Loading...
2012 11 27 PC MinutesPLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 27, 2012 CALL TO ORDER A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Vice Chairman Wright. PRESENT: Commissioners Alderson, Weber, Wilkinson, and Vice Chairman Wright. ABSENT: Chairwoman Barrows STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Les Johnson, Planning Manager David Sawyer, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Principal Planner Wally Nesbit, Assistant Planner Eric Ceia, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. Commissioner Wilkinson led the Commission in the Pledge of Allegiance. PUBLIC COMMENT - None CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA Confirmed APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion — A motion was made by Commissioners Wilkinson /Weber to approve the Planning Commission Minutes of October 23, 2012, as submitted. It was noted that the amendment to the September 25, 2012, minutes did not include the application and case number information. Staff clarified that this was an amendment to a specific application. AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Weber, Wilkinson, and Vice Chairman Wright NOES: None ABSENT: Chairwoman Barrows ABSTAIN: None PUBLIC HEARINGS Continued - Consideration of Conditional Use Permit 2012 -143 submitted by Crown Castle — Susan Makinson — for a Single Distributed Antenna System PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 1 NOVEMBER 27, 2012 (DAS) within the Public Right -Of -Way at the Southeast Corner of Avenue 50 and Park Avenue. Assistant Planner Ceja presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Vice Chairman Wright asked if there were any questions of staff. There being no questions of staff, Vice Chairman Wright asked if the applicant would like to speak and opened the public hearing. Susan Makinson, representative of Crown Castle, 5350 N. 48" Street, Suite 308, Chandler, AZ 85226 introduced herself and gave background on the new location. Commissioner Weber commented on: • The applicant's cooperation in finding an alternate location as directed by the Commission. Vice Chairman Wright concurred and asked if there were any questions of the applicant. There being none he asked if there was any public comment. Mr. Ronald Slegg, 50 -045 Mountain Shadows Road, owner of the house adjacent to the site, stated he was strongly opposed to the project due to his belief there were long -term detrimental health effects from microwaves coming off of these towers. He added there would be a degradation of property values with a tower located next to his house. Commissioner Alderson asked Mr. Slegg if he was aware the equipment was being mounted on an existing pole. Mr. Slegg said yes and stated his kitchen sink was 21 feet from his wall and the pole was another 30 feet from that wall on the outside. Commissioner Alderson commented that the previous request involved a stand- alone pole. Mr. Slegg asked why the applicants chose a residential area instead of locating this on a commercial site. Vice Chairman Wright said the applicant could address his specific questions. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 2 NOVEMBER 27, 2012 Ms. Alexis Walker Skeoch — 79 -145 Quail Crossing, expressed concern that she seemed to be the only property owner that received the hearing notice. She contacted her homeowners' association board, property management company, the school and the Boys and Girls Club and none of them were aware of the proposal. The Boys and Girls Club told her their concerns would run equal to any school concerns and they would be interested in having someone hear the proposal. She said there have been a lot of neighbors, in the area, with health issues and wanted that issue addressed. Vice Chairman Wright asked staff to respond to the method of notification. Assistant Planner Ceja said the notice of the public hearing went out on November 14, 2012, to all property owners within 500 feet of the site, as well as being published in The Desert Sun and no notices were returned by the Post Office. Ms. Esther Gelineau — 79 -120 Coyote Creek, said she was unaware of the project and the hearing until she received a call from her neighbor. She commented on previous health issues with the two nearby schools and the addition of the location of this tower being 21 feet over Mr. Slegg's wall. She added there were several empty lots at the other end of Washington as well as a vacant lot across the street from this location where the tower could be placed. There were also signal lights that it could be attached to. She did not see why it had to be located immediately outside of a residential development and said the Planning Commission needed to seriously review this. Commissioner Alderson asked the applicant to comment on: • The unsafe microwave question, • The process for site selection • Whether the first and second sites were noticed. Vice Chairman Wright called the applicant up to respond to comments. Ms. Makinson responded: • The notices were sent out to all residents within 625 feet of the site. The City only required 500 foot notification. • Notices were sent to all residents for the first and second sites, as well as the neighborhood associations, via U.S. Mail. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 3 NOVEMBER 27, 2012 Ms. Makinson gave a brief summary of the difference between the proposed DAS System (which is a repeater system) versus a traditional macrocell; and noted there were no microwaves involved. The antenna itself would not even be 23 inches tall, with a diameter of 10 inches and minimal ground equipment. She offered to provide a comprehensive report done by a specialist in health and medical physics to those that were interested. General discussion followed on how far away the previous site had been proposed, the noticing policy, and the possibility of double- noticing. Planning Director Johnson commented the Boys and Girls Club had not been noticed as the City was the owner of their leased property. There being no further questions of the applicant, Vice Chairman Wright called up Mary Walker. Mary Walker, CCAM, Rancho La Quinta Master Association, 79 -285 Rancho La Quinta Drive commented that several homeowners did receive notices and that was why she was in attendance. So, notices were received. Commissioner Weber asked Ms. Walker for her location; which she noted. Vice Chairman Wright asked if there were any other questions of Ms. Walker. There being none, she stepped down. Vice Chairman Wright asked if there was any further public comment. Ms. Alexis Walker Skeoch listed the following concerns: • At what stage of hearings was this project at? • After contacting the perimeter property owners, and the Board members, none of which received any information on this issue. They commented they did not want this antenna at this location. • It is a functional issue of property value and health concerns. Vice Chairman Wright explained the steps the project had gone through and said this was an action item to be voted on at this meeting. He added that Ms. Skeoch's concerns had been addressed and reiterated that this was a 21 -inch tall antenna on an existing light pole. Ms. Walker Skeoch also expressed the following concerns: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 4 NOVEMBER 27, 2012 • Were the previous hearings attended by Estancias, or Painted Cove residents. • The Painted Cove community was not represented at this meeting. • Their Board and management company knew nothing about this proposal. • It appeared not everyone received a notice of the hearing. • How many calls were being processed through this equipment and what kind of emissions were they looking at; now and in the future. In response to her concerns, Planning Director Johnson explained the hearing notice mailing procedures which involved all parcels within 500 feet of the site. He added that staff did try to notify their management company, but according to the most recent tax records, they were listed with an out -of -state address. Vice Chairman Wright re- called the applicant to the podium to address Ms. Skeoch's additional concerns. Ms. Makinson responses were: • The Riverside County Assessor's records showed the Painted Cove property managers were located in Mount Clemons, Michigan, and they had been notified. • Regarding emissions and RF — the Distributed Antenna System (DAS) is actually non - ionizing. The power used is the equivalent of house power and is basically like a 110 or any regular home outlet. • Regarding coverage and location — they would be increasing the existing capacity, but there were certain constrains in where, and how far apart, the antennas could be placed. • When completed, all that would be visible was a traffic signal with a light attached and a very small apparatus to the side which would be the antenna. • Studies were done in various cities, by Tarantello & Associates, to show the effect on property values due to these installations, and it turned out to be very negligible; less than 1 % either way. Vice Chairman Wright asked if there was additional public comment. Ms. Esther Gelineau expressed the following: • What is this antenna enhancing in the community? • What,company is being represented and what do they do? • What is the radius of this enhancement and why can't it be put on one end or another of Avenue 50, or in a nearby vacant lot? PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 5 NOVEMBER 27, 2012 • Commented on local carriers working in the area and suggested input be encouraged, from current carriers, before approving another carrier coming in. Ms. Makinson responded: • There is more and more demand on the wireless networks. • There is more strain on the networks due to the increase in data - intensive devices, and the applicant was trying to enhance the capacity and coverage. • The applicant was Crown Castle which is a large DAS and tower manufacturer. • The DAS system was like a hub - and -spoke system, all interdepending on one another, but there were some very specific constraints on how far apart these antennas can be placed. Mrs. Walker Skeoch expressed the following: • The address for the Painted Cove property management company was — Desert Management, P 0 Box 799, Rancho Mirage, and they had no knowledge of these proceedings. • She sells real estate and none of her clients would even look at a property that had any type of electromagnetic or radio frequency device anywhere near it. Whether it was an aesthetic, environmental, or health issue, it would not sell. • Mr. Slegg has pretty vast experience with some pretty serious cancers and anything that can be done to prevent any additional health issues should be taken into consideration for his sake as well as the children attending school and those at the Boys and Girls Club. • She asked the Commission to please consider the homeowners, for both the health and resale issues. Vice Chairman Wright asked if there was any further public comment. There being none, he closed the public hearing portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Alderson commented on: • The Commission having reviewed this type of application before, with the same issues being brought up, and the fact he was convinced they are not severe enough to be an issue. • The Commission had asked this company to relocate their equipment from the previous request, which they have done. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 6 NOVEMBER 27. 2012 • Notification was done within the scope of the law. • The Public Hearing allowed everyone to be heard in a democratic and proper way. Commissioner Wilkinson commented on: • He was also previously skeptical on these types of towers, but had the opportunity to do research on a macro tower that was near to his personal property, but far enough away to allow his vote. • A macro tower has a bit more power than the DAS system. • Applicant cannot relocate from this site due to the "circle of coverage ". • He was not a fan of this system until he did his own research and concluded there aren't any health related issues to this type of system. • He did personally understand Mr. Slegg's position and did the research to satisfy himself. Commissioner Weber commented on: • The fact the Commission has reviewed towers and their aesthetics more than once. • Visual landscapes (aesthetics) are important and the applicant has complied with the Commission's requests on aesthetics and location. • The utility needs to go in, at that location, to make an effective coverage area. • An electric clock, on your nightstand, has more radio frequency than you would get from this device. • A low frequency device like this, on a public right -of -way, is one of the best solutions. • Pointed out high voltage power lines on the north side of Avenue 50 and the fact that this was not in that league. • Previously had a real estate license and did not believe this was going to degrade real estate values; as this was so minor. Vice Chairman Wright echoed his fellow Commissioners' comments and thanked all the residents for attending. There being no further questions or discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Weber /Wilkinson to adopt Resolution 2012 -029 recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2012 -143 as submitted. AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Weber, Wilkinson, and Vice Chairman Wright NOES: None ABSENT: Chairwoman Barrows ABSTAIN: None PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 7 NOVEMBER 27, 2012 2. Consideration of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2012 -111 — Certain Amendments to the La Quinta Municipal Code: Chapter 9.160, Signs, and Certain Sections Related Thereto. Location: City -wide. Principal Planner Nesbit presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Planning Manager Sawyer pointed out the memo distributed with additional information with regards to two items; clarification of the short term rental signage provisions and the Chamber of Commerce comments. He recommended the language, in the memo, be included in the approval of this application. Vice Chairman Wright asked if there were any questions of staff. There being no further questions of staff, and the City being the applicant, Vice Chairman Wright asked if there was any public comment. There being no public comment, Vice Chairman Wright closed the public hearing portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. General discussion followed on: • Previous Commission meeting sign discussions. • Whether security signs were covered; to which staff stated they were currently not regulated. • The Chamber of Commerce letter and the Chamber's responsiveness. • Political sign deposits and their continuing need as encouragement for candidates to remove their signs in a timely manner. There being no further questions of staff, and the City being the applicant, Vice Chairman Wright asked if there was any public comment. There being no public comment, Vice Chairman Wright closed the public hearing portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. There being no further questions or discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson /Weber to adopt Resolution 2012 -030 recommending approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2012 -111 as submitted and including the language in the memo provided to the Commission at the meeting. AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Weber, Wilkinson, and Vice Chairman Wright NOES: None ABSENT: Chairwoman Barrows ABSTAIN: None PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 8 NOVEMBER 27, 2012 BUSINESS SESSION - None CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL - None COMMISSIONER ITEMS 1. Report on City Council meetings of November 6 and 20, 2012. 2. Upcoming Council meeting attendance: Commissioner Alderson — December 4, 2012, Chairwoman Barrows — December 18, 2012, Commissioner Weber — Re- scheduled meeting date, January 2, 2013, and Commissioner Wilkinson — January 15, 2013 3. Commissioner Weber: • Thanked the City again for payment of a portion of this APA Conference Registration fees, as well as kudos to Planning Director, Les Johnson, who was the Co -Chair of the Conference, held at Rancho Las Palmas in Rancho Mirage. • Distributed materials regarding roundabouts. • Discussion of articles in The Desert Sun regarding SilverRock and a San Antonio -like theme approach. 4. Commissioner Alderson: • Commented on the "Request to Speak" form and the procedure for allowing public comment. PLANNING STAFF ITEMS 1. Joint Council Meeting: Discussion of new format change which will include an update on the Status of the City. The meeting will begin at 5:00 p.m. on January 22, 2013. If unable to attend please advise staff. 2. Discussion of Holiday Schedule — December 25, 2012 meeting will be cancelled. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved by Commissioners Alderson /Wilkinson to adjourn this meeting at 8:46 p.m. AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Weber, Wilkinson, and Vice Chairman Wright NOES: None ABSENT: Chairwoman Barrows ABSTAIN: None PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 9 NOVEMBER 27, 2012 Transcribed by Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. Respectfully submitted, MONIKA RADEVA, Se retary City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES 10 NOVEMBER 27, 2012