Loading...
2011 09 27 PC MinutesMINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78 -495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA September 27, 2011 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Alderson. B. PRESENT: Commissioners Barrows, Weber, Wilkinson, Wright, and Chairman Alderson. ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Les Johnson, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, Planning Manager David Sawyer, Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen, Assistant Planner Eric Ceja, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: There being no comments, or suggestions, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows /Wright to approve the minutes of July 26, 2011 as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Continued Site Development Permit 2002 -753 Amendment 1 • a request by Walgreens Company, for consideration to rescind Condition of Approval #6 of the original Site Development Permit and to permit the sale of beer and wine at the existing Walgreens, located at the northeast corner of Avenue 48 and Washington Street. Assistant Planner Eric Ceja presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. There being none, Chairman Alderson asked about the police statistics since this retailer had located on this site. Staff responded that the Police Department was contacted and it was confirmed that for the entire period of time there had been two false alarms and one non - emergency. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and asked if the applicant would like to speak. Ms. Jennifer La Fond. Chavez, Associate, Luce Forward, Hamilton & Scripps, LLP, 600 West Broadway, Suite 2600, San Diego, CA 92101, introduced herself and commented on Walgreens' previous corporate policy on the sales of alcohol, and the current strong customer demand for the convenience of one -stop shopping. She then gave anecdotal evidence of the need to include beer and wine. She said Walgreens has a lot of experience with regulated products; including tobacco and pharmaceuticals and commented on the corporate policy which will be followed to make sure that the beer and wine sales are handled safely. She said the store would have cameras inside and the alcohol would be in a very visible location. There would also be public view monitors to go along with the cameras. She added that Walgreens would only sell beer in six -, twelve -, eighteen -, and twenty -four packs as well as full size bottles of wine. So there would not be sales of single cans of beer, or malt liquor. She then offered to answer any other questions from the commissioners. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the change of the corporate policy, State -wide, regarding the sale of beer and wine. Ms. Jennifer La Fond Chavez restated their former and present policies. Commissioner Weber asked if the Conditions were acceptable. Ms. La Fond Chavez said Walgreens was comfortable with them and explained they had already put some security plans in place. Commissioner Weber asked if Ms. La Fond Chavez was counsel for Walgreens covering most of Southern California. She said yes. -2- Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Discussion followed on: • Comparison of these conditions to those imposed at other Southern California locations. • Adequate training for management and staff on the sale of beer and wine. • Other Walgreens locations, in the Coachella Valley, currently selling beer and wine. Ms. La Fond Chavez had no further comments but requested the option of responding to any opposition. Chairman Alderson said she would have the opportunity to respond. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any more questions of the applicant. There being none he asked if there was any public comment. Mr. James Duff, 78 -625 Descanso Lane, introduced himself as the Secretary to the Board of the Rancho La Quinta Homeowners' Association (HOA) and said he had 42 letters from people (within 500 feet of this location) in opposition to this request. He said he would like to speak on a couple of issues: 1) there are plenty of outlets within a mile of this location (approximately ten) and there is no need to sell alcoholic beverages at this location, 2) at the time this approval was given Walgreens said they would supply a 24 -hour drive -thru for drugs and prescriptions; which has yet to be provided. Since they have not provided the 24 -hour drive -thru he did not believe these applications would stop with the sale of beer and wine but would continue with applications for additional items. He was not sure that once the door was open that you would be able to stop the proliferation. Mr. Duff commented on the suggestion of one -stop shopping at Walgreens. He said there are a lot of things that aren't available at Walgreens and the fact you can pick up beer and wine is probably not something that the average person really needs to fulfill their one -stop shopping needs. It's an interesting concept but he suggested that there is very little validity to that situation. Mr. Duff continued there is no community- stated interest in keeping Walgreens profitable, or competitive; they are doing fine the way they are -3- Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 and don't need these kinds of sales to make them competitive. Their attorney referenced an article that he sent to the Planning Commission from the Desert Sun. It spoke to the impact of retail alcohol sales on crime; specifically with the case of single -serve alcoholic beverage containers and their problems. However, in, the footnotes of that article the sale of alcoholic beverages does create the criminal situation. Increased crime statistics are true in Riverside County and California. The authors of the article point out that alcohol does, in fact, have a great deal of impact; not only in the short, but in the long- range. Mr. Duff pointed out that this location is in a neighborhood situation. The area is different from a mall or a Costco and should be looked at differently. He asked the Commission to particularly focus on the fact that this is a 900 home community which is right across the street. The homeowners think that should bear in the Commission's analysis of the situation. He had other points to cover, but deferred to the HOA President. He then presented the 42 letters to the Commission Secretary. Mr. Rob Dawson, 79 -770 Rancho La Quinta Drive, President of the Rancho La Quinta Homeowners' Association (HOA), introduced himself and said he was present, as were most of the members of the Board, when the original application was made for Walgreens which included the condition about having no storage or sales of alcoholic beverages. He commented that nothing has changed, in terms of that particular outlet, other than Walgreens' corporate policy. He said it was important to realize that, within a mile of Walgreens and Rancho La Quinta, there are currently at least 10 stores where people can buy beer or wine. And if price was really a factor, then people will be purchasing those products at Costco or BevMo. So, it's certainly not from an element of need, but of corporate policy. The HOA has no need in making Walgreens competitive and it provides no additional tax dollars to the City. Whether people buy from Walgreens or Ralphs it's the same tax revenue. Our Association has not seen any facts or figures to suggest that there has been a strong demand for any type of alcoholic beverages to be sold at this Walgreens. Mr. Dawson then pointed out the Desert Sun Article and the correlation between the density of alcohol outlets and violent crime among teens and young adults. He said the HOA's position is there just seems to be no need. It only serves the benefit of Walgreens. It doesn't serve the City of La Quinta and no one is deprived of access to purchase their alcohol. -4- Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Chairman Alderson asked Mr. Dawson, since this item was continued for 60 days to allow the HOA a bigger voice in the matter; if Mr. Dawson now had representative quantities of people back that he was representing. Mr. Dawson said it was their understanding the limit of impact was anybody that lived within 500 feet of the property. And in that, he stated there were 42 homes that sent letters of opposition. Commissioner Weber asked Mr. Dawson if he had any statistics other than the Desert Sun article regarding police statistics or alcohol related criminal activity that would affect a gated community. Mr. Dawson said the Desert Sun referenced an article that was published by three different gentlemen, under an institute that looks into these items; which cites numerous references. He offered to put the references together for the Commission since the article looked at multiple precedents for determining that the number of alcohol outlets, especially clustered in any given area, increases crime and has a substantial impact on crime. Commissioner Weber said he understood that, but was hoping to have something at this meeting that would be referenced to this particular situation. He understood, generally speaking, alcohol could possibly have a link to criminal activity, but wanted to see the connection between that and how that impacts a gated community with 24 hour security. Mr. Dawson said he was unaware he needed to provide that information but suggested that their gated community has walls about four feet tall and it is not totally protected. General discussion followed on: • The availability of security statistics for the Rancho La Quinta development. • Height and security of their perimeter walls. • Security versus privacy walls. Commissioner Wright referenced the history of this case approval and pointed out there were a number of people against it. He noted the condition was added to placate the nearby homeowners who were upset about this retail establishment being located in a very residential area. He pointed to the map and noted the closeness of Walgreens to Rancho La Quinta, as well as other developments in the area; such as Lake La -5- Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Quinta, Laguna de la Paz and Wolff Waters. He said he realized that the needs of the many outweighed the needs of the few and he was speaking personally when he stated he did not agree with, and would not be in support of, rescinding the condition of approval. Mr. Dawson said he would like to make one additional point. He referenced the mention of the Wolff Waters development being close by. Mr. Dawson said he had concerns about having an alcohol outlet so close to low income housing. Chairman Alderson asked Mr. Dawson if the Wolff Waters development was also very close to Costco. Mr. Dawson replied it was and said Costco already provided alcoholic beverages. Ms. La Fond Chavez requested the opportunity to respond and said Walgreens tried to reach out to the HOA after they requested the continuance. She said Walgreens provided some additional information and followed up on the HOA's concerns to see if they could be addressed. Walgreens did not get a response back. She stated "after what we have heard, it's because there's just no way to get their support for the alcohol sales and I'm sorry that that's the case, but I do want to point out that Walgreens often finds itself situated in the middle of a neighborhood. They know how to handle that environment and here won't be any negative impacts because of the policies and procedures mentioned earlier." Ms. Jennifer La Fond Chavez also pointed out that this is not a money maker for Walgreens. They are going to dedicate a very small portion of the store to beer and wine. She stated "We are asking for up to 2% of the total floor space and we'd be comfortable with a condition that says we can't turn into a liquor store. That's not what Walgreens is after. It really is to provide an additional convenience to customers. It's a small area of the store set aside to serve the existing customers in the store." She then commented on the number of outlets in the area, and Walgreens' research of customer needs. General discussion followed on: • Anecdotal evidence of customer needs • Walgreens' "No Loitering" policy • Conditioning the application so no single -serve container alcoholic beverages could be sold at this location. Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 • Any future requests for ) Planning Commission for liquor would have to come back to the Chairman Alderson asked if there was any further public comment. There being none, Chairman Alderson closed the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Weber said he didn't see any reason not to grant this request. He expanded on the following points: • It is the City's business to approach businesses. • This is something that is a the region and throughout th • The single -serve situation is criminal activity and even Ih the main issues here is th sell single -serve containers ti • The conditions that are pu conditions that other compa would find a little unusual, neighbors. be fair and fair - minded about how we common business practice throughout e City. an obvious issue when it comes to e Desert Sun article states that one of t if neighborhood liquor stores do not ten that is a major crime reducer. t on here are reasonable. They are nies within this same line of business but we're doing that because of the Commissioner Barrows said she recommended the sale of single She noted other areas of the cc residential areas and said staff issues. The conditions have b Department and she was cor exception of the single -serve condition. Commissioner Wright restated favor of rescinding this at this Commissioner Wilkinson asked H.E.A.L. Program. Planning Director Johnson res (H.E.A.L.) campaign focused on and encouraging residents in the r comfortable with the proposal and e alcoholic beverages be prohibited. mity that sell alcoholic beverages in done a careful job of reviewing the placed on the advice of the Police :able with the proposal with the ibition which would be an added earlier concerns and said he was not in ut how this related to the City's Healthy Eating Active Living healthier choices, being active ty to do the same. -7 Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 General discussion followed regarding the City's H.E.A.L. and Green Programs. Commissioner Wilkinson said he didn't really hear anything about how this was going to help Walgreens' business or any substantial statistics about crime. He provided anecdotal evidence of Blue Laws and pointed out how he didn't hear any evidence to make him want to rescind the condition. Chairman Alderson commented on Walgreens' presentation and said the community currently is in a slump; and the promotion of business is pretty important to this community and businesses. He said there are no schools in the area so they are not an issue. He commented on the pros and cons and his support of the rescinding of the condition. General discussion followed on: • Any exterior display, or signage, involving alcoholic beverages. • The inclusion of a condition about the amount of square footage to be allowed for the sale and display of alcoholic beverages. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Weber /Barrows to approve Resolution 2011 -014 approving Site Development Permit 2002 -753, Amendment 1, subject to the conditions submitted and the additional conditions: 6. The sale of alcoholic beverages at this site is limited to beer and wine. No hard liquor sales shall occur at this site. 7. The sale of single -serve alcoholic beverages is prohibited. 8. The sale display area of alcoholic beverages shall not exceed an area greater than two percent (2 %) of the store floor area. AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Weber, and' Chairman Alderson. NOES: Commissioners Wilkinson and Wright. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None. B. Village Use Permit 2008 -042 a request by Dr. Kathryn Carlson, Village Park Animal Hospital, for consideration of a Village Use Permit to construct an 8,752 square foot veterinary office, located at 51 -230 Eisenhower Drive. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. He commented on two letters ZZ Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 and a memorandum recommending some changes to the Conditions of Approval, which were distributed to the Commissioners at the meeting. Staff then recommended approval with the inclusion of the changed conditions. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Barrows asked staff for clarification on condition number 6a; regarding the inclusion of the word MAY. Staff deferred to Public Works for response. Principal Engineer Wimmer explained there are three documents that currently address SWPPPs; 1) California State General Construction Permit, 2) La Quinta's Municipal NPDES Permit, and 3) Uniform Building Code. All three of these documents speak about the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan ( SWPPP). The Municipal NPDES Permit and the Statewide General Construction Permit only require an SWPPP for projects that are one acre or more. This project is less than one acre, and under those two permits, an SWPPP would not be required. However under the 2010 California Green Building Standards Code, there is language that may require the SWPPP for projects that are less than one acre. While we don't have a definitive answer, staff is researching this to find out how this is being interpreted. We are exploring this item, but the SWPPP may be required under this building code even though this project is less than one acre. Commissioner Barrows was concerned that it was not really clear what the applicant was supposed to do. She asked if there was a way to better define what is expected of the client. Principal Engineer Wimmer said staff would be amenable to having some clarifying language put in there. Commissioner Weber had a question on condition 23.A.2. that had been deleted. He asked if this was no longer a requirement for the applicant since it was noted to have been deleted due to an oversight. Principal Engineer Wimmer explained there is an application that is not yet going to be heard. The two other components to this total application include a right -of -way vacation request and the approval of a development agreement. In the right -of -way vacation request, the issue ISM Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Commissioner Barrows described is what is being looked at. This particular area has been slated for a signal, but it is also being looked at potentially for a roundabout. What would be unfortunate is that the recommendation were made to vacate the right -of -way which is going to later be needed for either the traffic signal or the roundabout. Since this item was going tonight a condition was crafted that would basically defer this particular issue until the right -of -way vacation issues were sorted out. General discussion followed on: • What area was, or could be, affected by the right -of -way or street. vacation. • The size of the building versus the land available. • The element of risk. • "In Lieu Of" fee for 13 parking stalls (50% available /50% being accommodated). • Processing procedures for this type of application. • The possible location of a traffic circle. • Trip generation not requiring a traffic study. Chairman Alderson complimented the ALRC on its review of this application and directed the Commissioners to page 5 of 7 in the architectural review. He suggested item number 4 (the size of the trees in the parking lot should increase to 36 from 24 inch), number 5, (add additional dog relief area in the landscape for waiting animal patients), number 7 (the smooth finish for the building would be preferred rather than a sand finish), number 10 (cascading plants should be placed on the balcony) and number 12 (remove the planter in the sidewalk area on the eastern side of the entry), were worthy of being added as conditions. Commissioner Wright generally agreed with the ALRC comments, but not with the one suggesting the use of a darker color for the building. Commissioner Barrows said she agreed with what had been included in number 9 .'(tree replacement) but would comment on it later in the meeting. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing portion of the meeting and asked if the applicant would like to speak. -10- Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Mr. Brian DeCoster, 80 -900 Calle Conchita, introduced himself as the project manager, and commented on the size of the building and the area needed to accommodate the applicant's business. He then addressed item 25F of the memorandum, referring to drive aisles (16 and 20 feet). He said there had been discussion back and forth on this item, but they were fairly limited on how much they could adjust the parking lot. He said they would like to keep the parking lot as it was shown since they spent a lot of time with a civil engineer and the Engineering Department, trying to make this happen. He added they were willing to do what it took, but if there was a better way of doing this to get both your requirements and our building built then we're certainly all for it. Mr. DeCoster then referenced ALRC suggested condition number 10 (removal of planter) and explained why that planter was needed. He also noted that they have included greenery in quite a few places to try to reduce graffiti. He then said he would be happy to answer any additional Commissioner's questions. General discussion followed which included an explanation of what was being requested regarding item 25F of the memorandum to the Commission; with staff commenting that they would be working with the applicant and their engineer to achieve those dimensions. Mr. DeCoster asked for clarification on recommendation number 9 which states: "Simplify the landscaping palette by reducing the number of different types of plants. Replace the fruitless olives with Palo Verde." He wanted to know if the Commission was considering the whole item, or just the portion regarding the tree replacement. Commissioner Barrows said she did not feel it was necessary to include the first sentence, but added that more desert landscaping, particularly more local species, should be included; which applied to the second sentence of that recommendation. Mr. DeCoster said they had no opposition to including desert tree species. Commissioner Barrows asked the applicant for an explanation of the comments, noted in the minutes from the ALRC meeting, about the cascading plants possibly affecting the artistic design of the decorative screens. Mr. DeCoster said it would be difficult to maintain plants since that area is completely screened to prevent a dog from jumping out. It would not -11- Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 be impossible to maintain the plants, but it would be very difficult in that particular area. General discussion followed regarding: • Where the screens were located. • The type of design utilized on the screens. • Inclusion of a railing. Dr. Kathryn Carlson, 80 -900 Calle Conchita, introduced herself and spoke on her mountainscape design. She said she has a garden area for boarding animals at her current building and wanted a free place for dogs to be able to go to in her new building. She wanted the same feel, but had square footage constraints with the new building. She designed this with the feel of the Art in Public Places pieces that are seen throughout La Quinta. She said she has always loved La Quinta for the artwork and how it has been promoted. She thought it would be nice to include that type of artwork. She added, as you are driving down Eisenhower and you get to the stop sign at Calle Tampico you will see a beautiful building; even without the cascading plants because of the design, which is similar to the City's bridges. General discussion followed on: • The inclusion of plants on some of the balconies. • Clarification of ALRC conditions to be added. • The addition /placement of a bicycle rack. General discussion of the water feature then followed on: • It would be more of an art piece than water feature. • The general design would include glass block since it would provide light to the room behind it. • Would not employ excessive water usage. • Would be a drip -type fountain With a floor drain. Dr. Carlson commented that it would be basically like a dripping water fountain from the wall. If that could not be done, logistically, it would be made of artistic glass block to represent a water feature. She then described her vision of the feature utilizing various types of glass block. -12— Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Dr. Carlson also commented on the negative letter submitted by Mr. Michael Fisher, and explained her concern about the park being for families as well as her support and use of the park over the years. She concluded by saying she tried to support La Quinta as much as possible and also encouraged her clients to use the trails as well. She then offered to answer any additional questions the. Commissioners might have. Chairman Alderson asked if the Commissioners had any further questions. Having none, Chairman Alderson asked if there was any other public comment. Ms. Kay Wolff, 77227 Calle Ensenada, introduced herself and said she thought that it was wonderful Dr. Carlson was trying to keep her animal hospital in La Quinta and in the Cove Area. She said it was an asset in many ways, not only for the services provided, but also for the extracurricular activities the doctor sponsored in the park. She then commented on the building that was going to be vacated, its historicity, and her friend who was raised in that building. She did not want to see it demolished or desecrated in a way that would remove it from being a historical landmark for La Quinta. She concluded with her support of the application to build the new animal hospital. General discussion followed on the historical background and status of the current veterinary hospital building. The discussion ended with the Planning Director clarifying that any significant changes to the exterior of the building would make it subject to environmental review for CEQA and would have to be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission which reports directly to the Council. He also stated that there is some protection for a historical property. Chairman Alderson asked if there was any further public comment. Ms. Mary Cornell, 81 -107 Tranquility Drive, Indio, introduced herself and spoke on behalf of Dr. Carlson and the contribution that she has made to the community, over the years. She added that what Dr. Carlson did, at a time when almost every veterinary practice had been bought out by corporations, was to continue to provide compassionate, individual care for her patients and she was here to provide support for Dr. Carlson's request. -13- Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Ms. Cornell added that she hoped that the Commission would see to it that this went forward because it was not only a contribution to the members of La Quinta, but all of the surrounding communities that come to Dr. Carlson for care not available anyplace else. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any more questions of the applicant or further public comment. There being none he closed the public hearing portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. General discussion followed on: • Businesses making the investment to stay in La Quinta. • How it was good to see projects in that area. • Coverage of lot area. • Good design. • Clarification of item 25.F — 16 to 20 feet. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows /Weber to approve Resolution 2011 -015, approving Village Use Permit 2008 -042, as submitted with the addition of conditions suggested at the ALRC Meeting of December 2, 2009 as follows: • A smooth finish for the building shall be used rather than sand finish (noted in Final Conditions as #56). • The size of the trees in the parking lot should be increased to 36- from 24 -inch (minimum diameter calipers) boxes in the landscaping area (noted in Final Conditions as #66) • Add additional dog relief area into the landscaping someplace for waiting animal patients (noted in Final Conditions as #67). • The landscaping plan shall replace Fruitless Olive Trees with Palo Verde trees (noted in Final Conditions as #68 ). In addition, the Condition of Approval No. B.A. shall be revised, for clarification, to read: • For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land, the Permittee may be required to submit a Storm Water -14- Planning Commission Minutes September 27, 2011 Pollution Prevention Plan ( "SWPPP ") to the State Water Resources Control Board, if required by the Building Official. Unanimously approved. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: A. Flyer about the Coachella Valley Water District Water Awareness Tour scheduled for October 7, 2011. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Report on City Council Meetings of August 2, and September 20, 2011; including comments on the approval of the City's Housing Element and the upcoming Joint Meeting and Commissioner Appointments meeting. B. Commissioner Wright is scheduled to attend the October 4, 2011, City Council meeting. IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: A. Discussion items for the Joint Council meeting will be agendized on next Planning Commission Meeting. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilkinson /Barrows to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next meeting to be held on October 11, 2011. This meeting was adjourned at 9:06 p.m. on September 27, 2011. Respectfully submitted, IXJQ� J'� Carolyn W Iker, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California -15-