Loading...
2009 04 14 PC MinutesMINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA April 14, 2009 CALL TO ORDER 7:03 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Chairman Ed Alderson who asked Commissioner Weber to lead 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, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Assistant Planner Eric Ceja, and Secretary Monika Radeva. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chairman Alderson asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of March 24, 2009. There being no changes, or corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilkinson/Barrows to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Continued Sign Program 2006-1078, Amendment No. 1; a request by Highland Development Sign Company for consideration of a proposed sign program amendment to add an additional freestanding monument sign for the Dunes Business Park located on the north side of Highway 111, approximately 1,000 feet east of Dune Palms Road. P:\Reports- PC\2009\4-28-09\PC MIN_4-14-09_Draft.doc Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Director Les Johnson noted this was the second continuation for this item, and said staff would like to reschedule it to the April 28, 2009 meeting to allow additional time to address all of their concerns. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any comments from the public. There were no comments from the public, and he then closed the public hearing portion of the meeting. There being no further discussion from the Commissioners, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Wilkinson to continue Sign Application 2006-1078, Amendment No. 1 to the Planning Commission meeting of April 28, 2009. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2008-905 and Conditional Use Permit 2008- 112; arequest by Leslie Lippich Architect and Associates for Yury Levitan for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a 4,924 square foot express (self-service) car wash to be located on the east side of Washington Street, approximately ±780 feet north of Fred Waring Drive. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Principal Planner Sawa said staff had received an a-mail from Mr. Marvin Roos, Director of Design Development with MSA Consulting, representing the Robert Capri Corporation expressing concerns regarding the proposed requirement for a deceleration lane for the car wash entry located on Washington Street. Mr. Roos noted in his e-mail there was no professional traffic analysis indicating the need for a deceleration lane; nor would the car wash generate the amount of trips per peak hour that would trigger the threshold identified by the City to require a deceleration lane. Mr. Roos stated his concern was that the condition, as written, would create an off-set curb condition for the adjacent Mayer Villa Capri project at the northern driveway and the off-sets could be confusing and possibly dangerous to motorists. Mr. Roos proposed the condition state the driveway curbs not be off- P ~.neUOrts - PC`~.2009'~.4-28-09•~.PC MIN_4-1409_Uraftdoc 2 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 set and the deceleration lane start northerly of the Mayer Villa Capri approved entry on Washington Street. Mr. Roos noted a second concern in his a-mail pointing out that the landscaping plans submitted for the car wash did not indicate any ground cover for the area between the car wash and the property line. He said he hoped that area would be covered with decomposed granite and rockscape as shown elsewhere on the landscaping plans. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Weber asked if the hours of operation for the car wash were specified in the Code. Staff replied they were not and that the closing time was indicated by the applicant. Commissioner Weber asked if there were any requirements to prepare a noise study. Staff replied there were not. Commissioner Weber asked if the applicant was in agreement with the condition to install some type of a sound barrier wall to help deflect the noise from the tunnel. Principal Planner Sawa indicated it was his understanding that the applicant was in support of the condition. Chairman Alderson asked Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer to explain the issue concerning the deceleration lane as expressed by Mr. Roos in his e-mail. Principal Engineer Wimmer explained deceleration lanes were usually required on major arterial streets, however, if an applicant demonstrated that less than fifty vehicles per hour would be generated in the peak hour, then a deceleration lane would not be required. He said this project was exempt from CEQA requirements and therefore, did not require a traffic study. Public Works had conducted an in- house analysis in regards to the IT trip generation rate for similar type projects and it had identified that the trips generated would be in the area of forty-five vehicles per hour in the peak hour, which would not be enough to require a deceleration lane. However, in this case, the applicant offered to put the deceleration lane in front of his property. The proposed deceleration lane at 116 feet would not qualify for a complete design for a deceleration lane, but it would provide an opportunity for the traffic wanting to turn into the car wash to move into the lane and allow the faster moving traffic through on the outer lane on Washington Street. Principal Engineer said staff did not share the concern expressed by Mr. Roos and felt that the proposed deceleration lane would be a benefit to Washington Street and would help move traffic along. P:`~.Rcports PC`~.2009~,4 28 091PC MIN 4 14 09 Drafzdor, 3 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Commissioner Weber asked what the speed limit was for that location on Washington Street. Principal Engineer Wimmer replied the posted speed limit was fifty mph. Commissioner Weber pointed out other partial deceleration lanes already in existence near the project. Staff explained the benefits and connectivity between the partial deceleration lane for the car wash and the adjacent La Quinta Business Center. Commissioner Weber asked if the applicant would be submitting final landscaping plans as the ones currently submitted were marked as drafts. Principal Planner Sawa replied the applicant would be submitting final landscaping plans for approval, based on the Commission's decision and direction. Chairman Alderson asked to clarify that the applicant would address the landscaping for the area between the car wash and the property line in the final landscaping plans. Staff confirmed. Commissioner Quill commented that if the car wash site plan was submitted as a mirror image of itself, the parking area would be facing the Mayer Villa Capri parking lots. That would allow for connectivity between the two projects and would eliminate the necessity for two driveways that were only 150 feet apart from each other, as one access point could be used for both projects. He noted the deceleration lane, if the same access point is used, would have to be extended over the Mayer site as well. Commissioner Quill asked staff why flipping the site plan was not considered in the preliminary review of the project especially in terms of sustainability, preservation, and keeping vehicles off the main arterial for trip reduction. Planning Director Johnson said there was a lot of discussion about having the car wash design flipped and he noted the original proposal by the applicant did have the building flipped. He explained the driveway into the car wash in the original plans was not shared; however, it was adjacent to the one for the Mayer Villa Capri site. Staff had extensively discussed the issue of connectivity between the two projects and the Mayer Corporation was not in support of it because of concerns regarding potential access logistics, traffic flow, and the stacking of vehicles for the car wash creating a problem for the Mayer Villa Capri site and the site design to the south. He noted P.'~.Reports - PG.?009.»-25-09'~.PC MIN 4-14-09 Drah.doc t4 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 the issue had been discussed at length as staff shared the same interest and concern expressed by Commissioner Quill, however, both parties were not supportive of having the connectivity between the two projects. General discussion followed regarding what the potential issues would have been if there was a shared driveway for both projects. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the length of the drive area from the access point on Washington Street to the car wash pay station and approximately how many cars would be accommodated in the three lanes. Staff replied approximately twenty vehicles, but that the applicant would be able to better answer those questions. Chairman Alderson asked about the height of the wall and if the applicant was supportive of it. Staff responded the recommended height was six feet and that the applicant would comply with the condition. Chairman Alderson inquired if the recommendations made by the ALRC regarding the building color palette and types of palm trees used had been incorporated into the submitted plans. Staff replied the recommendations were not addressed in the plans, but were made part of the conditions of approval. There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Robert Palmer, Leslie Lippich Architect and Associates, Inc., 4766 Park Granada, Calabasas, CA 91302, introduced himself and offered to answer any questions the Commission might have. Commissioner Quill inquired how the polycarbonate clear roof material of the car wash would be made to look like copper. Mr. Palmer replied the polycarbonate material was available in different colors and the architect chose to use the bronze, or copper-like, color because the car wash would be in the southwest and it would blend better with its surroundings. He explained the material was chosen because it was light, cost effective, and allowed sunlight to get through to the car wash tunnel during the day eliminating the need to have lights on. Commissioner Quill asked about the design of the vacuum cleaners. Mr. Palmer explained the vacuum cleaners would look like hoses P:~Reports PC`~.2009`:4 2& 09\PC MIN 4 14 09 Draftdo, 5 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 running across a canopy and dropping down, similar to full service car wash vacuum cleaners. Commissioner Quill said the canopy was not identified on the site plans. Chairman Alderson concurred. Mr. Palmer replied the canopy was not identified because it was subject to a different permit. Planning Director Johnson stated the applicant had never mentioned to staff that there would be a canopy. Commissioner Quill noted the Commission was being asked to approve the plans without knowing what the canopy would look like, even though it was an architectural design feature of the car wash. Commissioner Quill asked about the trash receptacles and what measures would be taken to ensure that they get emptied out on a regular basis. He was also concerned about the applicant making sure the parking lot would be consistently swept and kept clean. Yury Levitan, Owner of the Express Car Wash, 11501 Donna Evita Drive, Studio City, CA 91604, introduced himself and addressed Commissioner Quill's previous question regarding the vacuum cleaning equipment. He said they would be using Vacuum Tech, a company which specialized in custom design of central vacuum systems and explained where the equipment would be located and how it would work. Mr. Levitan said there would always be at least two employees present at all times at the car wash and they would be in charge of maintenance and monitoring cleanliness of the site. Further, the volume of business would determine the appropriate manpower necessary to maintain the car wash. Commissioner Quill asked if the car wash was fully automated. Mr. Levitan replied the car wash would be fully automated. He said payment would be rendered through computers located at each of the three lanes as the cars entered the car wash and explained the process. Commissioner Quill asked about the aesthetic design of the trash receptacles and if there would be one at every parking space. Mr. Levitan replied the design had not yet been determined and there would be trash receptacles at every parking space. FnReports - F'C'~.2009`.428-09`~.FC MIN_4-1409 ~rrtt.doc Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Commissioner Quill asked where the vending machines would be located. Mr. Levitan noted the vending machines would be located in the building niches. Commissioner Quill asked about the type of material that would be used for the parking lot. Mr. Levitan said, due to the high temperatures in the desert area, it would most likely to be concrete instead of asphalt. Commissioner Quill asked, and the applicant confirmed that he would not object if the Commission conditioned him to use concrete. Commissioner Quill asked for details on the site lighting. Staff replied a requirement for additional design information on the lighting was included in the conditions of approval. Mr. Levitan said the lighting plans had not been completed, but sufficient lighting would be provided to allow for the car wash to operate at night. Commissioner Quill inquired about the hours of operation for the car wash. Mr. Levitan said the car wash would be open from 6:00 a.m. until 10:00 p.m., but if business was very slow, it would trigger an earlier closing time. Commissioner Quill asked if there would be employees present at the car wash during all hours of operation. Mr. Levitan replied there would. Commissioner Quill inquired about the close-down process and what it would involve. Mr. Levitan explained all outside equipment would be put away in the mechanical room, the gates to the tunnel would be closed, and the site would be secured with an alarm system. Commissioner Quill asked if there would be end-of-day parking lot maintenance. Mr. Levitan replied parking lot maintenance would be done two to three times a day. Chairman Alderson asked if the two car wash employees would be the ones designated for the maintenance of the car wash. Mr. Levitan said the two employees would be in charge of maintenance, but if volume was high and more manpower was needed, more employees would work the site. Commissioner Quill asked if the water would be recycled and what would be the recycling process. Mr. Levitan explained the water recycling process. P:`:Reports PC~.2009'':4 28 09`,PC 'vtlN 4 24 09 DmtLAor, '] Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Commissioner Quill asked approximately how much water would be used to operate the car wash. Mr. Levitan gave an example of the car wash in Palm Desert and stated the water bill for that operation was from 5300 to 5400 per month. His estimate for the La Quinta car wash would be between 5400 and 5500 per month. Commissioner Quill asked who would be in charge of maintaining the landscaping. Mr. Levitan replied a landscaping company would be put in charge on a weekly basis. Commissioner Wilkinson inquired about the warranty for the polycarbonate roof material. Mr. Palmer replied the warranty was at least 10 years, possibly more. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about heat generation within the car wash tunnel, considering the translucent roof material would allow a substantial amount of heat to build up in the tunnel. Mr. Palmer asked for the elevation plans to be displayed. He explained the top of the car wash tunnel at the front, and rear elevations, would be open for ventilation, as well as the tunnel doors being open during operating hours. Commissioner Wilkinson expressed concern regarding the durability of the roof material. He also concurred with Commissioner Quill's comments regarding not having any information on the color palette, shade structure, lighting, trash receptacles, etc. Commissioner Barrows asked if the proposed polycarbonate roof material had been used in other places with similar weather conditions. Mr. Palmer replied the same roof material was used for a similar car wash in Las Vegas. He said the main reason the material was preferred to other materials was because it was light and translucent. He explained there was no roof equipment and it was a self supporting structure. Commissioner Weber echoed the concerns regarding the roof material expressed by his fellow Commissioners in terms of durability, discoloration, and heat generation. He said the applicant should try to provide an example of where the material was used successfully. Mr. Palmer noted the polycarbonate material was generally used for green houses and therefore it would be able to sustain the heat. He explained there wouldn't be high levels of heat generated in the car wash tunnel because in addition to the roof and door openings on both P:'~.Repcrts - PC~.2G09~.4-28-09'~PC MIN_4-24-09_~ref*,.doc Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 ends of the tunnel, the entire car wash process required the use of water which would further reduce the heat levels. Mr. Palmer said the car wash tunnel was only for the car wash operations, the on-site office and restrooms were located to the side of the car wash building and were not under the polycarbonate roof material. Commissioner Weber clarified that his concern was not in terms of generating heat inside the car wash tunnel, but rather whether or not the polycarbonate material was durable enough to sustain the high temperatures of the desert. Mr. Palmer noted that was why he mentioned that this type of material was generally used for green houses. Commissioner Weber asked for the applicant's comments on the deceleration lane and expressed his concern regarding traffic safety and possible future liability for the City of La Quinta. Mr. John Hacker, Civil Engineer, 77810 Las Montarias Road, Palm Desert, CA 92260, introduced himself as part of the applicant's design team and provided his expertise on the traffic analysis for the car wash. He said, based on the estimated trips generated and the car wash design, there should be no backing up of traffic and no need for a deceleration lane. Mr. Hacker addressed the Commission's concern regarding the maintenance of the car wash. He said staff requires the applicant to submit a report for Best Management Practices (BMP) which identifies in detail how the applicant is to maintain the site. A newer trend is to also require the applicant to sign the report committing him/her to perform by the identified BMPs. Commissioner Weber asked for comments about the reverse design of the car wash. Mr. Hacker replied the original plans for the car wash were reversed, but the Robert Mayer Corporation was not in favor of that design. He noted Mr. Levitan did not object to having the car wash designed either way. When the applicant was asked by staff to flip the design and re-submit the site plans, he agreed. Chairman Alderson asked Mr. Hacker if he was the Civil Engineer for the car wash project. Mr. Hacker said he was. Chairman Alderson inquired about the symbols on the grading plan indicating the grease and sand traps. Mr. Hacker explained those were part of the P:~.Rcports PC`~.2009':G 2$ 095PC MIN 4 14 U9 Drah.dor, 9 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 architectural design and he was not involved in that part of the project. He said he would provide an underground storm trap to channel the water. Chairman Alderson commented the grading plans did not have sufficient information indicating the flow of the storm drain water. Mr. Hacker said the water in the submitted design was being channeled to the underground storm pipes and a minor amount of water was directed to a small catch basin at the entrance. Mr. Hacker explained the works of the underground water receptacles and the catch basin and noted the design could be modified during the final grading. Chairman Alderson expressed concern that there was only one catch basin and, if it were to plug up, the water would not have a second place to drain. Mr. Hacker replied there was a second catch basin above the receptacles. He said additional catch basins could be easily installed. Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. Ms. Terry Forward, Coldwell Banker Commercial, introduced herself as a representative of the owner of the La Quinta Business Center, 43- 576 Washington Street, La Quinta, CA 92253, located to the north of the proposed car wash, and asked for an explanation as to whether or not there would be some type of sound barrier protection to ensure there would be no nuisance noise for those tenants. Principal Planner Sawa replied there were no walls proposed along the north property line, only landscaping. Ms. Forward inquired about the type of landscaping. Staff said the plans identified alternating citrus and palm trees along the north border. Ms. Forward asked if there could be possible accommodation for a different type of landscaping or a sound wall barrier. Staff replied the Planning Commission had the authority to impose such a requirement on the applicant if it was determined to be necessary. Commissioner Quill asked if staff had required the applicant to submit acoustic information on the car wash equipment and operation. Planning Director Johnson replied acoustics were not requested. He explained staff had identified the need for a wall along the eastern property boundaries because of the new school to the east; however, staff did not define a requirement for walls along the north and south property lines. P.'~.Reports - PC`.2009'~.4-28-09~.PC MIN_4-14-09_Draft.doc 1~ Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Commissioner Quill asked if staff had asked the applicant to submit some type of a decibel (DB) analysis on their operation and if there was an established threshold. Staff replied the Code identified a standard DB level, but based on the proposed operation, staff had no reason to believe that it would exceed the City's established standard requirements. Staff did not require the applicant to conduct any type of noise analysis. Chairman Alderson asked Ms. Forward if the answer provided by staff was sufficient or if she insisted on further consideration for acoustic protection. Ms. Forward noted her client would not be in favor of reversing the site plans as it would put the car wash building closer to the La Quinta Business Center structure. Mr. Marvin Roos, MSA Consulting, 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA 92270, representing the Robert Mayer Corporation, introduced himself. Mr. Roos said he had reviewed the car wash site plans when the design was reversed and noted the plans identified a separate access for the car wash from Washington Street. He said there was never any intent to have a joint driveway for both projects. He explained the way the building and parking lot were laid out, there would not have been sufficient space to make the connection between the two projects and there were concerns that it might block up the Mayer Villa Capri project's service drive. He noted he was surprised to see the design reversed as his impression was the original design was to remain without the connectivity. He said the Robert Mayer Corporation is in support of the car wash project. Mr. Roos said there was an issue with the location of the trash enclosure which had been addressed. Mr. Roos explained his client's concerns in having the deceleration lane and demonstrated the traffic movement on the site plan. Mr. Roos said the only concern his client had was that the submitted landscaping plans did not indicate any ground cover for the area between the car wash and the property line. He stated he was not sure if the plans were simply hard to read or if the applicant had in fact planned to cover the area with the same decomposed granite and rockscape shown elsewhere on the landscaping plans, but he just wanted to address the issue. Mr. Roos said he was available to answer any questions the Commission might have. Pr~.Reports PC'~2009~A 28 09APC MIN 4 14 09 Drott.daC j j Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Commissioner Quill said he could tell the connectivity issue had been previously discussed in detail, but he did not get the impression that there was adamant opposition from both parties to flip the car wash design and come up with some type of connectivity between the two projects as well as a shared, wider driveway as opposed to two separate driveways. He noted he could tell both applicants were not in favor of the idea, but it seemed like the issue was still open for discussion. Mr. Roos replied he could not say whether or not the Robert Mayer Corporation would be willing to discuss the issue as he needed to confer with them first. Mr. Roos explained why a shared driveway might be a major issue for the Mayer Villa Capri site and what possible repercussions it might have to the deceleration lane. He emphasized the fact that the car wash site plan posed constraints to having the connectivity between the two projects. 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, based on the comments provided, additional work could be done to make the project better. He said he appreciated the ALRC comments about the use of more vibrant colors and additional planting. He noted he had inspected the site based on the concern expressed in an a-mail by a resident from a development located on Washington Street (across from the car wash.) He found that, based on her location, there would be no noise issues for her. He found the overall design of the car wash to be very nice. He liked the lay out and the trellises very much. He commented it would be optimal to incorporate a shared driveway with the Mayer Villa Capri project. If the design remained as currently submitted, he thought the deceleration lane to be appropriate and he looked forward to seeing more detailed landscaping plans. Commissioner Barrows did not have any additional questions or comments. Commissioner Wilkinson said he concurred with Commissioner Weber's assessment that the noise from the car wash on the south end would not be an issue for the nearby residential developments. He said he would prefer to see the design of the car wash flipped, which he thought would also be better for the commercial building located to the north of the project. He expressed a concern about the use of polycarbonate roof material as he questioned its durability. He PsRepcrts - PC~.2009+4-28-69~PG MIN_414-09_Dr~ft.doc 12 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 said he would like to know what the design of the shade structure was as well as some type of lighting information. He said additional information needed to be submitted by the applicant. Commissioner Quill said he concurred with his fellow Commissioners. He said he would like to see what the trash receptacles would look like, how many would be there, and where they would be placed within the site. He stated he would like to see the design of the vacuum trellis system. He would like to see some shaded parking provided by the vacuum system area, preferably having half of the parking lot as a shaded structure. He pointed out there was no sign information provided. He said he would like to see the architectural design of the pay stations. He expressed concerns regarding acoustics generated by the vacuum cleaners and would like to see additional information provided. Commissioner Quill would like the applicant to submit lighting details on the site as none were provided. He stated he would not be in favor of the project without any connectivity between the car wash and the Mayer Villa Capri site. Chairman Alderson said he agreed with most of the previous comments made by the Commissioners. He stated he would like to see detailed information on the trellises and the acoustics addressed. He noted he found the project to be well designed and beneficial to the City. He said it would have been beneficial to have the architect present to provide detailed answers to the Commission's questions. Chairman Alderson noted he did not concur with his fellow Commissioners that there was a need for a common driveway because the service traffic for the Mayer Villa Capri site would interfere with the commercial traffic for the car wash, possibly creating confusion and a dangerous situation. He found the two separate driveways to be more beneficial and a far better layout. He noted the applicant and staff had spent a lot of time and effort trying to figure out a way to create connectivity between the two projects only to find out that it would not be very practical to do so. He said flipping the site design would cause concern for the La Quinta Business Center owner because it would place the building adjacent to that office center. Chairman Alderson said he did not want to lose this project, but the applicant needed to provide additional information before the Commissioners could objectively cast their votes. He emphasized the need for specific information such as the quantity of water that would be used (not the dollar amount of the water bill.) He said he visited Mr. Levitan's car wash operation in the City of Palm Desert and P: Jieporis PC'~.2009~4 28 (39APC MiN -0 74 09 Drafi.<loc ),3 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 complimented him for running a well maintained car wash business. Commissioner Weber suggested they continue the project to the next Planning Commission meeting to give the applicant a chance to provide the additional information requested. Commissioner Quill noted that two weeks might not be sufficient time for the applicant to address all of the issues raised. He asked staff if the project needed to be continued to a specific date. Staff replied it did not have to be date specific, but it was preferable. Planning Director Johnson asked to clarify the items the Commission would like to be addressed and suggested the following: ^ Detailed information on the roof material. ^ Trash receptacles design, spacing, and location. ^ Pay station design. ^ Vacuum trellis detail. ^ Noise decibel allowance for the car dryers, not a full noise study, but an independent analysis that would provide identification of the impact at the property line. • Site lighting detail identifying the type of fixtures to be used and the throw pattern. • Identify the approximate quantity of water to be used. Planning Director Johnson said the Commission made comments on having a shared drive, reversing the plans, and possible connectivity between the two projects. There were comments made for and against these items and he asked the Commission to give staff clear direction on how to address those issues. Commissioner Quill stated he was adamant about having the connectivity and the shared driveway issues addressed. He said he would like to see the Best Management Practices (BMPs) included in the conditions of approval which would give the City the right to enforce proper maintenance of the site, if necessary, in the future. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston explained that enforcing proper maintenance in the future through BMPs may be difficult because the property rights lie with the conditional use permit (CUP) and it vests once operation begins. He said if the Commission had specific concerns along the lines of enforcement that those be clearly stated allowing enforcement to be managed. P.:Reports - PC420Q9~4-28-09'~PC FAIN_4-14-09 Draf'.tloc 14 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Commissioner Barrows said, in addition to the amount of water being used, she would like more information on the recycling system indicating how much water would be saved, and details on the water efficiency of the entire operation. Assistant City Attorney Houston said when an item was continued procedurally, it needed to be continued to a date specific time. If the Commission did not want to continue the item to a date specific time, the item should be tabled, which would indicate that it was indefinitely postponed. He noted staff would prefer the item be continued to a date specific time and if additional time was needed the item could be continued again. Commissioner Quill asked staff what would be a reasonable amount of time to allow the applicant to address all issues. Planning Director Johnson replied four weeks would be reasonable. Chairman Alderson re-opened the public hearing portion of the meeting. Chairman Alderson asked the applicant how much time would be needed to provide the information requested. Mr. Levitan asked if the conditional use permit could be approved by conditioning the applicant to provide the requested information subsequently. He expressed his concern that additional specialists would have to be hired to provide such detailed information, without having an approved project. Chairman Alderson replied the Commission would like to give Mr. Levitan an opportunity to provide the necessary information, but could not be responsible for the costs incurred during that process. Mr. Bob Reordan, Real Estate Broker with R.G. Reordan, Inc., 60217 Wishbone Court, La Quinta, CA 92253, introduced himself and thanked the Commission for their willingness to work with the applicant. He explained that timing was of the essence with regards to the close of escrow. He asked the Commission to continue the item for only two weeks, until the next Planning Commission meeting scheduled for April 28, 2009, which would give the applicant the opportunity to meet the escrow deadline. Mr. Reordan pointed out the applicant had originally submitted the plans with the reverse design and had changed at the request of City staff and comments from the Robert Mayer Corporation. PnReports PCA2009VA~ 28 09~°C M3N -0 14 09 Dr~fi4.doc j S Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Chairman Alderson consulted with staff regarding having the meeting continued to the next Planning Commission meeting. Planning Director Johnson replied as long as the applicant could provide the requested information staff would work with them to meet the deadline. If more time was needed, that could be addressed at the next meeting. Planning Director Johnson wanted to clarify that the Robert Mayer Corporation was not involved in the recommendation to flip the plans for the car wash and that it was strictly staff's direction. He explained staff felt this design was more advantageous once it was determined there was not going to be an access on the south. There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Weber/Barrows to continue Site Development Permit 2008-905 and Conditional Use Permit 2008-112 to the next Planning Commission meeting on April 28, 2009. Unanimously approved. C. Sign Application 2003-682 Amendment No. 1; a request by Washington 111, Ltd. for consideration of a proposed sign program amendment to include revised monument signs and under-canopy blade signs for their retail center located south of Highway 111 between Washington Street and Adams Street. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Bill Sanchez, Project Manager, representing the developer, Washington 1 1 1, 78365 Highway 1 1 1, La Quinta, CA 92253, introduced himself and said the sign program amendment was aimed at freshening up the shopping center and trying to bring awareness and directional signage for the existing tenants who had expressed concerns. He explained the developer had requested the two additional monument signs to be placed along Washington Street because oftentimes when giving directions to businesses located P ~.Reuorts - PG2009'~A-2fl-09'~PC MIN_4-14-08_Draf*,.doc 16 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 within the shopping center, some of the brand name tenants had to be used instead of the name of the center itself. Mr. Sanchez submitted revised sign designs based on staff's recommendations and explained the difference in size, in terms of width and height, where they would be located, and how they relate to the geometrical shape of the shopping center. He said he was available to answer any questions the Commission might have. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if staff had had the opportunity to review the sign revisions. Staff replied the revisions had been reviewed earlier in the afternoon. Planning Director Johnson said the staff report provided a comparative analysis and identified the scale of the signs to be consistent with other existing signs in the area. He noted the revised plans still exceeded what had been recommended, but the dimensions were reasonably scaled back and were much more in line. He indicated staff's original recommendation would remain. He explained staff's concern in changing the recommendation was because it would raise the bar from what had been historically addressed with other projects along Highway 1 1 1. He pointed to the fact that Washington Park was a very large shopping center with many major tenants involved and still a lot of land to be developed. Staff felt it would be best to leave the decision up to the Commission's discretion and follow their direction. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the dimensional differences between staff's recommendations and the revised proposal in terms of height and width. Staff replied the comparison was done based on sign face area and not by height and width. Staff presented graphics of similar existing signs and explained the difference in dimensions and the implication of the City's sign code which excluded the structural elements of the sign design and focused on sign face area. Commissioner Quill expressed his concern that if the Commission allowed one applicant to exceed the sign dimensions identified in the Code that might invite other project owners to demand the same. He said he did, however, realize the importance of providing signage for the tenants in the current hard economic conditions. Commissioner Barrows did not have any additional questions, but she indicated she had the same concerns as those expressed by Commissioner Quill. 7:~Raports PC.2~JO~J'~A 28 Q9~PC MIN 4th 09 Draft.doc ),7 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 Commissioner Weber thanked the applicant for doing the extra work and providing the Commission with a revised set of sign designs that was more in line with staff's recommendation. Commissioner Quill concurred with Commissioner Weber's comment. Commissioner Weber commented that the revised signs used a substantial amount of the sign area in identifying the name of the shopping center (Washington Park). He inquired about the need to advertise the Washington Park brand. Mr. Sanchez replied that due to the current economic hardship, a lot of the tenants, in an effort to generate more business, are advertising the location of their businesses in Washington Park, in the local venues. The owner of the shopping center was being supportive of that and wanted to help establish the brand recognition of where Washington Park Shopping Center was located. Commissioner Weber noted he concurred with his fellow Commissioners' concern to approve signs that exceeded the sign code guidelines. Chairman Alderson thanked Mr. Sanchez for submitting the revised sign designs. Mr. Sanchez asked the Commission to consider section 9.160.090 of the sign code, referenced on page 5 of the staff report, which allowed adjustments and additions to the Sign Program "to overcome a disadvantage as a result of an exceptional setback between the street and the sign or orientation of the sign location," or "due to an unusual lot shape, the street frontage is excessively narrow in proportion to the average width of the lot. " Commissioner Barrows said the proposed Al and A2 signs were within staff's recommendation as they only exceeded the sign area by five feet. However, she pointed out that the proposed 61 sign along Washington Street, exceeded staff's recommendation of sign area by fifteen feet. She suggested the Commission move to approve the Al and A2 signs as proposed in the revisions and ask the applicant to follow staff's recommendations for the 61 sign. Chairman Alderson provided opportunity for Mr. Sanchez to respond to Commissioner Barrow's comments. Mr. Sanchez replied the overall mass of the monument sign was not an issue and he could comply with the recommended sixty five feet of sign area by only reducing the signs and keeping the overall design of the monument sign. P:~.Reports - PC`:2009':4-28-09'YC iNIN_4-14-09_Dreft.doc 1g Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Quill to approve Minute Motion 2009-005 recommending approval of Sign Application 2003-682, Amendment No. 1, accepting the proposed revised Al and A2 signs, and having the applicant comply with staff's recommendation to reduce the signage area for the 61 sign to sixty-five feet. Unanimously approved. D. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009-097; a request by staff for consideration of the following amendments to the La Quinta Municipal Code: 1. To restrict the placement of permitted temporary signs within the public right-of-way (9.160.60); 2. To reduce the maximum time period for permitted temporary signs from sixty (60) days to forty-five (45) (9.160.60); 3. To eliminate sign size restrictions for exempt directional and informational signs for public, quasi-public, and non- profits (9.160.020); 4. To revise Table 9-17 to change maximum sign size and height restrictions for exempt signs (9.160.020) Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Eric Ceja presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. There being no questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked if there was any public comment. There being no questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Chairman Alderson asked staff to clarify that the Commission was to review the proposed changes, provide feedback and comments, and recommend approval to City Council. P:~.RFports PC\2009'.4 28 09tPC MIN 4 14 09 Dr:~ft.dc'c 19 Planning Commission Minutes April 74, 2009 Planning Director Johnson explained there were multiple study sessions that led up to the proposed changes. There was a lot of general discussion between the Council members, but no clear, definitive direction was given. Staff followed Council's general comments to bring this information together and the document was open for the Commission's review, comments and recommendations. Chairman Alderson asked if the document provided by staff had Council's input in it. Planning Director Johnson replied it did have Council's input; however, it consisted of comments during the study session discussions. Commissioner Weber said he was pleased to see that staff was working on code revisions, he thought such updates were necessary, and contributed to the clean and overall appropriate appearance of the City of La Quinta and the standards the City would like to maintain. Chairman Alderson commented that signage was one of the most inexpensive and effective ways to obtain public recognition. He said other types of advertising, such as magazines, newspapers, TV, etc. were not as effective and were also very expensive. He noted taking away the political candidate's privilege to advertise through signage, would be taking away their most effective and affordable weapon. Chairman Alderson said he agreed that the display of political signs took away from the aesthetics of the City and he found that reducing the amount of days the signs could be displayed from sixty to forty- five would most definitely help with that problem. He noted he was in favor or prohibiting the display of signs in the public medians as it was dangerous for those trying to put up or take down the signs, but he was in opposition of prohibiting the display of political signs in the public right-of-way all together. There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Weber to approve Resolution 2009-015 recommending approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009-097 as submitted. AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Weber, and Wilkinson. NOES: Chairman Alderson. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None. Pr.Reports - PC'~2009~.4-28-69'~PC MIN_4-14-g9_Uraft.doc 20 Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: A. Attendance Update Chairman Alderson inquired about the reason for Commissioner Wilkinson's absence on the January 13, 2009, Planning Commission Meeting. Commissioner Wilkinson clarified the absence was due to health reasons, which prevented him from attending the meeting. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Chairman Alderson reported on the City Council meeting of April 7, 2009. He said the City's new public relations company Ferrino & Green made a presentation suggesting programs of interest and what actions were to be taken. Council provided comments and feedback. He mentioned another item that was discussed was a memorial grant that was available to the City to be received from the Federal Government in the amount of 569,416 allocated for police activity, etc. Councilman Sniff was in opposition of accepting the grant because he thought it was time for someone to make a stand and turn down government handouts. His proposition, however, was not accepted and the item was accepted with a majority vote. B. Chairman Alderson noted Commissioner Barrows was scheduled to report back on the April 21, 2009, Council meeting; however, there was a scheduling conflict with a lecture she needed to give that evening in Palm Springs. Commissioner Weber would sit in for Commissioner Barrows for the April 21, 2009, meeting and would report back on the Council meeting. D. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the requirements for the federal funding item. Chairman Alderson replied the money was allocated to purchase two police segways and other items. Planning Director Johnson explained the City would not have to pay that money back, but only provide proof that the equipment was acquired. He noted this program grant had been around for years and it was not directly affiliated with the large federal stimulus package that was currently underway. IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: None P:~R~ports - PG'~.2G09~4 28 09APC M1N ~ 14 09 DmRdoc ~~ Planning Commission Minutes April 14, 2009 X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Weber to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting to be held on April 28, 2009. This meeting was adjourned at 9:23 p.m. on April 14, 2009. Respectfully submitted, Monika Radeva, Secretary City of La Quinta, California Pr,Reports - PC'`2008',448-09`~.PC MIN_4-t4-09_Qr,ftdoc 22