Loading...
2011 06 28 PC MinutesMINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78 -495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA June 28, 2011 IV There being no comments, or suggestions, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows /Wilkinson to approve the minutes of June 14, 2011 as submitted. AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson and Chairman Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Weber. ABSTAIN: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: CALL TO ORDER 1'KGB1191ILLVitA A. A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to order at 7:03 p.m. by Chairman Alderson. PRESENT: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson, and Chairman Alderson. ABSENT: Commissioner Weber. STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Les Johnson, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Planning Manager David Sawyer, Associate Planner Jay Wuu, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. PUBLIC COMMENT: CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. CONSENT CALENDAR: 0 2010 -61 071,Amendment No. 1, S ite Development Permit 2003 -762, Extension No. 4, and Amendment No. 1 a request by WSL La Quinta, LLC, for consideration of development plans for La Paloma, a 208 -unit senior living community located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 Chairman Alderson reminded the audience that the public hearing was opened at the last meeting and left open. He then asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Jay Wuu presented the staff report,. a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Staff pointed out the revised conditions memo submitted by the Public Works Department distributed to the Commissioners prior to this meeting. Commissioner Barrows asked staff to provide a brief overview of the changes. Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer said the Public Works Department amended three conditions: • Condition 52 — clarified that there would be two elements to the CVWD permit, an indemnification agreement and. that the developer would be required to cover any costs associated with sampling any stormwater, if so required by the Water Quality Control Board. • Condition 25.6.1.g. - changed the required benchmark from Class I, Level I to a Class 11, Level II benchmark, deemed to be more appropriate for this project. • Condition 25.a.2.d — clarified that the applicant would only be responsible for fifty percent of the raised landscape median improvements along Avenue 50 and language was added allowing for interim improvements. Chairman Alderson asked staff to show the area in question on the plans and staff did so. Chairman Alderson asked if these improvements would involve the entire southerly portion of the project. Staff confirmed it was the southerly frontage of the project. He said the applicant had requested a left turn in and therefore the median would be constructed in a manner that would accommodate that. He noted staff was in support of the left turn in improvement. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if that was where the retaining wall was located. Planning Director Johnson replied it was not and he -2- Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 pointed out on the plans where the retaining wall was located. Principal Engineer Wimmer added that it was not yet known whether or not the retaining walls would be needed. He explained the applicant was to take a second look at the situation to determine if the retaining walls would be required from an engineering standpoint. He noted it was not staff's intent to require very expensive retaining walls for an interim improvement. Chairman Alderson thanked staff for the answer and said he would address the issue with the applicant to find out whether anything had been determined. Planning Director Johnson said Attachment 6 to the staff report discussed in detail, all of the amendments to the conditions of approval. He noted three of the conditions had already been addressed with the memo by Public Works. He explained the rest of the amendments to the conditions of approval: • Condition 3 - amended to make the Site Development Permit valid for two years after City Council approval. • Condition 14 - identified that Public Works would address the dedications and right -of -way at the appropriate time during the development process. • Condition 28 - maintained that a left out movement on Avenue 50 not be allowed. • Condition 34 - maintained that the applicant must provide a plan profile for the on -site street improvements; this did not apply to interior driveways. Principal Engineer Wimmer explained Condition 34 was meant in particular for the storm drain on -site improvements and most likely there would not be any need for a plan profile Planning Director Johnson said this Would conclude the response to the original letter that was submitted to the Commission two weeks ago, as the rest of the amended conditions were revised according to Fire Department requirements. Discussion followed regarding water pollutant removal systems. -3- Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson re- opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and asked if the applicant would like to speak. Mr. Roger Green, Vice President of Development for West Senior Living, 5796 Armada Drive,. Carlsbad, CA, introduced himself and said he was attending on behalf of Mr. John Rimbach, President of West Living (WSL La Quinta, LLC), who was here for the last meeting, but was unable to attend this evening. Mr. Green thanked staff for their time and effort over the last two weeks to get the conditions of approval modified and amended. Mr. Green said he would like.to clarify Condition 25 stating that the applicant would not be responsible for any median improvements related to the., property to the south of the project. He noted that the way the condition was currently worded was acceptable. He asked Mr. Marvin Roos if he had anything to add. Mr. Marvin Roos, MSA Consulting, 34.200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA, introduced himself and said he would like to reiterate Mr. Green's comments on commending staff for their time and efforts on trying to work out the conditions of approval. He noted the conditions were clarified as best as possible. Mr. Roos said that a possible U -turn on southbound Washington Street was requested by the applicant and discussed with staff. Staff's response was. that in an effort to maximize the intersection capacity, a U -turn would not be acceptable due to an existing right -turn overlap, which would have to be eliminated in order to allow for the.0 -turn. He asked that this issue be revisited at a later time when .the project is built out, so that the actual impact on traffic and street capacity could be realistically measured. Mr. Roos said that -the applicant was supportive. of staff's report and Mr. Green's comments and would like to answer any questions from the Planning Commission. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions. There being no further questions he asked about the storm drain. Mr. Roos replied the usage of the storm drains would be further explored and explained the procedures that would have to be followed. He, noted that the En Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 only reason the site plan would change was if a surface retention system would have to be utilized. Commissioner Barrows expressed a concern about the entry water feature and inquired about its design. She explained the Commission's position regarding water features and said the water feature at the proposed location would only serve an aesthetic function as residents would not be able to enjoy it. She suggested the water feature be placed next to the entrance way or at another location where it could be really appreciated. Mr. Roos replied the water feature was a re- circulating vertical fountain dropping water and explained its design. He said the proposed location was the area where residents would be waiting to take the bus and the element of water would enhance their experience. He noted the Commission's comments would be taken into consideration and the applicant would not have any objections if the Commission chose to add a condition that the entry way be revised. Commissioner Barrows thanked Mr. Roos for the explanation. Mr. Mark Irving, Urban Housing Communities, 2000 E. Fourth Street # 205, Santa Ana, CA 92705, introduced himself and said he was a representative of the owners of the property to the south of the project. He said he was supportive of the project overall. He asked for clarification on Condition 25a2d regarding a median being built and asked for assurance that their right to implement a left turn -in would be preserved, otherwise that would result in devaluation of the property. He noted there were no objections to the proposed widening of the road as there were no overall perceived impacts to their property. He said there was a significant amount of slope and asked that it be taken into consideration in relationship to any retainer walls. Commissioner Wilkinson asked to see the area where the left turn -in would be located. Commissioner Quill said that the owner of the property to the south would have to. dedicate a right -of -way when the site was being developed. -5- Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 Chairman Alderson said the left turn -in would have to be brought forth for consideration at the time the property on the south was being developed. He explained the Commission would take note of his comments and concerns, however the Commission was not in, a position to provide any absolute assurance. � Mr. Irving said he understood that an assurance from the Commission would not be possible. He I noted that Planning Director Johnson provided a letter stating that staff has acknowledged their position and though nothing could be promised at this time;. an effort would certainly be made in the future to accommodate their request. General discussion followed regarding possible ways the street and median improvements could be implemented, one of which included building out the median to its ultimate intended use with the left turn - in lane in place at this time. City Attorney Jenson explained that this approach might require the City to advance the costs associated with the improvements and to have to seek reimbursement at some time in the future and explained the difficulties associated with that. Further discussion followed regarding possible reimbursement agreements, the parties involved, and how they could be implemented. Discussion followed regarding the currently available right -of -way which was not sufficient to implement the required street improvements. Mr. Roos said that they were able to reach an acceptable interim solution for the improvements with the Public Works Department. He explained staff's concern that the full implementation of the street and median improvements at this.,time would result in a left turn -in access that was not clearly identified. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any more questions of the applicant. There being none he asked if there was any public comment. There being no public comments, he opened the matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Wilkinson asked how the wording on Condition 25 was corrected and if both parties were satisfied with the corrections made. City Attorney Jenson replied Mr. Green would be responsible for certain interim improvements unless he entered into an. agreement Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 with the City stating he would not be responsible. Mr. Roos said the wording was corrected as best as possible under the circumstances. Commissioner Quill asked the Public Works Department why a U -turn lane could not be accommodated on Avenue 50 while traveling southbound on Washington Street. Staff replied that a U -turn lane could be accommodated. The issue was that the traffic light could not support it due to the current right - turn dedicated green arrow while traveling northbound on Washington Street. Because the intent was to maximize the signal operation a U- turn could not be accommodated. Planning Director Johnson said this use had been discussed and the prevailing opinion was to possibly give the U -turn signal a try when the project was developed and measure the impact it would have on the right -turn lane traffic exactly, in order to determine for which one there was a prevailing demand. Commissioner Barrows asked if the Commission needed to address this issue as a condition of approval. Staff replied there was no need for a condition at this time. Chairman Alderson commended the developer for the professional presentation he presented and for the well -done specific plan. He said he was very much in favor of the project. Commissioner Quill asked for clarification on Commissioner Barrows comments on the proposed water feature. Commissioner Barrows said she would like to see the proposed water feature in the circular drive either eliminated or re- located to a different location where the residents would be able to enjoy it. She also said she would like to see the use of native Colorado Desert species incorporated into the plant palette, or some other type of native species. Commissioner Quill said the Commission had set a precedent for water features in the past. He explained that usually the Commission would like to see the use of water features in places where they could be -7- Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 enjoyed and appreciated by patrons and residents, and enhance the ambiance of the area.. This particular water feature provided neither in the proposed location and was merely an additional expense. He noted he would be in favor. of a water feature located by the recreation center area or the sitting area, but in the drive area it was simply a waste of energy and water. Chairman Alderson suggested the Commission condition the applicant to propose an alternative treatment for the circular turn around and to include Mr. Gregory's comments from last week regarding working with staff on using an alternative landscape planting material. There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill /Wilkinson to approve Resolution 2011 -006 recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2004 - 071, Amendment 1, subject the conditions submitted, with the following revisions: AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson, and Chairman Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Weber. ABSTAIN: None. There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill /Wilkinson ,to approve Resolution 2011 -007 recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2003 -762, Extension , 4, and Site Development Permit 2003 - 762, Amendment 1, subject to the conditions submitted, with the following revisions: a. As part of the Final Landscape Plan. review process, the applicant shall submit a revised plan for the main entrance vehicular courtyard depicting either the removal of the water feature within the drive aisle or relocation of the water feature with an enhanced interactive design. b. As part of the Final Landscape Plan review process, the applicant shall submit a revised plant palette that reflects an increased use of . Colorado Desert native type species of plants and shrubs. AYES: Commissioners. Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson, and Chairman Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Weber. ABSTAIN: None. Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2011 -104 a request by the City of La Quinta for consideration of an Amendment to the La Quinta Municipal Code, Section 9.170, Communication Towers and Equipment to be effective City -wide. Planning Director Les Johnson noted the memo included in the packet requesting the Commission to open the public hearing and continue the case to the next regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting on July 12, 2011, at 7:00 p.m. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson noted the City was the applicant and asked if there was any public comment. There being none, Chairman Alderson closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. There being no further questions or discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows /Wilkinson to continue Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2011 -104 to the July 12, 2011, Planning Commission Meeting. AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson and Chairman Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Weber. ABSTAIN: None. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: A. Regional Transportation Plan (RTP) Planning Director Johnson handed out an informational brochure titled "2012 RTP /SCS Public Outreach Workshops" and said that the Riverside County Public Outreach Workshop was scheduled to be held at the Coachella Valley Associated Governments (CVAG) offices on July 26, 2011, from 9:00 a.m. until 12:00 noon. Planning Director Johnson explained this was mandated by State law Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 to combine regional transportation planning efforts with Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) efforts, the affordable housing numbers, in order to create a sustainable community strategy. Commissioner Quill asked if this was part of the SB 375 mandated program. Staff replied it was. VIII.. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Discussion of June 7 and June 21, 2011 Council meetings. Planning Director Johnson said the June 7 Council meeting addressed residents' concerns about the City's dog parks. Commissioner Ed Alderson gave a brief overview of the June 21, 2011, meeting: • Commissioner Barrows gave a presentation about a nature walk program. • The Building and Safety Director was acknowledged for his twenty -eight years of service to the City of La Quinta and congratulated on his retirement. Planning Manager Greg Butler was appointed as the Building and Safety Director. • Presentation of the City's financial statement and preliminary budget review. • Discussion of Census data. • 30% of the City's income is applied to public safety. . City Council will be dark on August 16 and September 6, 2011 meetings. • Council deferred the Development Impact Fee (DIF) increase for six months. • PGA West residents attended the meeting requesting the release of bonds associated with old conditions . of approval related to street improvements. The item was continued to the first Council meeting in November of 2011. This was to allow for the participation of seasonal residents as well. • Updated Multi- Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Nexus Study. B. Chairman. Alderson is scheduled to attend the July 5, 2011, City Council meeting. C. Noted that the new City Council Meeting Attendance Schedule from -10- Planning Commission Minutes June 28, 2011 July 5, 2011 — June 19, 2012, was included. Commissioner Wilkinson requested for an amendment to the schedule due to scheduling conflict. D. Discussion of the Planning Commission Summer Schedule The Commission decided to go dark for the August 9 and 23, 2011, meetings. IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: None. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows /Wilkinson to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next meeting to be held on July 12, 2011. This meeting was adjourned at 8:23 p.m. on June 28, 2011. Respectfully s*Scretary Monika Ra ev for Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California -11-