Loading...
2009 06 09 PC MinutesMINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA June 9, 2009 CALL TO ORDER n 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. (Commissioner Quill joined the meeting at 7:07 p.m.) C. Staff present: Planning Director Les Johnson, Planning Manager David Sawyer, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, Public Works Director Tim Jonasson, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Andy Mogensen, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: None IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chairman Alderson asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of April 28, 2009. Staff presented a memo with three revisions to the minutes. There being no further corrections it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilkinson/Barrows to approve the minutes, with inclusion of the revisions from staff. Unanimously approved. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Site Development Permit 2006-868, Extension No. 1; a request by REA La Quinta, LLC fora one-year extension of the approval of architectural and landscaping plans for a 5,723 square foot P:\Reports - PC\2009\7-14-09\PC MIN_6-9-09_Approved.doc Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 freestanding building located on the north side of Highway 1 1 1, 1000' ± west of Jefferson Street in Jefferson Plaza. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Staff distributed a memo, from Public Works Director Tim Jonasson regarding a condition change to this project. Principal Planner Stan Sawa discussed this change and presented the staff report. Copies of both are on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. There being none from the other Commissioners, he commented on the changes submitted by the Public Works Department and asked about the original application. Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer explained Public Works laws change rapidly and this revision would bring the application up to the current Municipal Code, as well as State and Federal requirements. Chairman Alderson asked if any of these changes would impose substantial costs and was the applicant aware of it. Principal Engineer Wimmer said there would be substantial costs and they would be explained later in the meeting when the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) permit overview was discussed. He did say the applicant was aware that the extension would reflect the current State law. Discussion followed on general developer/applicant awareness of the new guidelines and the usefulness of the MS4 handout (to be presented later in the meetingl. Commissioner Barrows asked staff about Condition No. 55 which stated "The Chilean Mesquites shall be replaced with an alternate deep rooting canopy tree appropriate for parking lots." She asked if the reason for the change was because that species created challenges because it didn't root well, and tended to blow over. Staff responded that was correct. P:IReports - Pg200917-1409~PC MIN_6-9-09_Approved.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 Commissioner Barrows added that it provided shade better than any other parking lot tree. She asked if there was another mesquite which could be used. She was concerned that a replacement would not achieve the goal of shading the parking area as well as a mesquite. She wondered if the problem could be resolved by deep watering of the mesquite, but admitted that probably would not happen. Staff replied there were two landscape-oriented members on the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) and, with their knowledge and background; they should be able to choose a suitable replacement tree. Commissioner Quill and Commissioner Barrows then discussed various mesquites including the Alba, and Arizona Mesquites; as well as the Prosopis glandulosa. There was discussion of the possibility of exploring different species of mesquite trees and the use of native trees. Chairman Alderson said the Commission would ultimately be seeing the landscape plan on this project, but the current discussion should be focused on the Site Development Permit issue. He suggested these comments could be passed along to the project's landscape planner. Planning Director Johnson advised the Commission that the final landscape plans would not be coming back to them, unless they included that as a condition. If not, it would be processed through administrative review with involvement from the ALRC. He then commented on the issue of trees, the past decisions by the ALRC, and the drawbacks of planting mesquites. Commissioner Barrows said she was not suggesting a change, but bringing it up because a suitable replacement needed to be identified. Planning Director Johnson said the use of different trees was now being encouraged in parking lots. Generally mesquites were being discouraged in favor of Acacias in particular and, on occasion, Palo Verdes. Chairman Alderson suggested Commissioner Barrows comments be given to the ALRC and appropriate staff. Staff responded they would do so. P:1Repons - PC12009V-14-091PC MIN_6-9-09_Approved.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. .Douglas Digison, 2825 W. Keyes Lane, Anaheim, CA, introduced himself and offered to answer any questions. Commissioner Weber asked him if he had visited the site recently. Mr. Digison said he had and it needed to be cleaned up. Commissioner Weber asked if Mr. Digison was committed to taking care of the site and getting it cleaned up. Mr. Digison said he was. Commissioner Weber also commented on signage on the property. Mr. Digison said the signage would come down. Commissioner Weber commented on Condition No. 15 which referenced reciprocal access easements and a mutual maintenance agreement for perpetual maintenance of parking areas and drive aisles within Parcel Map No. 28573. Mr. Digison said his understanding of the condition was the same as the Commissioner's. He also added they were currently in the process of developing CC&Rs. Commissioner Weber expressed his concern about the entrance on Depot Drive. Planning Director Johnson explained there were two in- bound lanes with the right lane being aright-turn-only (eastbound) lane towards IHOP and Home Depot. Commissioner Weber commented on the two fan palms being removed because of meandering sidewalks as well as the relocation of the drive aisles. He was concerned about the safety issue of people coming in on the right-hand turn while others would be trying to exit left there. He said he would defer to the professionals, and didn't want to condition anything right now. He did want to ask if there was a potential change planned due to safety concerns. Mr. Digison said he appreciated the comments and he could see where there was concern about getting backup onto Depot Drive. Since the issue was just raised to him, his initial reaction was to try and push the drive aisle back to avoid having a dead end in back there, as that would not be desirable. It lined up nicely with the drive aisle on the opposite side of the east/west main access. He said he would like to consider it a little since he would not lose parking but would remove the dead end. PiReports- PCA2009Ax-14-09APC MIN_6-9-09_Approved.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 Commissioner Weber asked if moving the potential trash enclosure, as well as the aisle with five parking spaces to the west, would work with the concept of having parking adjacent to the building. Mr. Digison said if the trash enclosure was swapped he would be concerned about access for trash trucks. Additional discussion followed regarding the layout Commissioner Weber was suggesting and the applicant's understanding of his suggestions; culminating with Commissioner Weber's confirmation of his understanding and saying the only problem he would have was with alignment of the drive aisles. Mr. Digison said only one entry did not line up with the drive aisles, but he would be amenable to make the appropriate changes. Commissioner Weber said he was happy the applicant would at least consider it. Mr. Digison said it was not a bad solution. He then asked where Commissioner Weber was suggesting they put the trash enclosure. Commissioner Weber pointed out the location. Commissioner Weber said he was still concerned that the drive aisles were not aligned, but his real concern was safety issues with someone making a slow left or right-hand turn. Mr. Digison commented on his previous involvement in the northern portion of this development and the fact that this situation had always been of concern to him. He said he would be willing to look into the matter. Chairman Alderson asked if the layout change would alter the number of parking spaces available and affect the applicant's parking ratio. Planning Director Johnson said he would be reluctant to say the applicant would retain the exact same number of stalls. Staff would have to work with the applicant, but couldn't answer the question without having something dimensioned out. Chairman Alderson asked if they currently had a tenant. Mr. Digison said they did not. F'aReports- PC12009\7-14-09\PC MIN_6-9-09_Approveddoc 5 Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 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. Commissioner Weber said a recent site visit showed the parking was more than adequate on the north side of the actual parcel. He noted that most of the retail area in Buildings A and C was occupied. He said the parking seemed to be adequate whenever he visited the site, but even if some parking was lost by reconfiguration at the retail Building B location, there seemed to be more than adequate parking there. He said his packet information noted that the parking there was substantially more than required. Planning Director Johnson responded there was an excessive amount of parking for the complex. Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant had latitude to deal with this. Staff said yes. Chairman Alderson asked if the parking on that particular site was based on the entire project, not just that lot. Staff responded it excluded the Jack-In-The-Box and IHOP parcels, but the rest of the project, even though separate parcels, was covered under a similar development proposal. There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Weber/Quill to approve Resolution 2009-016 approving. Site Development Permit 2006-868, Extension No. 1 as submitted, including the amendment to Condition No. 7 as requested by the Public Works Department. The Commissioners also encouraged, but did not condition, the applicant to reconsider the layout on the current site plan. Planning Director Johnson asked the Commission to clarify the comment about the physical condition of the lot and direction for remedial action. The Commissioners directed staff to contact the Code Enforcement Department to work with the applicant to maintain the City's landscape and signage standards. Unanimously approved. P:AReports - PCA2009 V-14~~051PC MIN_ 6-&09_Approved.doc Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009-098; a request for consideration of an Ordinance to 1) permit used car sales not associated with a new car sales facility within the Regional Commercial Zoning District with approval of a Conditional Use Permit, 2) to establish provisions for the development of used car sales facilities, and 3) delete erroneous text identified with the Automotive Uses portion of the Non-Residential Table of Permitted Uses by City staff. 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. Commissioner Wilkinson commented on Section 4, Storage and Display; specifically the portion which discusses elevated display areas, and its bearing on other existing dealerships. Staff responded since they were under an existing specific plan, permitting their use, they would essentially be grandfathered in. Many dealerships had specific plans which permitted such things and this code was not necessarily written with existing, but more with future, facilities in mind Commissioner Quill asked if this was primarily focused on trying to enable the former Chrysler dealer to be able to sell used cars and stay open. Staff said it would enable the former Chrysler dealership, but was written with future purpose. Commissioner Quill said right now this is almost like an emergency legislation in a sense to try to enable them to stay in business and not leave a large vacant dealership as had previously happened. Planning Director Johnson said that was correct and this change was being brought before the Commission to avoid the situation mentioned. Commissioner Quill said he was in favor of anything the Commission could do to allow them to continue in business and avoid having another shuttered dealership. Also, sales tax revenue would be saved for the City if this was approved without delay. P:1Reports - PC1200917-14-091PC MIN_6-9-09_Approved.dor, ~ Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 Chairman Alderson commented on the Council's approval of the Urgency Ordinance and .said the Commission was ratifying what Council had already done. Planning Director Johnson said Council had approved an Urgency Ordinance which allowed the dealer to submit a conditional use permit application and to continue to remain open. The dealer would still have to submit the conditional use permit and, in all likelihood, they would be in front of the Commission by July or August. Commissioner Quill asked if the dealership would be shuttered during that time. Staff responded they would not as the Urgency Ordinance specifically allowed them to remain open. Chairman Alderson asked if the existing screening was acceptable. Staff responded it was. Chairman Alderson asked if what he read in an article in The Desert Sun, which stated the applicant was actively pursuing another dealership, was true. Staff responded that when the applicant reported to Council, he stated he had interviewed with three different car manufacturers, was actively pursuing a new car franchise, and saw this as an interim measure. There being no further questions of the staff, and the applicant being the City, 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. Commissioner Weber expressed his pride in the City and staff for proactively addressing the issue and trying to do what they could to preserve local businesses. He said this represented significant sales tax revenue to the City. He then expressed his extreme displeasure over the events that created a situation which caused cities to act in an urgent manner to try to maintain their businesses. He added that he thought it was a very appropriate thing for the City to do whatever it could to support these folks and he was proud of the City of La Quinta for working to maintain a vital commercial corridor. P:\Reports - PC12009V-14-091PC MIN_6-9-09_Approved.doc $ Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 Discussion followed regarding the tragedy of the economic situation that had caused this situation to occur and several Commissioners expressed their displeasure at the fact that the Federal Government could cause this to happen to cities and local businesses. The Commissioners concurred on the fact that anything the Commission, and the City, could do to help support local businesses would be appropriate; especially since the Highway 111 Corridor was so vital. There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Weber to approve Resolution 2009-017 recommending approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2009-098 as submitted. Unanimously approved. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Discussion regarding the Commission Summer Meeting Schedule. After discussion of the planning calendar, the Commissioners voted to go dark on August 25, 2009, and left open the option to include August 11, 2009; dependent upon whether there were any scheduled items for review. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: A. A letter from Mr. & Mrs. Wayne Wianecki was distributed to the Commissioners. Staff commented that it was routed to the Commissioners, for their knowledge, and to make them aware that Public Works and the Planning Department were looking into the Wianecki's concerns. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Report on City Council Meeting of May 5, 2009, from Commissioner Quill. B. Report on City Council Meeting of May 19, 2009 from Commissioner Weber. P:1Reports - PC12009V-14-091PC MIN_6-9-09 _Approved.don 9 Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 C. Report on City Council Meeting of June 2, 2009 from Commissioner Wilkinson. D. Chairman Alderson noted he was scheduled to report back on the June 16, 2009, Council meeting. He commented that the Council would be discussing the appeal of a condition included in the Planning Commission's decision on CUP 2008-112/SDP2008-905, Applicant: Leslie Lippich. General discussion of this project followed. E. Listing of Council Meeting Attendees. A new attendee listing was provided to all Commissioners, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. F. Chairman Alderson commented on a previous a-mail sent to the Commissioners regarding the election of the new Chair and Vice Chair. He added the item was scheduled for the first meeting in July (7/14/09) and would be discussed at that time. IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: A. Planning Director Les Johnson presented the update of the County Map for Tentative Parcel Map 34784. A memorandum, discussing the update, was included in the Commission packet, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Pertinent points of the Update were: • This was an informational item and there was no Commission action required. • Staff had responded, with their concerns, to the Riverside County Planning Commission several years ago and has done the same again recently with a new submittal. • It is a matter of making sure that we are identifying the City of La Quinta standards since it was within the City's Sphere of Influence; even though it is under the County's control, We do want to make sure that we continue to comment "on the record" of any inconsistencies with our standards in comparison with developments being proposed. N:AReports- PCA2009V-14-09APC MIN_6-9-09, Approved.doc 1Q Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 Commissioner Weber said he was glad the City was being proactive and gave an example of one item staff commented on. He complimented staff for their efforts. Staff responded they would continue to comment on these items, in writing, and in person. B. Public Works Director, Tim Jonasson gave a presentation on the Whitewater River Region Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permit Overview. A copy of the Power Point is on file in the Planning Department. Pertinent points of the presentation were: • The requirements have gotten more stringent. • The requirements are mandated to cities by Federal Law. • He explained the acronyms associated with storm water. • He went over each of the handouts. • The MS4 permit, adopted a year ago' in May, requires compliance as of mid-June 2009 and an implementation of the storm water management plan. • Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) rules require BMP's be maintained in perpetuity. • The City is considered the local enforcement agency for this permit and legal counsel has drafted an enabling ordinance for the storm water requirements. • The City is a co-permittee with the County being the principal permittee. • Penalties for violation can be very costly. • The criteria are such that almost every project will need a WQMP. • The Planning Commission will probably see a lot of projects come in with additional conditions placed upon them because of these changes. There are ramifications to projects as they move along Commission comment followed with discussion on the following pertinent points: • The amount of storm water in the desert. • Procedures for ensuring the quality of the nuisance water going into the aquifer. P:1Reports - PC12009V-14-09\PC MIN_6-9-09_Approveddoc ] j Planning Commission Minutes June 9, 2009 • Concern about unfunded mandates and their effect on developers. • Clarification of the geographic area covered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board. • Differences between the various climate areas in Southern California; e.g., coastal and arid. • Indemnification of Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD~. • Fees and perpetual maintenance. 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 June 23, 2009. This regular meeting was adjourned at 8:34 p.m. on June 9, 2009. Respectfully submitted, ~IC~K~ G(/~~U Carolyn alker, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California P:\Reports - PC12009\7-14-091PC MIN_6-9-09_Approved.doc ]2