2009 07 28 PC MinutesMINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
July 28, 2009
CALL TO ORDER
7:02 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:02
p.m. by Chairman Ed Alderson who asked Commissioner Wilkinson to
lead the flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Katie Barrows, Paul Quill, Mark Weber, Robert
Wilkinson, and Chairman Ed Alderson.
Staff present: Planning Manager David Sawyer, Assistant City
Attorney Michael Houston, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Assistant
Planner Yvonne Franco, Assistant Planner Eric Ceja, and Executive
Secretary Carolyn Walker.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: None
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Chairman Alderson asked if there were any changes to the minutes of July
14, 2009. There being no comments or corrections it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Wilkinson/Barrows to approve the minutes as
submitted. Unanimously approved.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Conditional Use Permit 2003-075, Amendment 1; a request by Milan
Institute of Cosmetology, for consideration of a conditional use permit
to increase the number of students per session for a beauty school
within the Regional Commercial District IRCI located on the east side
of Dune Palms Road, approximately 300 feet south of Highway 111
(47-120 Dune Palms Road).
P:\Reports-PC\2009\9-8-09\PC MIN_7-28-09_Approved.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009
Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report.
Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco 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 Weber asked for clarification of a possible conflict of
interest since his church was looking at leasing property in the same
general area. He had no connection to the negotiations, but wanted
to make sure Counsel was aware of the relationship. Assistant City
Attorney Michael Houston said there was no conflict since the
Commissioner was not on the Board of Directors, but only a member
of the Church.
Commissioner Wilkinson asked about lighting in the rear portion of the
building. Staff said lighting was addressed when the building was
originally approved and they have received no complaints.
Commissioner Wilkinson asked about hours of operation. Staff
responded they were from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Commissioner
Wilkinson said he was concerned about security, with the staff and
students parking in the rear of the building. He wanted to make sure
there was enough lighting and security to avoid any future problems.
Chairman Alderson asked about how the spaces were allocated for the
students. Staff explained how the building was divided and the
requirements for parking; as well as the fact the applicant would have
to meet all code requirements.
Chairman Alderson asked if twenty students was the maximum
allowed and how the applicant came up with that amount. Staff said
the twenty-student-limit was proposed by the applicant.
There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson
asked if the applicant was available and would like to address the
Commission.
P:\Reports - PC\2009\'3-8-09\PC MIN 7-28-09_Approved.tlor, 2
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009
Ms. Kathy Wohlford, 45-691 Monroe, Suite 2, Indio CA, representing
Milan Institute of Cosmetology, introduced herself and provided
background on herself and the Institute. She explained why they were
interested in this location and how they decided on the number of
students. She then offered to answer any additional questions.
Commissioner Wilkinson asked about shift times. Ms. Wohlford
explained the times and security procedures. She said she appreciated
the Commissioner's concern about safety.
Commissioner Weber asked Ms. Wohlford if the Milan Institute would
be encouraging the staff and students to park in the rear of the
building to allow the public to use the front parking spaces. Ms.
Wohlford said yes and explained the transportation arrangements they
have for their students; which emphasizes car pooling and the use of
public transportation. She said most of their students do not own a
vehicle.
Commissioner Weber asked about their experience with the Indio
campus. Ms. Wohlford gave anecdotal evidence of the parking
experiences at the Indio campus. Commissioner Weber asked if they
anticipated having a similar number of students in La Quinta. Ms.
Wohlford said the La Quinta location would take a number of years to
grow to the size of the Indio campus and they would probably not be
using the full number of parking spaces to begin with.
Commissioner Weber asked if Ms. Wohlford could speak about the
layout of the interior area. Ms. Wohlford explained how they would
be utilizing the layout; including the training and office areas, and said
they would be operating much like an ordinary salon.
Chairman Alderson commented that the last shift of students would
be leaving at night and asked if there were pedestrian protection lights
in the rear of the building.
Ms. Patricia Wood, 47-120 Dune Palms, La Quinta CA, owner of the
building, introduced herself and responded by saying there were wall-
mounted lights and parking lot standards in the rear of the building.
Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment.
P:1Reports - PC\200919-8-09\PC MIN- 7-28-09_Approved.doc 3
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009 '
There being no public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public
participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for
Commission discussion.
Planning Manager David Sawyer made a point of clarification stating
the applicant had indicated they intended to grow. He wanted to
make it clear, before the motion was made, the current application
was for two shifts of 20 students (a total of 40) as proposed in the
application and recommended by staff. He added the applicant had
been advised they would have to come back for and additional
amendment if they wanted more than that amount.
There being no further discussion
Commissioners Quill/Wilkinson tc
approving Conditional Use Permit
submitted. Unanimously approved.
it was moved and seconded by
approve Resolution 2009-020
2003-075, Amendment No. 1 as
B. Conditional Use Permit 2009-119; a request by Royal Street
Communications for consideration to allow the placement of roof-
mounted equipment and telecommunication antennas with minor
additions to the architecture of a commercial building located at 47-
647 Caleo Bay Drive.
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.
Commissioner Weber commented on the telecommunications
equipment not requiring line-of-sight transmission since it was going to
be fully screened. Staff said the equipment would be fully screened
and not visible from the ground.
Commissioner Weber reiterated the equipment did not need line-of-
sight for transmission such as a monopalm does. Staff explained how
the antennas worked, were placed, and the minimal visual impact they
would have.
P:Afteports - PCA2009A9-5-09APC MIN_7-28-09 Approved.AOC ~}
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009
Commissioner Quill asked what the uses of the antennas were. Staff
responded it was for PCS, which is wireless telecommunication
including phone service. Commissioner Quill asked what PCS stood
for. Staff responded they were not sure but would defer to the
applicant for an explanation.
Chairman Alderson commented on the history of the building and
stated that screening was extremely important. He asked staff to re-
confirm there would be no visible impact from the addition of these
antennas. Staff said they would not be visible.
Chairman Alderson reiterated the only change you would see would be
some slight modifications at the parapet edge, making the enclosure
slightly larger in the same architectural style, and assuring it would
look like a building alteration and not a screening. Staff responded
that was correct.
Commissioner Weber asked about the dimensions of the additional
parapet screening. Staff gave the dimensions as noted in the staff
report.
Commissioner Barrows wanted to clarify a comment in the staff report
on page 2, paragraph 5, sentence 1, which stated:
"The six 16) panel antennas are approximately three 131 feet in
height, and when placed on the buildings roof would be visible
from public view."
She asked if the comment regarding "visible from public view" was a
typographical error. Staff responded it was a typographical error and
the antennas would not be visible.
There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson
asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Ms. Veronica Arvizo, 350 Commerce, Suite 200, Irvine CA introduced
herself and gave some background information on Royal
Communications and stated they were a new PCS (Personal
Communications Service) provider.
P:\ReParts- PC1200919-8-09\PC MIN_7-28-09_Approved.doc 5
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009
Commissioner Barrows asked for a definition of the personal
communications service. Ms. Arvizo explained it was just like Sprint,
Nextel, Verizon, and others. She explained they were a new carrier
and had come out from the east coast; starting in the Los Angeles and
San Francisco areas. They were now moving into the Coachella
Valley. She said they were hoping to have their network up and
running by next year.
Ms. Arvizo had a question, for staff, regarding condition 2, which
stated:
"This permit shall expire on July 28, 201 1, unless cone-year
time extension is applied for and granted by the Planning
Commission pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the Zoning
Code."
Ms. Arvizo asked if that was before the Building Permit was applied
for or was that for the entire use. Staff explained the condition was
included so that if the Building Permit, or improvements, were not in
place the applicant would need to go back through a time extension.
Ms. Arvizo brought some sample parapet material and explained it was
what the signal would go through. She added that she had driven by a
building site in Corona and the material blended so well you could not
see the alterations to the building.
She then passed the sample on to the Commissioners and said it
would be painted to match the building.
Chairman Alderson asked if this was the product which would be the
veneer of the extension of the building. Ms. Arvizo said that was
correct.
Commissioner Weber said the applicant mentioned they were starting
service out here and asked if they had other tower sites as well as the
ones that were proposed in La Quinta.
Ms. Arvizo explained how many sites she was responsible for and
Royal Street Communications efforts to be sensitive to the
proliferation of towers, by co-locating when possible.
P~.AHeports - PC1200919-&09APC MIN_7-28-09_Approved.doc 6
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009
Commissioner Weber asked about the contracts Ms. Arvizo already
had and whether she was in the process of doing that for the other
sites that were needed in La Quinta. Ms. Arvizo said they had three
applications in, but for the entire La Quinta area they would have four.
They still had one more search ring for which they were trying to
locate a tower.
Commissioner Weber said the Commission was very sensitive to
comments from the Lake La Quinta residents. He asked if it was part
of Royal Communications' business plan to contact potentially
affected homeowners' associations. Ms. Arvizo said, generally
speaking, jurisdictions notify them of any homeowners' association in
the vicinity. In this case they did send out the hearing notice to all
property owners within a 500 foot radius. She said she read the
letter (previously mentioned) and drove by the property; which was
actually located east of the building. In reading the letter it was
unclear as to whether the homeowner understood it was going to be
completely screened. She said staff spoke to the homeowner and told
them the equipment would be completely screened.
Commissioner Weber said he visited the site and the address on the
letter and could attest it would be hard for any addition to the building
to be significantly noticed by that location. He said they were across
the waterway and had additional houses, and the La Quinta Inn Bed
and Breakfast there, so they had a lot of other visual issues there. He
added that the letter writer's comment that "...the property would be
less valuable because the view would be obstructed..." was probably
not accurate.
Chairman Alderson asked if the Royal Street Communications would
be doing the physical construction of the project. Ms. Arvizo
explained Royal Street Communications bids out the construction but
it is all managed under an in-house construction manager.
Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment.
There being no public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public
participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for
Commission discussion.
P:1Reports - PCA2009A9-S-09iPC MIN_7-2H-09_Approved.dac "J
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009
There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Quill/Weber to approve Resolution 2009-021
recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2009-119 as
submitted. Unanimously approved.
C. Conditional Use Permit 2009-063, Amendment 2; a request by Royal
Street Communications for consideration to allow the co-location of
six panel antennas on an existing telecommunication monopalm tower
located at 46-600 Adams Street.
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.
Commissioner Weber commented on the photos and the fact that they
showed that the monopalm did blend in. He did point out the dead
palm and condition number 30, page 14, which stated:
"The applicant shall replace the 'dead' palm tree at the site
and replace it with one (11 forty (40) foot tall palm tree in
close proximity to the existing monopalm tower. The applicant
is responsible for the health and maintenance of the palm tree
and shall be responsible for the palm trees replacement if
determined necessary by the City."
He then asked if, at some point, the height of the nearby palm trees
would affect the transmission at this facility and have to be replaced.
Staff stated they vvere not aware of how the growing palms would
affect future transmission at this site but the intent of the condition
was to make sure the tower would be further screened with the
addition of that palm tree.
Commissioner Quill stated, as a side note, that the tower elevation
appeared to be 55 feet, on a 68 foot tower, and generally speaking
date palms died before they got over 45 feet. They generally do not
grow that high.
P:\Reports- PC1200919-8-09\PC MIN-7-28-09_Approved.doc $
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009
Chairman Alderson suggested the applicant might want to look into
why the current palm tree died, to avoid its replacement having the
same problem. He also asked if the applicant had an easement for
additional ground equipment to expand their ground facilities; and did
that lease negotiation have to be completed as part of their conditions.
There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson
asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
Ms. Veronica Arvizo, 350 Commerce, Suite 200, Irvine CA said
Chairman Alderson was correct and offered to answer any additional
questions.
There being no further questions of the applicant Chairman Alderson
asked if there was any public comment.
There being no 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/Wilkinson to approve Resolution 2009-022
recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2009-063,
Amendment 2, as submitted. Unanimously approved.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Report on City Council Meeting of July 21, 2009, from Commissioner
Quill.
Commissioner Quill was unable to attend on that date, however
Commissioner Weber was in attendance and gave a brief rundown on
some of the items discussed.
Discussion followed regarding of the loss of State Funds, its effect on
cities' redevelopment funds, and the possibility of local jurisdictions
seeking legal recourse.
PAReports- PC12009A9-8-09APC MIN_7-25-09_Approved.doc 9
Planning Commission Minutes
July 28, 2009
Commissioner Wilkinson introduced the subject of the Commissioners
opting to reduce, or eliminate, their stipend. Assistant City Attorney
Houston explained what determined the payments and stated the
Commissioners were not required to accept the funds. He then
explained the procedures the Commissioners could follow to make any
changes to their payouts.
B. Chairman Alderson noted Commissioner Weber was scheduled to
report on the City Council Meeting of August 4, 2009.
C. Chairman Alderson reminded the Commissioners that the Council
would be dark August 18`h and September 151 and the Planning
Commission would be dark the entire month of August.
IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: None
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 September 8, 2009. This regular meeting was
adjourned at 7:56 p.m. on July 28, 2009.
Respectfully submitted,
GUS~~
Caroly~'~, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
P:AReports- PCA2009A9-8-09APC MIN_7-28-09_Approv~rl.doc ]~