Loading...
2009 11 24 PC MinutesMINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA November 24, 2009 7:01 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:01 p.m. by Chairman Ed Alderson .who asked Commissioner Barrows to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Katie Barrows, Paul Quill, Mark Weber, Robert Wilkinson, and Chairman Ed Alderson. Staff present: Planning Director Les Johnson, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Planning Manager David Sawyer, Associate Planner Jay Wuu,and Secretary Monika Radeva. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chairman Alderson asked if there were any changes to the minutes of November 10, 2009. Commissioner Weber asked the following typographical errors to be corrected: Page 10, Commissioner Items, C, second line, Hyndai should read Hyundai. Page 10, Commissioner Items, D should read: Commissioner Weber stated he wanted to say thanks to staff for clarification on the housing a/ement item relating to guest houses, second units, and casitas. Page 10, Commissioner Items, E, first line, my should read may. There being no further comments or corrections it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Weber/Wilkinson to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. P:UZeports- PC\2009\12-8-09\PC MIN_11-24-09_Approved.doc Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 2009 Commissioner Wilkinson asked for clarification that if the parking study was conducted, it would not take into account the available on- street parking to meet the code parking requirement. Staff said the on-street parking spaces could be counted in. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if on-street parking would create a traffic hazard. Staff replied that Desert Club Drive was designed to accommodate on-street parking in both directions and to allow for two-lane traffic; Calle Cadiz was a little bit narrower. Staff anticipated Desert Club Drive would be the more prominent focus for any overflow parking due to its proximity to the main entrance. Staff spoke with owners of the two most adjacent homes and both owners were supportive of the reduced parking requirements allowing the medical use. Staff said the owners of the adjacent vacant lots had not been contacted since staff felt the significant impact would be to the adjacent home owners. Commissioner Wilkinson noted the aerial view showed that cars were already being parked on one of the adjacent vacant lots. Staff said they were unaware of the exact situation and suggested parking may have been allowed due to on-going construction in the area when the image was taken. Staff stated the vacant lot was not set up to serve as a parking lot and, if that was to happen, the City would be addressing this issue with the property owner. Commissioner Wilkinson inquired about the size difference between a standard parking space and the existing ones. Staff replied the sizes were listed in the staff report on page #16. Commissioner Wilkinson expressed a concern that there might be some unintended consequences if the applicant was not held up to the code requirements. Commissioner Quill asked if the fee-in-lieu was being put aside for some type of a parking structure for the Village or if it was being rolled into the general fund. Planning Director Johnson replied that all monies collected were being put aside specifically for future parking improvements within the Village, such as land acquisition, actual hardscape improvements for parking, or potentially more parking structures being established as needed. He said nothing has been done to date because the latest parking study identified that the Village had more than adequate parking available. P:\Reports - PC\2009\72-8-09\PC MIN_i t-24-09_Approved.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 2009 signed lease with Dr. Fraschetti, however, the lease included a contingency pending Planning Commission approval. Commissioner Weber asked staff if the applicant was in compliance with the requirement of having 30% of the parking area covered. Mr. Meade said he thought the applicant was in compliance with that requirement. He asked staff to display the site plan for more information. The site plan showed five covered parking spaces out of 17. Commissioner Quill said his questions were more directed to staff. He s stated he was a member on the Commission when the building was originally approved in 2004. Even though parking was an issue at that time because it did not provide the required 25 parking spaces for the proposed uses, the building was approved because the consensus was that it was located in the Village and the Commission felt that the Village was over-parked. Further, the City was getting ready to complete a parking study at that time which showed that The Village had adequate parking. He asked staff if the required number of parking spaces had increased because it would be used as a pediatric office. Planning Director Johnson replied the medical office parking standard was the same, regardless of the type of practitioner or location within the community. Commissioner Quill said he remembered that when the Commission approved the building in 2004, credit was given for on-street parking which was how the requirement of 25 parking spaces was met. He asked staff why the number of parking spaces had increased and the applicant was being asked to incur fees for the difference. Staff replied the calculations currently conducted were based on the off-street parking provisions set forth for the proposed medical use. Commissioner Quill said that the applicant was being penalized because the rules had changed from when the building was originally approved. Planning Director Johnson said there was a blanket provision, specific to the Village District only, which allowed the Commission to deviate from the established standards. Commissioner Quill asked what the empirical basis was for the code with respect to medical use parking requirements. Staff replied the standards were established based on what was happening in the industry at the time. For example, staff used data from the American P:\Reports- PC\2009\72-8-09\PC MIN_i t-24-09_Approved.doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 2009 Commissioner Weber asked where the $200,000 dollar fee-in-lieu figure came from. Mr. Meade said it was an estimate of the number of missing parking stalls times $15,000 per stall. Commissioner Quill asked if the building was still owned by the original owner, Skip Lench. Mr. Meade explained Skip Lench was the Architect, the current owner purchased the building from Dr. Dixon under the assumption that it was designated for medical use. Chairman Alderson asked how the patients parking in the southern parking lot would enter the building. Mr. Meade said there was a walkway from the back entrance of the building to the parking lot. Chairman Alderson asked if Dr. Fraschetti would have four separate medical suites with different doctors. Mr. Meade replied the entire space would be utilized by one doctor. Chairman Alderson wanted to confirm that the parking would have to accommodate only one doctor and his four to five patients per hour. Chairman Alderson said that even though the applicant was not able to take into account the public on-street parking available on Desert Club Drive, common sense dictated that the parking would be available for that building as it was a legal parking area. for the general public. He asked if the lease was contingent upon Planning Commission approval. Mr. Meade confirmed it was. Commissioner Weber asked if the lease was contingent upon a satisfactory resolution of the parking requirements or the change in permitted use to allow for medical offices. Mr. Meade replied it was the latter. There being no further questions of the applicant, Chairman Alderson opened the matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Barrows asked for clarification on the original approval of the building in 2004. Staff described the original approval process and the placement of the medical limitation. Commissioner Barrows gave examples from the 2004 staff report stating that other businesses within the Village had been granted parking reductions. She said she was not very concerned about this application's parking issue and explained why. She was, however, concerned about the Village image with parking lot after parking lot. She stated she was concerned that a tenant might be potentially required to pay for more parking than it was appropriate for the location. P:\Reports- PC\2009\72-8-09\PC MIN_11-24-09_Approved.doc ~ Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 2009 Commissioner Weber said he was also supportive of the idea of bringing in a pediatrician into the Village, but he wanted to emphasize that he was concerned about setting a precedent. He noted that Calle Cadiz was inadequate for additional parking because it was a residential street. He said the Commission should make reasonable concessions, but should also be very cautious in addressing this matter and in setting a precedent. Staff pointed out that a VUP could be treated as a CUP which would give the Commission the ability to designate certain parking areas on the site for employee parking if warranted. The Commission could also condition the applicant to have the tenant comply with its operational set up outlined in the second paragraph of the letter dated November 9, 2009, as attachment #7. Commissioner Quill said the precedent of allowing lesser parking in the Village than required was already set back in 2004 because of the reasons outlined by staff above. The Commission had a different concept for the Village and felt it was overparked, and didn't need to have additional parking. Commissioner Quill stated he remembered the approval, but did not recall any specifics on the different types of allowed uses for the building as being a significant part of the parking concept. He said he was in support of setting the precedent that the Commission would allow deviations from having seas of asphalt in the Village. He commented that the building in question was never designed as a retail space, it was always meant to be used as an office space and this application was an opportunity not only to fill a vacant building, but to put a pediatrician in the heart of the La Quinta Cove. He said he did not foresee any possible issues with parking availability. Commissioner Wilkinson said he agreed with Commissioner Quill's statement that the Commission had already set the precedent to reduce the parking requirements for the Village. He said he viewed the vacant lots in the Village as potential for businesses and traffic as well. He asked staff for suggestions on solutions for parking such as a VUP allowing for the Commission to condition the tenant to have designated employee parking spaces. He asked if it was feasible to identify employee parking at the parking lot on the other side of the Village. He inquired if the City was working on any projects to provide parking solutions. Staff replied that at this time the City was not actively looking at the acquisition of property for additional parking. P:\Reports - PC\2009\7 2-8-09\PC MIN_7 L24-09_Approved.doc 9 Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 2009 again. Chairman Alderson said this could also be tempered by the upcoming staff's overall parking analysis. Staff replied it anticipated that the analysis would give a good comprehensive assessment of the peak demand of the activity. Commissioner Weber asked if in the future staff could provide copies of the previous minutes relevant to the case being reviewed. He said the standards were established to safeguard the developer as well as the City. He was concerned regarding the front parking lot because of the stalls' inadequate size. He said he was trying to diligently look through the process and be consistent in applying the City's standards. He said he would be willing to support a motion that would condition the dedicated parking spaces. He emphasized that with it being unknown how the surrounding vacant parcels would be developed the Commission might be setting standards that might not be possible to be met in the future. There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Quill to approve Resolution 2009-032 approving Modification By Applicant 2009-025 as amended below: 44. This Village Use Permit a/lows the construction of aone-story, 4,494 square foot commercial office building addition on a 0.41-acre site with 17 on-site parking spaces. The original building area (Suite 1; approximately 1,450 square feet) shall consist only of general office uses. Medical office uses shall be permitted only in the additional expanded area of the building (Suites 2 - 51. Equally or less intensive uses (based on parking standards in LQMC Section 9. 150.0601 are a/so permitted in the expanded area. No additional parking spaces beyond those provided on-site are required as part of the expansion of uses in Suites 2 - 5. Emp/oyees of the medical use (Suites 2 - 51 shall park in the rear parking area on Calle Cadiz. The front parking area, on Desert Club Drive, shall be reserved for patient parking. AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson, and Chairman Alderson. NOES: Commissioner Weber. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. P:\Reports - PC\2009N 2-8-09\PC MIN_71-24-09_Approved.doc 1 ~ Planning Commission Minutes November 24, 2009 • Locations of allowable use. • Staff requested Commission's concurrence with the position that particular uses such as golf carts, neighborhood electric vehicles and/or scooters, categorized as motor vehicles, would not fit in the same category as automobiles. That they would be an outright permitted use within the three listed commercial zoning districts with the exception that if there was to be an outdoor display, it would be allowed via a Conditional Use Permit application which would have to come before the Commission for consideration. Staff asked the Commission to either concur or modify this proposal, so that the next municipal code update would properly identify it within the code provisions. • Commissioner Quill was supportive of staff's recommendation and he thought the City should do anything possible to promote alternative forms of transportation. He agreed that the outside display of electric vehicles should be brought to the Commission for consideration. • Commissioner Quill asked staff to bring the issue of prohibiting the use of private golf carts at the Silverrock Resort for City Council consideration, in light of the fact that City Council recently approved phase 1 of the golf cart plan allowing residents to drive their private golf carts to the Silverrock Resort. • The Commission passed a motion concurring with staff's interpretation on motor vehicles permitted uses, as described above. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilkinson/Quill to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting to be held on December 8, 2009. This regular meeting was adjourned at 8:33 p.m. on November 24, 2009. Respectfully submitted, 1 Monika Rad va, Secretary City of La Quinta, California P:\Reports- PC\2009\72-8-09\PC MIN_11-24-09_Approved.doc ),3