quill asked if the Commission could add the language, by condition, for the west facing sign. Chairman Alderson added that the condition would state staff should review the sign and it would not come back to the Commission. Planning Director Johnson suggested the Commission be definitive in what they would like to see and not leave it to staff's discretion. Commissioner Quill said the west facing sign was visible from the parking lot and it is a fairly visible location. This is a community blood bank and they want people to know where it is. He said personally he would not be adverse to allowing a sign for a single tenant. By virtue of The Blood Bank occupying the whole building there is no opportunity for them to put up two signs. All the applicant is suggesting is the sign facing west could give them additional visibility. He would not be adverse to that. He would personally agree to the proposition they allow the 50 square foot sign on the west face and follow all the other conditions of approval. Chairman Alderson asked if the rest of the conditions would remain the same. Commissioner Quill replied they would. Commissioner Weber asked staff if it would pose any undue hardship to staff if the signs were not approved. Staff said it is not a matter of undue hardship. Staff does not disagree that it does give exposure on Adams. They question the need for an additional large sign, and suggested they could use a door sign, or other signage. The question being; is there a need for two 50 square foot signs on the building if they are getting the exposure. The way Corporate Center is identified now at this site, just beyond the east driveway, it is a cul-de-sac, with all the trips coming from Adams. P:\Reports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Commissioner Weber agreed with what Commissioner Quill had proposed. He added that The Blood Bank customers could potentially also be customers of the Gym and the additional sign could make The Blood Bank more visible to them. Also if Corporate Center Way were to go through the additional sign would be in an appropriate spot. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Wilkinson to approve Minute Motion 2008-014, recommending approval of Sign Program 2003-734, Amendment No. 1, as recommended in the staff report with the following additions: 6. The tenant occupying the northwest portion of building one will be allowed an additional 50 square foot sign on the west face of Building One. Unanimously approved. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Discussion of Whitewater Channel Multi -Use Trails. Planning Director Les Johnson responded to Commissioner Quill's request for an update on the Whitewater Channel Multi -Use Trail and distributed a copy of the proposed Whitewater Channel Multi -Use Trail Map. He noted this trail was identified in the 2002 General Plan. He said the Coachella Valley Parks and Recreation District has embarked on three trails to be established. He has been working with the Planning Department (CVPRD) and the City's Community Services Department and they have all been talking with nearby communities about working on a continuous trail. It would be more of a success to obtain grants if this a joint effort. He said a meeting was held, in mid -July, with the City of Indio to discuss a multi -use trail and found both cities were in about the same place. There will be another meeting again in September and the City of Coachella will be included in that meeting. P:\Reports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 9 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 He said La Quinta will be coordinating with the other cities, but it is undetermined, at this time, when they will be dialoguing with the City Manager regarding a feasibility study on the trail. He said it is early in the process but there is quite a bit of interest, from the staff, in La Quinta as well as Indio. He distributed an exhibit to the Commissioners of the proposed site showing access along the Commercial Corridor (Highway 1 1 1). He added, if they can work it out with Indio it would open access to the east. On the second page of the exhibit, there was a larger scale of the Indio portion of the Whitewater Channel and the Indio Boulevard/1-10 Corridor which showed there was nothing currently mapped out, but it illustrated the large amount of people this corridor could reach. The General Plan has a significant amount of language that supports this program being established. He was encouraged by the potential of seeing something move on this. Commissioner Quiil said we've had the trails on the General Plan and have conditioned them as an improvement. The reason this discussion came up was because of the last parcel at the corner of Dune Palms and Highway 111. There was a question as to how we would condition them to build their portion. He had the following questions: • Who's got the condition to build this anywhere else along this corridor, adjacent to their property? • If we haven't conditioned anybody else, is it okay to condition new development to do their piece, fund their piece, or bond their piece? • If were looking at this as a joint city project, and the City of Indio is on board with that, is this more of the kind of thing where we just want cooperation, or do we want grant money sources for non -motorized transportation routes? • How do we actually condition projects with the few parcels left, in terms of development (Highway 1 1 1) along the wash and how do we condition projects, for the future? • And what does this mean for the developer who was approved at the last Planning Commission meeting? P:\Reports - PM2008\9-09-08NMinutes 8-26-08.doc 10 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Planning Director Johnson pointed out the following: ■ He outlined other projects which had been conditioned for development contributions. ■ Even though the General Plan supports a trail to be established there is not an actual plan that definitely moves forward with a policy to support it. ■ The feasibility study will give substance to defining what the improvement would be and provide a better opportunity to identify financial contributions. ■ Our position is that even though we have one project that is conditioned, we see it as Indio does, we are going to have to identify other financial resources to make this happen. ■ Palm Desert's successful trail plan, along the 1-10 corridor, provided a lot of optimism and hope that other cities can be as successful in joining together to obtain grant funding sources. We see that the majority of the costs of this plan are going to have to be borne by grant funding sources. ■ We are trying to work with Indio to do a feasibility study that all cities contribute to. It may not be possible and we may have to do it on our own. We want to make sure that the trail material, width, etc. will be consistent. But in the final analysis, there should be a different feel on the trails between our city and other communities and that will be a way to let people know they have arrived in La Quinta. There will be components that are different and independent from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. The biggest benefit, from a funding standpoint, and our greatest success is in working jointly. Commissioner Comments were as follows: ■ Commissioner Quill said CVRPD (Coachella Valley Recreation and Parks District) is working on a feasibility study right now. Planning Director Johnson said once they had met with the other two cities, they would then be working with Mr. Ford of CVRPD. ■ Commissioner Weber said Community Services is actively working on this trails plan. He mentioned the challenge is to get the level of detail done in a timely manner. He added he is fully supportive of this and it will be a great project for the City of La Quinta. He thanked Commissioner Quill for bringing up the subject for discussion. P:\Reports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc I ] Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 ■ Commissioner Barrows said, in terms of the issues identified in the feasibility study, the developments have already been approved and what remains are the back sides of stores which presents a challenge. The feasibility study would look at the entrance and exit points on the trails. She was interested in the use of the trails for actual bike usage, as well as a paved trail. She asked if these features were part of the CVRPD Study. ■ Commissioner Quill said they are looking at land ownership in the feasibility study. He said most people think it will be a Class I bike trail, as a base level requirement. He would also recommend that they should look at the north side, of the wash, as well. The north side would be more feasibile since it has a gentler slope and would be more buildable. The south side is more erodible. The north side has a gentler slope. ■ Staff said they are open to options on either side, but are currently focusing on the south side. If the south side is chosen they will work with the neighboring property owners to provide safe access to those properties. One component of the multi -use trails is the convenience factor since it is what gets people to use them. That is critical. It needs to be inviting, encouraging, and tastefully done; complementary to the way the City is built out. It should encourage people to utilize the commercial corridor. ■ Commissioner Wilkinson asked about funding. Staff said, at this time, they have not discussed who would be doing the funding. ■ Commissioner Quill said the Community Trails Group has discussed funding. He said the cities need to come together, like La Quinta, and once those plans are on the books, foundations will fund substantial amounts of money to groups like the Community Trails Group. There is a lot of money available. The challenge is to get the trail designed. ■ Planning Director Johnson mentioned the Council/Commission Joint Meeting on November 25t' and suggested the Commissioners might want to bring up this subject. He said he would talk with the City Manager about scheduling this as an agenda item. P:\Reports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 12 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 • Chairman Alderson said this land is not CVWD land. When he was working with the Point Happy development they had to put up a deposit for an eventual sidewalk. The land they were talking about securing for the trail was the landowner's property. ■ Staff said their understanding is there is not a parcel -by -parcel analysis. In preliminary checking, on the south side, some land belongs to CVWD and some is privately owned. It is hoped the ownership will be identified in the study.. ■ Commissioner Quill said a lot of this land is simply easement; floodway easement, dedicated to CVWD. There are other uses allowed. He gave the example of the Monterey Country Club. He said the idea of a trail becomes tough when dealing with other cities, who do not favor the plan, because they can just say "no". • Commissioner Quill said as you go down the trail there is every conceivable form of ownership. Some are owned by CVWD and some are privately owned. ■ Chairman Alderson said the City has land that is provisioned, and some that is not. ■ City Attorney Jenson said the City does have the power of eminent domain and this use would qualify as a public purpose. ■ Commissioner Weber said Community Services is identifying the owners, for public record. CVWD has indicated they are in support of this trail. Eminent domain would be an opportunity once the cities band together. The sheer weight of those numbers would help convince unwilling cities this is a valuable use. IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: A. Joint Council Meeting Planning Director Les Johnson advised the Commission of a Joint Council meeting on November 25, 2008. The Planning Commission is scheduled to meet with the Council at 5:00 p.m. in the Study Session Room. P:\Reports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 13 Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 2008 Commissioner Barrows asked if all the other commissions would be done the same night. Staff replied they would. She commented she might not be able to attend as she had a previous commitment. Staff said they would confirm the time and place, via email, to the Commissioners. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Wilkinson to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting to be held on September 9, 2008. This regular meeting was adjourned at 8:21 p.m. on August 26, 2008. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\2008\9-09-08\Minutes 8-26-08.doc 14 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821, EXTENSION 1 APPLICANT: MEGA DEALER, LLC PROPERTY OWNER: MEGA DEALER, LLC REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 30,000 SQUARE FOOT AUTO DEALERSHIP FACILITY LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND AUTO CENTRE DRIVE ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS PREVIOUSLY CONDUCTED AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT IN CONJUNCTION WITH A SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 97011055) WHICH WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER 17, 1998 PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) FOR THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029, AMENDMENT 4. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RC (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) ZONING DESIGNATION: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: AUTO CENTRE DRIVE; AUTO DEALERSHIP SOUTH: VACANTLAND EAST: AUTO CENTRE WAY SOUTH; VACANT LAND WEST: ADAMS STREET; LAKE LA QUINTA 1 PROJECT BACKGROUND Site Development Permit 2004-821 was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on March 22, 2005. The permit was due to expire on March 22, 2007; however, an application for a one-year time extension was submitted exactly on that date. The time extension request has taken over a year to process as the applicant has been participating in on -going discussions with the City of La Quinta Redevelopment Agency regarding various project characteristics that involve the subject property and an adjacent dealership, Torre Nissan. Approval of this one-year time extension request would establish a new expiration date of September 9, 2009. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The approved project design includes plans to construct an approximately 29,985 square foot auto dealership facility on a 3.59 acre site located on the southeast corner of Adams Street and Auto Centre Drive within the Centre at La Quinta (Attachment 1). The Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan (SP 97-029), as amended, was approved by the City Council to allow auto dealerships south of Highway 111 and east of Adams Street. Site Development Permit 2004-821 consists of development plans for a fourth dealership. The previously -approved plans identify the fourth dealership as Mazda; however, at this time is uncertain as to exactly who the dealership will be. Site Plan The project site includes frontages on Adams Street, Auto Centre Drive, and Auto Centre Way South, with vehicular access provided on the north and east side of the property (Attachment 2). The 29,985 square foot facility is sited generally parallel to Adams Street with the main sales entrance and showroom located on the north side of the building and an automobile service area with twelve service bays and storage areas located on the south side of the building. Approximately fifteen parking spaces are provided near the showroom entrance for customers; the remainder of the property is designated for new and used vehicle display and inventory. The building is approximately 200 feet east of Adams Street, beyond the Secondary Image Corridor setback limiting building heights to 22 feet. Architectural Design The two-story flat roof facility is approximately 26 feet in height. The rectangular shaped structure is constructed of split face concrete block on three sides with numerous openings for windows, doors, and service entrances. The front elevation will be a steel frame front with heavy gauge metal, stuccoed block, and glass (Attachment 3, Sheet A-3.0). The principle facade elements will be painted black and parrot green with blue doors and orange accented aluminum window frames. The facility entry feature is a metal canopy at the main entry driveway that will match the building's front elevation. 2 Landscape Plan Landscaping is provided around the perimeter of the property with planters in the vehicle display area (Attachment 4). The landscape palette consists of various trees, shrubs, and groundcover. The tree palette includes numerous Acacias, Palo Verdes, and Mexican Fan Palms. The shrub and groundcover palette includes Birds of Paradise, Oleanders, Bougainvilleas, and Lantanas, among others. Landscaping within the Adams Street landscape setback, which consists of water -efficient desert landscaping and a minimal amount of turf, was completed with the first phase of the Auto Mall; however, a six foot high block wall has been conditioned to be added for screening purposes along Adams Street behind the existing landscaping. Additionally, the applicant has proposed to place automobile display nodes within the landscaped area along Auto Centre Drive and at the northeast corner of the project site at Auto Centre Drive and Auto Centre Way South (Attachment 2, 4). This proposal was not included in the original entitlement process. The approved conceptual landscaping plan for the auto dealership was submitted and approved prior to the adoption of the most recent water -efficiency standards. Although the project landscaping may have features that may not comply with these current standards, conditions of approval requiring compliance with the new standards have been added. Compliance with these standards will be confirmed during the final landscaping plan process. Lighting The lighting plan for the dealership is consistent with the lighting standards and layout specifications in the Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan with vehicle display lighting to be the same as the existing dealers (Attachment 3, Sheet E-2A). Box lights will be mounted on 24-foot high poles with 1000-watt metal halide lamps, which is consistent with the Specific Plan lighting for the Auto Mall. As conditioned, illumination levels for the site, particularly along the Adams Street property line, should have a minimal impact on traffic and neighboring residents. ANALYSIS As part of the project's original review and approval, it was found that the site layout and building design are in compliance with the La Quinta Municipal Code and with the Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan. A number of concerns that were raised during the initial entitlement process, mainly dealing with loudspeakers, lighting, and screening, have been alleviated with conditions of approval (Attachment 5). For instance, the use of loudspeakers has been prohibited, site lighting has been reduced and redirected away from the adjacent residential neighborhoods, additional architectural features have been added, and a six-foot high block wall is required along Adams Street for screening. With regards to the proposed automobile display areas located within the perimeter landscaping area, staff believes that the applicant should apply for a Modification by 3 Applicant at a later date, and therefore does not recommend approval of this change to the site plan. The proposed one-year time extension of the site development permit in no way changes the project from its original approval. Since there are no design or site changes, the original intent of the project, as well as the subsequent conditions of approval, are still applicable. A number of revisions to the previously -approved conditions of approval are proposed, and are highlighted in bold in the attached recommended conditions of approval. These amended conditions bring the project into compliance with new procedures that have been implemented since the original project approval, such as storm water retention standards, water -efficiency standards, and final landscaping plan procedures, and do not significantly affect the project's design. Public Notice This request was published in The Desert Sun newspaper on August 29, 2008, and mailed to all affected property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the proposed project site as required by Section 9.200.110 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. No comments have been received as of this report's preparation; any correspondence received interim to the public hearing will be transmitted to the Planning Commission. Public Agency Review This request was sent to all applicable City departments and affected public agencies on July 1, 2008. All written comments received are on file and available for review with the Planning Department. All applicable comments have been incorporated in the recommended Conditions of Approval, as appropriate. FINDINGS Findings to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2008-_, approving a one-year time extension for Site Development Permit 2004-821, subject to findings and conditions of/approval. by: Y WIYU, Associate Planner M Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Conceptual Grading Plans, 3. Project Development Plans 4. Preliminary Landscape Plan 5. Minutes of March 22, 2005 Planning Commission Meeting PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ONE YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR CONSTRUCTION OF AN APPROXIMATELY 30,000 SQUARE FOOT AUTO DEALERSHIP FACILITY CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 APPLICANT: MEGA DEALER, LLC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 9" day of September, 2008, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, to review building elevations, site plans, and landscaping plans for an approximately 29,985 square foot auto dealership facility, located on approximately 3.59 acres generally located south of Highway 111, east of Adams Street, more particu►arly described as: PARCEL 1 OF PARCEL MAP 28525-1; and WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The La Quinta Planning Department has previously conducted an environmental assessment in conjunction with a Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (State Clearing House No. 97011055) which was Certified by the City Council on November 17, 1998 pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for The Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment 4. No changed circumstances or conditions are proposed which would trigger the preparation of subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21 166; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did, in accordance with LQMC Section 9.200.080, make the following mandatory finding: 1. The proposed one-year time extension for Site Development Permit 2004-821 is justified by the circumstances of the project. Through the initial approval process, it was determined that the proposed building design and site layout are in compliance with the City of La Quinta Municipal Code, General Plan, and the Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan. The current request for a time extension does not include any amendments to the previously reviewed and approved development plans, and there have been no significant changes to the City's Municipal Code that would necessitate a modification of the approved plans. ri Planning Commission Resolution 2008- Site Development Permit 2004-821 Extension 1 Mega Dealer, LLC September 9, 2008 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 Commission in this case; 2. That it does approve Site Development Permit 2004-821 Extension 1 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 City Planning Commission, held on this the 9" day of September, 2008, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ED ALDERSON, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: LES JOHNSON Planning Director City of La Quinta, California 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 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 shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code § § 66410 through 66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"). The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-guinta.org. 3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Improvement Permit) • Planning Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District YID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency • South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley 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. 9 * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 A project -specific NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the applicant; and who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOI"), prior to the issuance of a grading or site construction permit by the City. 4. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES Stormwater discharge permit, LOMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin Region Board Order No. R7-2008-001. and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this project. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (LQMC Section 8.70.020 (Definitions)):. 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval ' 9 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant to this project. F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. Additionally, the applicant shall comply with applicable provisions for post -construction runoff per the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 at seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board — Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2008-0001. G. For post -construction urban runoff from New Development and Redevelopments Projects, the applicant shall implement requirements of the NPDES permit for the design, construction and perpetual operation and maintenance of BMPs per the approved Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the project as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board — Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2008-001. H. The applicant shall implement the WQMP Design Standards per (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2008-0001 utilizing BMPs approved by the City Engineer. 5. 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). PROPERTY RIGHTS 6. 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 * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 7. The applicant shall offer for dedication all public street right-of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 8. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet containing the draft final map submitted for map checking, an offsite street geometric layout, drawn at 1 " equals 40 feet, detailing the following design aspects: median curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane widths, left turn lanes, deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The geometric layout shall be accompanied with sufficient professional engineering studies to confirm the appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and auxiliary lanes that may impact the right of way dedication required of the project and the associated landscape setback requirement 9. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right- of-ways shown on the approved Parcel Map No. 28525-2, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the City. 10. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. A 20-foot landscape setback along the east side of Adams Street (Lot C of Parcel Map No. 28525-2) and a 16-foot sidewalk/landscape easement along the north side of Auto Centre Drive and the west side of Auto Centre Way South has been provided for Parcel 1 of PM 28525-2. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final Map. * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 11. The vehicular access restriction are as shown on the recorded Parcel Map No. 28525-2. 12. 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. 13. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Tentative Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. 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. 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. 14. 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. A. On -Site Commercial Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal B. PM10 Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal C. SWPPP 1 " = 40' Horizontal Note. A thru C to be submitted concurrently. * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 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. The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on annotated print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2001 California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. "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 and proposed handicap parking shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans at a scale to be determined by the Public Works Department. Precise Grading Plans shall also require approval by the Community Development and Building and Safety Departments. 15. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the "Plans, Notes and Design Guidance" section of the Public Works Department at the City website (www.la- quinta.org). Please navigate to the Public Works Department home page and look for the Standard Drawings hyperlink. 16. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the mylars of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with 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 approved mylars previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as - built conditions. The applicant shall employ or retain the Engineer Of Record during the construction phase of the project so that the EOR. can make site visits in support of preparing As Built drawings. However, if subsequent approved revisions * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 have been approved by the City Engineer and reflect said "As -Built" conditions, the Engineer Of Record may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal. GRADING 17. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 18. 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. 19. 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, 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. A statement shall appear on applicable improvement plans that a soils report has been prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953. 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. 20. 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 * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 14 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 21. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the Site Development Permit Plan, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 22. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus five tenths of a foot (0.5') from the elevations shown on the approved Site Development Permit site plan, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for approval by the City Engineer. 23. 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. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE "Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for Specific Plan No. 97-029 and Parcel Map No. 28525-2 and as revised for this site development permit. 100-year storm overflow shall be routed to public streets/Right of Way. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner." 24. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), Retention Basin Design Criteria, Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The design storm shall be either the 1 hour, 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. " Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval ' 15 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 25. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. 26. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise and as approved by the City Engineer. 27. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for development of this property. 28. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. 29. For on -site above ground common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems. Side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. Additionally, retention basin widths shall be not less than 20 feet at the bottom of the basin. A. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LOW Section 9.100.040(B)(7). B. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries and levels in any area outside the development. C. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. D. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 16 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 30. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. 31. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 32. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 33. 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. 34. 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 Lot 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 35. 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 * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 17 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design 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. 36. The applicant shall reconstruct existing curb and gutter on Auto Centre Drive at the approved access drive location. Additionally, sidewalks shall be redesigned at the access drive location to provide ADA accessibility across the driveway or provide curb ramps. 37. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Auto Centre Way South (Collector Street) The master developer, Stamko Development, is conditioned to construct street improvements for Auto Centre Way to a 54 foot curb to curb full width improvements as shown on the Parcel Map 30420 and approved in Specific Plan No. 97-029 and all applicable amendments. The applicant for this Site Development Permit shall work with Stamko Development to construct all necessary improvements along the boundary of the site to provide access to La Quinta Centre Drive to the north. Stamko Development has constructed partial improvements to include the full width street improvements to the west side of Auto Centre Way along the Site Development Permit boundary and partial street widening on the east side of Auto Centre Way South per Plan Set Number 99027. The applicant shall reconstruct the improvements shown on PSN 99027 for the access driveway to the southerly portion of this Site Development Permit. 38. 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 and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 18 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 39. The applicant shall remove and replace the existing sidewalk as needed at all locations where it is cracked, uneven at joints, or otherwise damaged pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Section 5610. This requirement applies to all sidewalk located in the public right of way adjacent to the property being developed. 40. The applicant shall advise any prospective buyer of any parcel on this Site Development Permit of its continuing obligation to maintain all sidewalks located in the public right of way adjacent to its property in a good state of repair pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Section 5610. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 41. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). In particular, the following are conditioned with this approval. A. Two-way accessways shall have a minimum width of twenty-eight feet. B. Customer parking stall lengths shall be a minimum of 19 feet where no curbs are provided. C. Two-way parking aisles along routes where customer vehicle may traverse such as to customer and service parking shall be a minimum of 26 feet. D. Accessibility routes to public streets shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plan. E. Cross slopes should be a maximum of 2% where ADA accessibility is required including accessibility routes between buildings. F. Building access points shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans to better evaluate ADA accessibility issues. G. Design parking stalls using hairpin striping. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer. Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval ` 19 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 A. General access points and turning movements of traffic to off site public streets are limited to the access locations approved in the approved Parcel Map No. 28525-2 and these conditions of approval. CONSTRUCTION 42. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly - maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION 43. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans). Although the approved conceptual landscaping plans may not comply with these standards, final landscaping plans, when submitted, shall be in compliance. 44. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 45. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 46. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Planning Department and green sheet sign off by the Public Works Department._ When plan checking has been completed by the Planning Department, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the Planning Director, however landscape plans for landscaped median on public streets shall be approved by both the Planning Director and the City Engineer. Where City Engineer approval is not required, the applicant shall submit for a green sheet approval by the Public Works Department. Final landscape plans for on -site planting shall be reviewed by the ALRC and approved by the Planning Director. Said review and approval shall occur prior to issuance of first building permit unless the Planning Director determines extenuating circumstances exist which justify an alternative processing schedule. * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 20 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9. 2008 Final plans shall include all landscaping associated with this project. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by both the Planning Director and/or the City Engineer. 47. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the Planning Director. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 24 inches of curbs along public streets. 48. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance requirements per guidelines in the AASHTO "A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, 5th Edition" or latest, in the design and/or installation of all landscaping and appurtenances abutting and within the private and public street right-of-way. MAINTENANCE 49. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 50. 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 51. 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. 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 MARSHALL 52. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 21 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding Fire Marshall conditions should be directed to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. SHERIFF DEPARTMENT 53. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall review building plans with the Sheriff's Department regarding vehicle code requirements, defensible space, and other law enforcement and public safety concerns. All questions regarding the Sheriff Department should be directed to the Senior Deputy at (760) 863-8950. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 54. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall provide samples of actual precision and aggregate block types to the Community Development Department for final approval. 55. Top band to be precision block with a thinned band of smooth trowel stucco concrete block. Bottom band is a split -face block type to be worked out with staff. 56. The architectural plans shall be revised to provide an architectural canopy over service bay. 57. The architectural plans shall be revised to provide more detail on left elevation by wrapping the "green" block wall around the stair well. 58. Light fixtures along the west (adjacent to Adams Street) and south perimeter property line shall be adequately shielded to eliminate light glare and/or spillage within Lake La Quinta residential development. Applicant shall revise lighting plan by lowering the light poles to 18 feet in height along the south property line with a single box using 250 watt metal halide fixtures, and lower the light poles on the west property line for a distance of 170 feet, from the south property line to 18 feet in height using 250 watt metal halide fixtures. Applicant shall also revise the landscape plan by adding non -deciduous trees along the south and west property line which are clustered around the light poles. All lighting along the west (adjacent to Adams Street) and south perimeter property line shall be shielded. " Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval ` 22 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-821 EXTENSION 1 MAZDA AUTO DEALERSHIP SEPTEMBER 9, 2008 59. Public address/paging systems are prohibited; available alternatives include pagers and personal telecommunication systems. 60. Service departments shall operate only between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. up to six days per week excluding Sundays. Lighting after 10:00 p.m. shall be reduced to a security level. The final lighting plan shall include a wiring control diagram which clearly demonstrates compliance with this condition. 61. Applicant is required to install a 6 foot wall on a 2 foot berm along the entire west property line (i.e. Adams Street). 62. Site Development Permit 2004-821 Extension 1 shall expire on September 9, 2009, one year from the date of this Planning Commission approval, unless granted an additional time extension pursuant to the requirements of La Quinta Municipal Code 9.200.080 (Permit expiration and time extensions). * Note: Bolded text represent revised or added conditions of approval * 23 ATTACHMENT 1 FA J SITE �a a w z n 24 ATTACHMENT 5 Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2005 FILE COPY Chairman Kirk recessed the meeting at 7:45, due to technical difficulties and reconvened at 7:50 p.m. B. Site Development Permit 2006-821; a request of Joe Riso/Stewart Woodard for consideration of development plans for a two story 29,985 square foot auto dealership facility, located on the southeast corner of Avenue 47 and Adams Street. 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Alderson asked if the elevation presented showed the changes as requested by the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee. Staff stated not all. 3. Commissioner Daniels asked if there was berming in the landscape buffer. Staff stated the proposed berming would be in addition to what is existing. There would be an opportunity for additional berming. 4. Commissioner Alderson stated there is slight berming now. 5. Commissioner Daniels asked if the design criteria contained in the Specific Plan was the same as what was approved in 1998. He also asked what height was allowed in this district. Staff stated the height is governed by the Specific Plan; 40 feet is allowed. The design of this building is slightly different. _ 6. Commissioner Ladner asked if this design was different from the original approvals. Staff stated the difference between the original three auto dealerships on Highway 111 and this one is the lighting and the requirements to screen the lights. The slight change in the architecture is the pitch on the roof on Adams Street. Commissioner Ladner asked about the loudspeakers. Staff stated they are not allowed. 7. Commissioner Daniels asked the height of the parking lot lights as dictated by the Specific Plan. He also asked what was across the street on Adams Street. Staff stated directly across Adams Street n L 25 G:%WPDOCMPC Minutes%3-22-05.doc Planning Commission Minutes 1 March 22, 2005 is the senior project, Hadley Villas which is accessed off Avenue 47. South of Hadley Villas is Lake La Quinta properties. He then displayed an aerial of the site. 8. Commissioner Alderson asked the use of the site south of the proposed Mazda dealership. Staff stated it is yet to be determined. 9. Commissioner Ladner asked the about the light fixtures. Staff stated they are required to have two, not four boxes. Staff indicated the light locations on the site plan and clarified the fixtures are required to be shaded straight down. 10. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Stewart Woodard, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. His concerns were the restriction on the lower band that will go around the building to break up the building at two feet and a requirement for a bus turnout. 11. Chairman Kirk asked if the bus turnouts could be deleted. Staff stated it is a boiler plate condition and no comments have been received from Sunline Transit requesting the turnout. It could be deleted. 12. Commissioner Alderson asked if the green color was a trademark. Mr. Woodard stated it is part of their corporate color scheme. 13. Chairman Kirk asked for legal counsel's determination as he did not believe color was under corporate control. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated the color is not part of the trademark. 14. Commissioner Alderson asked why the Sheriff's Department approval was included. Staff stated all applications are approved and reviewed by the Sheriff's Department. They did not request any additional conditions. Commissioner Alderson asked for clarification on the central sales area where there are the high windows. One appears to be an office that will allow the owner to look down into the sales area. The second window appears to ' be a storage room. Mr. Woodard stated the office that appears to be for parts storage will be future office space. 26 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-22-05.doc Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2005 ' 15. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. Dutch Dilshaver, 78-839 Dulce Del Mar stated that when this approval was first presented, there was to be a three-foot berm with a six foot wall on the east side. The grading was to be a total of nine feet from the finish grade to the top of the wall to keep the noise down and for privacy as well as all service bays were to open to the east to keep the noise down. All loud speakers were to face east or north. The light standard height was to be such that it would not shine into the neighboring residential areas. They are to face downward. On the additional parcels the buildings were to be set back and facing east. 16. Mr. Ben Rusker, 47-675 Via Montessa, HOA president, stated he would like to state that they are opposed to the project, but do understand this was approved several years ago. They do appreciate the access driveways being placed on the interior of the project. They would like the Chairman and Commission to understand there are 288 homes as well as the Hadley Villas residents that currently hear loudspeakers and struggle with the ' lighting. Now with this project more lights will be added. Their homes should not be subject to this lighting. They are subject to the lighting and noise of the existing auto dealerships and ask for the Commission's protection on this project. The landscaping is another big problem. A wall was to be constructed to help alleviate some of these problems. 17. Susan Albert, 47-910 Via Florence, stated her home is located cattycorner to the project. She is going to look at a block wall and a two story building facing her house with nine foot lights, 14 feet above the wall. She will be looking up into the lights. The Dodge dealership is further away and they have the glare from those lights. The original approval for the automall was to be nine feet below the elevation. There were no homes built at this site when these dealerships were approved. In addition, the block wall should be covered with trees. 18. Sandy Lower, 47-225 Via Vintina, stated the lighting from all the commercial on Avenue 47 and the dealerships is horrible. She suggested the yellowlighting be considered with lower poles. This is invasive to the whole community. The plantings along ' Adams Street are low as well as the height of the berm. This should have more trees and landscaping. There should be more U$I G:\WPDOCs\PC Minutes\3-22-05.doc Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2005 protection for the property owners from the Circuit City, SteinMart, Target in the rear to soften the hardscape by adding additional landscaping. 19. Mr. Stewart Woodard stated that when they started on this project they followed the Specific Plan to every detail. As to the landscaping, there is landscaping and they have met the requirements. As to the lighting, it too meets the Specific Plan conditions. These dealerships were approved before the homeowners and it should be noted. 20. Commissioner Ladner asked about the loudspeakers. Mr. Woodard stated they will have them. A time frame could be placed on their use. They do need to be able to contact their workers. 21. Commissioner Daniels stated he thought staff indicated they would not have any loud speakers. Staff stated they were not allowed loud speakers, but were allowed to use radios and the lights were to be lowered at a certain time. Mr. Woodard stated they will: meet whatever requirements are required by the Specific Plan. 22. Commissioner Ladner asked what time the lights go off. Staff stated they are to be turned down at 10:00 p.m. but need to retain security lighting. 23. Commissioner Daniels stated the auto dealerships were previously approved, but the Commission does need to address the concerns of the residents. The loudspeakers need to be omitted. Is there a way to address the lighting? Is it possible to retain protection of the cars, and reduce the number of lights and can the height be reduced. Mr. Woodard stated the lower you go, the more lights are required to get the amount of light needed. Commissioner Daniels asked if additional trees could be added near every light standard to soften the direct light. Mr. Woodard stated this is a possibility they could add more trees. Commissioner Daniels asked if the design of the box shield could be extended down further on the sides of the box to shield the light on the west side. Mr. Woodard stated they will still be seen. Commissioner Daniels stated he understands but he was trying to find a way to soften ' the glare and if there is a product that could extend down to cut back the radiation of the light. Mr. Woodard stated he does not believe this will help, but they are willing to explore the possibility. 28 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-22-05.doc Planning Commission Minutes March 22, 2005 ' Community Development Director Doug Evans stated the applicant could look at the south property line where it is all employee parking and see if the standards could be reduced to 18 feet and reduced in wattage to 250 watt single fixtures with the right type of lenses which would be the same as most shopping centers. You would still see them but it would be less intense, lower and the trees would help to shade the lights. There are several different types of boxes with shields and prisms to help on the southwest corner up to the edge of the south side of the building (essentially the south and west side of the building) reducing the lighting. Change the trees that are not deciduous. The two-story portion is up front and more than 250 feet from the corner. A condition should be added that no loudspeaker should be allowed. Heavy landscaping with trees at the southwest corner to shield the lights should be added. Discussion followed as to what activities took place in the different bays. Mr. Woodard asked if the lights are reduced on the south side, they have no objection. There will be another dealership to the south of them at some time in the future. If this is required of them, they want it required on the future parcel at the same time. Staff reminded the Commission t that if the condition for a six-foot block is to be required, the wall needs to be added. 24. Chairman Kirk reopened the public Hearing. Ms. Albert stated she thought the elevation was to be nine feet below grade. Staff stated they were unaware of any such condition. Chairman Kirk stated there was a grade differential due to the height at Highway 111 and this location. 25. Commissioner Daniels stated it was to be a three-foot berm and then a six-foot wall. 26. Mr. Dilshaver asked what the finish grade was now. Staff explained the grade differentials. Chairman Kirk stated there appears to be some research that needs to be done on the original approval. 27. There being none, the public participation was closed and open for Commission discussion. 28. Commissioner Alderson asked if the photometric study would have , disclosed the number needed. Staff stated yes because of the 29 G:\WPDOCS\PC Minotes\3-22-05.doc Planning Commission Minutes ' March 22, 2005 Dark Sky Ordinance. There is zero light on the property line. Commissioner Daniels asked about the 24 light pole to match the existing and they are suggesting going to a lower light. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated normally regulations are written as maximums not minimums to allow the Commission some discretion to fit into the neighborhood. He does believe the side of the boxes being extended does affect the sight line drastically. 29. Commissioner Daniels stated the challenge is to fix this with some of the concerns raised. 30. Chairman Kirk asked that staff look into the Code violation on the other dealerships in regard to the loud speakers. 31. It was moved by Commissioners Daniels/Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-013 approving Site Development Permit 2004-821, as recommended by staff. ' a. No loud speakers shall be allowed. b. The lighting shall be reduced down to a security level. C. The lights shall be redirected so the light is directed internal to the property. d. Wattage on the south side and the Adams Street side shall be reduced in wattage. e. Non deciduous trees shall be planted between the outside of every light standard along Adams Street. f. A six-foot high block wall be required. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Daniels, Ladner, and Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Quill. C. Site Development Permit 2005-824 Conditional Use Permit 2005-090. and Sign Application 2005-876; a request of Nasland Engineering, La Quinta Redevelopment Agency, and Stamko Development Co. for consideration of development plans for a 136,000 square foot retail store and gas station on a 13.72 acre site, located at the southwest corner of Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road. I 1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Community Development Director Doug Evans and G:VWPDOCS\PC Minutesl3-22-05.doc 30 w w ' F to, � I i 4♦ ti �- u 4 Tl 02 / iO a mz m' w 5 A Z O N \ 9 2 m m D D A A A O O m � y D C N N m O n c a . - —] r twoR� dtnzoant THE WOODARD GROUP ypyyrta AYrppnYr ARCNIIECIURE PIANNINO RNFARCH a $ PPfnll PMQDARl E9if YWXNN41NYOtlNra�� 4 � '31 YOWnN. Cl.9t1'A Plw�fwf16l4PP evfwffcme — — xrouve" as�6S9r ADAMS STR E rx �i �iG�d b �� I !go I � I o� Imo Z rpi SR I I I I �oo n _ / t5 ic 90c, S p 2 $ Ocvm 1yy I r ZN fix z O O oN0�3 N CA a � �1s /w � cf it Iz N :' 46 6� 3 jaiis AA 4�,AR m�g Rg Q. ° � a 1 oc s ' y n D � M Y� D� �f �... IeNpa) } y �nzonttt THE WOOD;6 GROUP a j I.awnn�aw caYr umw+eeru2 PYwxwp weAxcx T PYN 1.PMtYY41b.L6ib] BbwtWwWGAIAPmNxt U?"w K9Y131 pM1YSNY�YYWP;6_ OPIu�p10A614t� 1cl�OTiTl10 lcn cM r 5z zy — --•-- ADAMS-----w, o,.•—��REET— - — — — i MIA m O m m o m m m m m A O CENTRE Y U< J AUTO CENTRE WAY --SOUTH „14€1� $ a a°ei���ii�i'r�'I O f�Ell jjiil gill Ei � € i i list 1111,11,1€1 Ills �o s s "' Ei € D@ @'@ � THE WOODA�RD G�RO�UPI -------- ' 5 R-. i i -� II ' -- 6 T � i i y Ip 1 im i r O 4 O � ------------- ------------ m Q`-------------� 0 z o , o L----------------- 4D I7lu�WOO�D�uRD �GROUPI ' t wsDpm oe Riso mom• LU 0 E 11! ti= MTNEWWOODARD GROUP ----------- W Joe Riso TITHE WO�D�A wD GROUPS a O j NKDA111 THE WOOWARD GROUP �aauowwwecw+r ua�ac++we PUNuxa eneand+ Pad l.PaalYq MP]ldS !Y/M pppMAU.P�IMI t�0u44 CA tl]N uaoNwMilnulaOYsaPon O �Iiu�1M1161M PaMIIMiIL a_ .;- iT o HE WOODARD GROUP o \q�� wil | , | , �■ all |§ § �H bl|m�•.E �1 !� |z � | eta �|q 111||1 1 Kill, � � � |• � �� � • � \ | | ■ .! q 11 |� •■ || || , h ; ■| | all @ . ; § | ..| , _m m s�te GROUP $. r Y Y Yull F " a x ¢• Y ld � n. Y y 9 C �• G % K of m _ F Y e Y Y e K- Y Y Y 6 ♦ ♦y �p rn- e Y Y ----------------------- AUTOCEMBEWAY NriI Y/.IDAtH we�oDMID GROUP Elo �mnw uma .s....Q� �.k 7N a a y� lRN " • � .y cJz. I OF � ar yyFi iG 1 y / i T2 mn i d� Ra t r ! s ��I I l� 3I1{�i � I y � 3 E�� i i I i5- DDDD�DDD � Q � i e F ¢ PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN m TORRE NISSAN till 1 4 9 e Y Y• LA OUNfA CA