Loading...
2006 07 11 PCG'ity of La Quints Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-guinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California JULY 11, 2006 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2006-025 Beginning Minute Motion 2006-018 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR P:\Reports - PC\2006\7-11-06\PC AGENDA.doc PUBLIC HEARINGS: For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public hearing. A. Item ................... CONTINUED — ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006- 568, AND SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-080. Applicant ............. City of La Quinta Location .............. 546 acre site south of Avenue 52, west of Jefferson Street, north of Avenue 54. Request .............. Consideration of: 1...... Recommending to the City Council Certification of an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 2002- 453; and 2...... Recommending to the City Council approval fo the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan creating development guidelines and standards for the future development of a destination resort area. Action ................. Resolution 2006- , and Resolution 2006- . BUSINESS ITEM: None CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Discussion of a Request to Consider Allowing Ten Foot Rear Yard Setbacks in a Medium Density Residential Zoning District that Requires a Fifteen Foot Rear Yard Setback as Requested by Skip Lench. B. Notification of the Draft Village Parking Study. C. Vista Santa Rosa Design Guidelines. D. Year 2006/2007 Work Program. P:\Reports - PC\2006\7-11-06\PC AGENDA.doc DECLARATION OF POSTING arolyn Walker, Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Ma for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, July 11, 2006, was ted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the atin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, on Friday, July 7, 2006. FED: July 7, 2006 - w lmz x &",r L iOLY WALKER, Secretary of La Quinta, California Public Notices The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7123, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required. If background materials is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00 p.m. meeting. P:\Reports - PC\2006\7-11-06\PC AGENDA.doc PH #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 11, 2006 CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-568 SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-080 REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF RESOLUTIONS TAKING THE FOLLOWING ACTIONS: 1 . RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002- 453; AND 2. RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE SILVERROCK RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN CREATING DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF A DESTINATION RESORT AREA. LOCATION: 546 ACRE SITE SOUTH OF AVENUE 52, WEST OF JEFFERSON STREET, NORTH OF AVENUE 54 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA PROPERTY OWNER: LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ADDENDUM 2006-568 (ADDENDUM TO EA 2002-453) FOR THIS REQUEST IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROJECT, WITH ITS REVISIONS WILL NOT TRIGGER ANY OF THE FINDINGS IN CEQA GUIDELINE 15162, WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND THEREFORE, IS RECOMMENDING AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUS MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE CERTIFIED WITH MITIGATION MEASURES. ZONING: GOLF COURSE (GC), TOURIST COMMERCIAL (CT) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: GOLF COURSE (G), TOURIST COMMERCIAL (TC) SURROUNDING LAND USE/ ZONING: NORTH: THE CITRUS AND WATERMARK VILLAS/ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) SOUTH: PGA WEST/ LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) EAST: THE HIDEAWAY/ LOW DENISTY RESIDENTIAL (RL) WEST: OPEN SPACE AND TRADITIONS/ OPEN SPACE (OS) AND LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) BACKGROUND: The 546 acre project site is located on the south side of Avenue 52, west of Jefferson Street and north of Avenue 54 (Attachment 1). The property is zoned Golf Course and Tourist Commercial. The project site was originally a part of the 1,020 acre Oak Tree West Specific Plan, which was adopted in 1985. The Oak Tree West Specific Plan included property north of Avenue 52, what is now known as The Citrus, and identified much of the subject property being developed as a single-family residential 45-hole golf course community but, also included a hotel, retail and commercial uses as well. In 1998, a resort development was proposed for the project site that included 36 holes of golf, a hotel, retail, commercial and residential uses. The applicant did not complete the permit process for this proposed development. In 2002, the City of La Quinta Redevelopment Agency acquired the project site with the primary objectives of providing public recreation opportunities with the development of two public golf courses and to facilitate the development of a resort and associated commercial uses that would generate a recurring revenue source for the City. As part of the acquisition process, an Environmental Assessment was conducted and certified that identified a development proposal similar to the resort development previously proposed in 1998. Approximately 1 /3 of the site is currently developed with the first of two proposed 18- hole municipal golf courses, Arnold Palmer Classic Course at SilverRock Resort, opening in March, 2005. The remainder of the property is primarily undeveloped except for site grading and perimeter landscaping that was completed in conjunction with the golf course development. ANALYSIS: General Plan The project is consistent with the City's General Plan goals and policies. The land use designations for the project site are Golf Course (G) and Tourist Commercial (TC). The General Plan Land Use Element encourages "the continued growth of the tourism and resort industries in the City." In addition, the Land Use Element also states that "the City will continue to support and encourage the development of resort hotels as a key component of its economic base." The General Plan also states that a specific plan is required for development on Tourist Commercial designated properties. Specific Plan The request is for approval of the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan 2006-080 (Attachment 2) establishing design guidelines and development standards in a focused development plan for the distribution of land uses, location and sizing of supporting infrastructure, development standards, and requirements for public improvements on the 546 acre project site. Zoning Code Section 9.70.030 requires that a specific plan be approved for any development that exceeds ten acres located in this zoning district. The Specific Plan is designed to ensure quality development; it also provides a degree of flexibility to allow development to respond to the changes in local standards and the marketplace. Project Proposal The SilverRock Resort Specific Plan identifies future development that is predominately focused upon two high -quality public courses combined with three separate and distinct hotels, resort casitas and a mixed -use resort village. A more definitive description of the development proposed for SilverRock Resort Specific Plan is provided via the eight planning areas identified in the Specific Plan. Each planning area description provides a general overview of the area, acreage and land uses. A general description of each planning area is as follows: Planning Area 1: Uses in this area include two 18-hole golf courses and supporting facilities, including a 20,000 square foot clubhouse, driving range, instructional facility, and golf course maintenance facility. One of the golf courses, Arnold Palmer Classic Course at SilverRock Resort, has been developed and is operational. Planning Area 1 consists of approximately 373 acres. Planning Area 2: This area includes the Ahmanson House, which is the current temporary clubhouse location. The residence will be preserved and maintained for use as a commercial, civic and/or cultural events facility. Additional facilities may be constructed that could include a restaurant, conference facility, and lodging for up to 80 guest units. Planning Area 2 consists of approximately four acres. Planning Area 3: The primary use proposed for this area is a four -star boutique hotel and resort casita units with a maximum of 225 units and up to 260 keys. Other main amenities include a restaurant, spa and fitness facility, pool and conference/meeting space. Planning Area 3 consists of approximately 13 acres. Planning Area 4: The signature four -star resort hotel for SilverRock Resort will be located within Planning Area 4. Consisting of up to 405 units and 520 keys the 4-star hotel and resort casitas will be centrally located and adjacent to the resort village. Main amenities will include restaurants, spa and fitness facility, kid's pool, adult pool and conference/meeting space. In addition to the hotel and associated amenities, this location will also include a multi -use conference -theater building that can accommodate movies, live theater and conferences. Planning Area 4 consists of approximately 30 acres. Planning Area 5: Located immediately south of Planning Area 4, this segment of the project consists of nine acres and is planned for the development of a mixed -use resort retail village. The tenant mix is proposed to include restaurants, retailers, art galleries, banks, resort oriented offices, gourmet markets, etc. This area may also include live - work lofts and/or multi -family residential. Total building square footage for the resort retail village is up to 160,000 square feet. Planning Area 6: Uses in this planning area consist of a 3-star or better resort or boutique hotel and resort casitas that will have up to 450 unitss and 500 keys. Main amenities include restaurants, bar, and two resort pools. Planning Area 6 consists of approximately 31 acres. Planning Area 7: This planning area is 35 acres in size located in the northeast corner of the site and is proposed to be a community park. Design of the park will allow for special events to be conducted on site, such as automobile displays, art shows/festivals, corporate events in conjunction with one of the on site hotels, and/or public parking. Planning Area 8: Approximately 51 acres in size, this planning area contains existing and planned public facilities such as streets, water well sites, and the existing All American Canal. Additional information for each of the Planning Areas, including development standards, is provided in the Plan. The Plan requests a limited number of deviations from the development regulations currently provided for in the Tourist Commercial and Golf Course zoning districts. Most notable is the maximum height and number of stories proposed for the main resort hotel proposed in Planning Area 4. A maximum building height of 65 feet and up to five stories is identified in the Plan. Without specific plan approval, the Tourist Commercial zoning district allows a maximum building height of 40 feet and up to three stories. All other proposed structures are consistent with the applicable development regulations. The Specific Plan includes a parking program (Table 15, page 51) that identifies types of uses and parking space requirements. Several of the requirements differ from the City's parking standards. However, the parking space requirements identified in the parking program resulted from research conducted that considered standards and built parking environments for similar hotel and resort commercial developments. The Specific Plan proposes establishing a multi -use trail along Avenue 52, Jefferson Street and a portion of Avenue 54. The City's design standard for multi -use trails identifies a split rail fence being established between the trail and vehicular traffic lanes. The multi -use trail was constructed along Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street in conjunction with development of the first golf course and did not include the split -rail fence. Currently, Public Works staff is proposing fencing alternatives via a pilot project to be constructed along Avenue 54. Depending upon the outcome of this exercise, it will be determined if fencing, split rail or otherwise, will be installed along the other fronting streets. The signature resort hotel proposed for Planning Area 4 will be designed to be a focal point for SilverRock Resort. Though the hotel will be taller than other buildings in the general area, it will be a considerable distance from the perimeter of the resort and adjacent residential developments. Relationship to Neighboring Properties SilverRock Resort is predominately surrounded by residential uses to the north, south and east. The majority of the properties to the west are permanent undeveloped open space except for The Traditions which abuts the northwest corner of the subject site. The two golf courses essentially border the perimeter of the Resort with active and passive use open space. In addition to the golf courses and the existing golf course maintenance facility on Avenue 54, a park site at Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street and a well site at Avenue 54 and Jefferson are also proposed perimeter uses. The majority of the resort units are several hundred feet from neighboring residential uses as identified in the following table: Resort Development Nearest Residential Uses Distance PA 3 - Boutique Hotel The Traditions 400+ feet PA 4 - Signature Resort Hotel The Hideaway 1750+ feet PA 6 - Resort or Boutique Hotel PGA West 200+ feet With a maximum height of 65 feet, the signature resort hotel proposed for Planning Area 4 will be visible from adjacent streets and some neighboring properties. The tallest segment of this hotel will be greater than 2,100 feet from residences in PGA West, 2,300 feet from residences in The Citrus and Watermark Villas, and more than 1,750 feet from The Hideaway. Many of the residences in these neighboring developments have mature landscaping and/or berms that will limit, if not prevent viewing the proposed signature resort hotel. In addition, landscaping that will be installed in association with the second golf course and parkway will also limit views of the hotel. At a varying height between 1,350 and 1,600 feet, the segment of the Santa Rosa Mountains immediately adjacent to the subject property will continue to be the prominent visual focus for this area. The proposed signature resort hotel will not obstruct views of these mountains. A photo representation of the area where the signature hotel is proposed has been developed identifying the "window" of area that could include one or more buildings up to 65 feet in height (Attachment 4). As currently proposed, only a limited segment of the signature hotel would be 65 feet in height. With exception to services and amenities reserved exclusively for hotel guests, the site and all amenities, services, features, etc. will be open to the general public. Neighboring properties will be able to take advantage of close proximity to two public golf courses, resort oriented retail, public park space, as well as a multi -purpose trail system. Development Review Standards Section 3.2 of the Specific Plan identifies 16 standards applicable to future development of the SilverRock Resort Planning Areas. Additional specific conditions of approval will be identified in conjunction with the processing of site development permits. Staff is recommending four additional standards be incorporated into the final Specific Plan as specified in Attachment 2. Public Notice This map application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on June 26, 2006. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. Public Agency Review All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the Conditions of Approval for this case. FINDINGS - The findings necessary to approve the Specific Plan and Site Development Permit can be made provided the recommended Conditions of Approval are imposed per Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code as noted in the attached Resolutions. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006- recommending to the City Council certification of an Addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2002-453 (Sch # 1999081020), a Water Supply Assessment and Water Verification for the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan; and 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2006- , recommending to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2006-080, subject to attached Findings. Prepared by: Douglas . Ev Community evelopment Director Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. SilverRock Resort Specific Plan 3. Additional Development Review Permit Standards 4. Photo Representation of Maximum Building Height PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE SILVERROCK RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN CREATING DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES AND STANDARDS FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF A DESTINATION RESORT AREA CASE NO: SPECIFIC PLAN 2006-080 APPLICANT: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 11 ` day of July, 2006 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency for approval of development guidelines and standards for the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan allowing for the development of two 18-hole golf courses, three hotels, resort retail, and a community park on a 546 acre site, generally located south of Avenue 52, west of Jefferson Street and north of Avenue 54, more particularly described as follows: ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBERS 770-200-009-5, 770-200-010-5, 770-260- 028-8, 776-150-001-5, 776-150-002-6, 776-150-003-7, 776-150-004-8, 776-150-005-9, 777-050-003-5, 777-050-005-7, 777-050-006-8, 777- 050-007-9, 777-050-008-0, 777-050-009-1, 777-050-010-1, 77-050-01 1- 2, 777-050-013-4, 777-050-014-5, 777-050-015-6, 77-050-016-7, 77- 050-017-8, 777-060-004-7, 777-060-005-8, 777-060-006-9, 777-060- 007-0, 777-060-009-2, 777-060-012-4, 777-060-013-5, 776-060-014-6, 777-060-015-7; WHEREAS, said Specific Plan application has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has completed and addendum to Environmental Assessment (EA) 2002-453. The City has determined that the project with required Mitigation Measures will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and therefore, recommends an Addendum to the previously certified Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact be certified; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.240.010 of the Zoning Code to justify recommending to the City Council approval of said Specific Plan: Planning Commission Resolution 2006- Specific Plan 2006-080 — SilverRock Resort July 11, 2006 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the density, design, height, scale and mass of the project is compatible with the Tourist Commercial (TC) and Golf Course (G) Land Use designations. 2. Public Welfare: Approval of the proposed project will not create conditions materially detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare in that this issue was considered in an addendum to Environmental Assessment 2002- 443, and no significant health or safety impacts were identified for the proposed project. 3. Land Use Compatibility: The proposed Specific Plan is compatible in terms of surrounding land uses, in that the subject site is predominately surrounded by golf courses, which is a land use that exists in most of the surrounding residential developments. The golf courses provide a transitional land use, and allow a buffer from the main arterial roadways that border the subject property. 4. Property Suitability: The proposed project is suitable and appropriate for the subject property in that it is located on a major intersection, affording direct access to main transportation arteries and public transportation options, which makes the site suitable for a higher intensity resort use. The Specific Plan can be served without adverse impact by all necessary public services and utilities. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Specific Plan; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Specific Plan 2006-080 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution; PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 11`h day of July, 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: Planning Commission Resolution 2006- Specific Plan 2006-080 - SilverRock Resort July 11, 2006 ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PAUL QUILL, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R EVANS, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 2002-453 (SCH # 1999081020), A WATER SUPPLY ASSESSMENT AND WATER VERIFICATION FOR THE SILVERROCK RESORT SPECIFIC PLAN CASE NO.: EA 06-568 APPLICANT: REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, on May 15, 2002, the Board of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of La Quinta certified Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and Environmental Assessment No.2002-453, State Clearinghouse Number 1999081020 (the "MND"), for the acquisition of approximately 707 acres generally located north of Avenue 54, west of Jefferson Street, south of Avenue 52 and east of the Coral Reef Mountains (the "Ranch") and the subsequent development of the non -mountainous portion of the Ranch with public golf courses and resort uses (the "Ranch Project"); WHEREAS, a portion of the Ranch Project has now been completed; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 111" day of July, 2006, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider an Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and Environmental Assessment No. 2002-453 and a Water Supply Assessment and Water Supply Verification, for the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan, which plan establishes development plans, guidelines and regulations for the development of a golf course, hotel resort facilities and supporting commercial uses (the "Project"), and which Specific Plan area is located on a 546-acre portion of the Ranch, generally bordered by Avenue 52 on the north, Avenue 54 on the south, Jefferson Street on the East, and the Santa Rosa Mountains on the west, as more particularly described in the Specific Plan; WHEREAS, a Notice of Determination for the MND was filed on May 16, 2002. There are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information, which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21 166 in connection with the Project; WHEREAS, an Addendum to the MND has been prepared and it has determined that the Project does not trigger the need for the preparation of an additional or subsequent environmental assessment pursuant to CEQA Guideline 2156/015610-0084 71968201 a07/07/06 section 15162 or Public Resources Code section 21166, in that the Project does not involve: 1) Substantial changes to the project analyzed in the MND which would involve new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; 2) Substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the MND; or 3) New information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the MND substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following findings to justify certification of said Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact and Environmental Assessment No. 2002-453: 1. The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by the MND and Addendum. 2. The Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory in that no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the MND and Addendum. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the Project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends in that in that no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the MND and Addendum. 4. The Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the MND and Addendum. 5. The Project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the Project. 2156'015610-0084 719682.01 a07/07/06 -2 6. The Project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the Project may have a significant effect on the environment in that mitigation measures are imposed on the Project that will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 8. The Planning Commission has considered the MND and Addendum and said MND and Addendum reflects the independent judgment of the City. 9. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253; WHEREAS, in connection with the preparation of the Addendum, the City requested the Coachella Valley Water District ("CVWD") to prepare a water supply and demand assessment and written verification of sufficient supply in compliance with Sections 10910 through 10912, inclusive, of the Water Code, and Sections 65867.5 and 66473.7 of the Government Code, respectively, to evaluate whether sufficient potable water will be available to serve the water demands associated with the Project (the "Water Supply Assessment"); WHEREAS, acting on the City's request, the CVWD did prepare the Water Supply Assessment, which document was approved by the CVWD's governing body, in accordance with California Water Code section 10910(g)(1), following a public meeting held on June 13 2006; WHEREAS the Water Supply Assessment has been considered by the City, along with those documents included in the administrative recorded and a true and correct copy thereof included in the Addendum, in accordance with California Water Code sections 1091 1(b-c); and WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following findings to justify approval of said Water Supply Assessment: 1. In accordance with California Water Code section 1091 1(c), the City hereby determines, based on the entire record, that projected water supplies will be sufficient to satisfy the demands of the Project, in addition to existing and planned future uses. 215W015610-0084 719682.01 a07/07/06 -3- NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for recommending that the City Council certify the Addendum to Environmental Assessment 2002-453 and that the City Council approve the Water Supply Assessment; 2. That it does hereby recommend that the City Council of the City of La Quinta certify the Addendum to Environmental Assessment 2002-453 and approve the Water Supply Assessment for the reasons set forth in this Resolution; PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 11`" day of July, 2006, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Paul Quill, Chairman Planning Commission City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: DOUGLAS R. EVANS Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California 2156/015610-0084 71968201 a07/O7/06 -4- ool ' ATTACHMENT jaAYAT ulftu pike \52No AVE � E. 1 1 , /I r > sit@ / I� _i �" 'LI�V1ERA 54TH AVt N � � '1 �,� I '•Y41}1yY11 �0 ATTACHME T4'1�t44Q" MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Chairperson and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Les Johnson, Planning Manager DATE: July 7, 2006 SUBJECT: Specific Plan 2006-080 — SilverRock Resort The draft SilverRock Resort Specific Plan was previously distributed to Planning Commissioners approximately three weeks ago. Since then, there have been a few minor amendments to the draft Plan (i.e. stating hotel units rather than rooms and identifying SilverRock Way as having a minimum right of way width of 61 feet). Rather than providing you with new copies, the revised pages are attached for your consideration. 1.6 ENABLING LEGISLATION • The authority to prepare, adopt, and implement the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan is granted to the City of La Quinta by the California Government Code (Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 3, Article 8, Sections 65450 through 65457). • As with General Plans, the Planning Commission must hold a public hearing before it can recommend to the City Council, the adoption of a specific plan or an amendment thereto. The City Council of La Quinta, after holding a public hearing, may adopt a Specific Plan and/or an amendment to the Specific Plan by either ordinance or resolution. • The SilverRock Resort Specific Plan is a regulatory document that, once adopted, will serve as the Specific Plan and Development Code for the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan Area. Once the SilverRock Plan is in effect, all future development within the Specific Plan Area must be consistent with the Specific Plan. 1.6.1 Required Findings According to the La Quinta Zoning Code, Chapter 9.240.010.E, the City Council must make three specific findings in order to approve the project. Each finding is listed below, followed by a discussion of how each is satisfied by this project. The project's success in meeting the required findings is supported by the facts presented throughout the Specific Plan document. 1. Consistency with the General Plan. The plan or amendment is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the general plan. • The SilverRock Resort Specific Plan is a resort and golf course development which is consistent with the General Plan Land Use designations for the parcels included within the Specific Plan Area. All uses approved for proposed development within the Specific Plan are consistent with the existing General Plan Land Use designations. These uses include: G: Golf Course Open Space TC: Tourist Commercial W: Water Course/Flood Control. 2. Public Welfare. Approval of the plan or amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and general welfare. • The master concept plan for this Specific Plan is consistent with City development standards, which are established to protect public health and safety. • In accordance with the General Plan, a golf resort -oriented development is consistent with the "G" and "TC" Land Use designations that currently exist for the Specific Plan Area. 3. Land Use Compatibility. The specific plan is compatible with zoning on adjacent properties. • The surrounding parcels include a wide variety of uses that include preserved natural open space in the Santa Rosa Mountains, single-family residential units, and other golf and recreational uses. • The allowed uses in this Specific Plan do not present any issues related to incompatibility with existing adjacent uses to the Specific Plan Area. June 2006 2 Plans, Programs and Guidelines 2.1 RESORT CONCEPT This Specific Plan allows for the development of public golf courses, hotel resort facilities, and supporting commercial uses. The Specific Plan provides for the development of a second high -quality public golf course with supporting facilities, a public park, a hotel with a conference center, a resort hotel, a boutique hotel, a mixed -use resort retail village, meeting facilities, and resort casitas. 2.1.1 Planning Area Definition The Specific Plan Area defines eight distinct Planning Areas, each with corresponding development criteria and development standards. The location and extent of each of these Planning Areas is shown in Exhibit 4. 2.1.2 Planning Area Characteristics The size and allowed uses in each Planning Area are identified below. More detailed development criteria and design development guidelines for these Planning Areas are contained in Section 2.4, Master Plan of Land Uses, in this Specific Plan. Planning Area 1: Allowed uses in this Planning Area include two 18-hole golf courses and supporting facilities, including a clubhouse, driving range, instructional facility, and a golf course maintenance facility. One 18-hole golf course currently exists in this Planning Area. Planning Area 1 includes approximately 373 acres. Planning Area 2: This Planning Area includes the existing Ahmanson House, which will be preserved and maintained for use as a commercial, civic and/or cultural events facility. This Specific Plan allows the use of this existing facility and the development of additional facilities which may include a restaurant with up to 300 seats, up to 10,000 square feet of conference facilities, and/or up to 80 guest units. Planning Area 2 includes approximately 4 acres. Planning Area 3: The allowed use in this Planning Area is a boutique hotel containing a minimum of 188 units and maximum of 225 units that can be occupied separately with a minimum of 200 keys, and a maximum of 260 keys. Planning Area 3 includes approximately 13 acres. Planning Area 4: Allowed uses in this Planning Area include a resort hotel and appurtenant resort casitas containing a maximum of 405 units that can be occupied separately with a maximum of 520 keys. Planning Area 4 includes approximately 30 acres. Planning Area 5: Allowed uses in this Planning Area include a mixed -use resort retail village containing up to a maximum of 160,000 square feet. Planning Area 5 includes approximately 9 acres. Planning Area 6: Allowed uses in this Planning Area include a hotel and resort casitas containing a maximum of 450 units that can be occupied separately with a maximum of 500 keys. Planning Area 6 includes approximately 31 acres. Planning Area 7. Planning Area 7 includes a total of approximately 35 acres to be used as public park. Planning Area 8: Planning Area 8 includes a total of approximately 51 acres containing existing and planned public facilities including streets, the existing All American Canal and water well sites. June 2006 12 Planning Area 2 Planning Area 2 consists of approximately 4 acres containing the existing Ahmanson Home, situated in the rocky outcroppings, a former working -ranch hacienda, which has been renovated for use as the temporary clubhouse for the Arnold Palmer Classic Golf Course. After the new clubhouse is developed, the Ahmanson Home and additional facilities may be developed in this Planning Area with the allowed uses including a restaurant with up to 300 seats, up to 10,000 square feet of conference facilities, and/or up to 80 hotel units. TABLE 2 PLANNING AREA 2 — LAND USE SilverRock Specific Plan Civic and Cultural Events Area GC Civic/Cultural Use Area GC 4 Existing Historic Landmark: Ahmanson House Proposed Uses Restaurant: up to 300 seats Conference Facilities: up to 10,000 sq. ft. Hotel: up to 80 units Destination Spa Outdoor Activities TOTAL Planning Area 3 Planning Area 3 consists of approximately 13 acres planned for an intimate, boutique (investor owned) hotel with a high level of service and a unique architectural theme. Boutique hotels differentiate themselves from larger chain or branded hotels by providing an exceptional and personalized level of accommodation, services, and facilities. Facilities would be designed for short-term stay and would include a management program to encourage use of hotel rental pool; with a fee paid for unit owner use. The units and resort casitas allowed in this Planning Area may be sold as condominium -hotel units, will full access to resort amenities and services. When not in use by the owners, all units shall be offered for rental as part of the resort. Such rentals may be offered by the unit owner, a third party rental agent or an agent affiliated with the resort operator. All use of the units, including by the owners, shall be through the resort front desk check -in and check-out procedure, using electronic keys controlled by the resort operator. The resort operator shall have the ability to book all unbooked units as demand dictates within 2 weeks of the date being requested, and may charge a booking fee for such booking. The individually sold units may include, but are not limited to, such types of ownership as residence club, condominium -hotel, or timeshare -designed units. June 2006 21 The hotel developed in this Planning Area is required to meet the operational standards and include the specific features identified below: • Quality - 4-star quality level or higher providing a luxury hotel experience with expanded amenities in a distinctive highly finished environment. Public spaces including restrooms, restaurants and meeting spaces are furnished with upgraded materials such as granite, marble, specialty lighting, and custom millwork. Distinctive and authentic architectural details such as clay tile, iron gates, fountains, and pavers are included throughout. Lobby areas feature elegant live plants and floral displays. • Services - Service must be provided at a 4-star level or higher. Services must include, but are not limited to, turndown service, room service, laundry service, personalized wake up calls, concierge and bell services, secure luggage storage facilities, and covered valet parking. Amenities - Amenities must include at least one signature dining restaurant with minimum seating for 80 indoor and 40 outdoor, a well appointed lounge/bar with minimum seating for 40, guest registration lobby of at least 1,500 square feet, a first-class spa and fitness facility of at least 8,000 square feet (sf) at least one fully amenitized pool offering food service and cabanas, and at least 10,000 sf of interior meeting space. A highly upgraded Presidential Suite to be included of at least 2,500 sf. Landscaping must include distinctive entry water features, use of fountains throughout, and substantial landscaping material. Hardscape materials to include tumbled pavers and file in courtyard areas. At least 50 percent of required parking must be provided in covered or trellised parking areas. At least 150 parking spaces shall be in the parking structure. Guest Units - Guest units are to be finished with upgraded materials such as stone, wood, and tile flooring, upgraded carpet and pad, granite or file counters, tile and/or marble baths, decorative wood beam ceilings where applicable, flat screen televisions, LodgeNet or equal services, 2 telephones, kitchenette with top -of -the -line or equal appliances, custom fireplaces in some units, luxurious bedding, and top-quality furnishings, uniformity of units/furnishings. TABLE 3 PLANNING AREA 3 — LAND USE SilverRock Specific Plan Boutique Hotel Planning Area TC - Boutique Hotel TOTAL Planning Area 4 TC 13 225 Units/260 Keys 13 225 Units/260 Keys Planning Area 4 consists of approximately 30 acres planned for development of a resort hotel, including appurtenant units in casitas-style buildings adjacent to the hotel. The resort hotel in this Planning Area is intended to offer a destination for vacation travelers and those planning retreats and meetings, rather than simply being a place to stay while in the area. Resort hotels offer unique features, themes and amenities for vacation travelers over and above those provided by June 2006 22 other lodgings. The amenities, surroundings, and services provided in resorts are specifically designed to create a single source location for guests to enjoy their stay. The resort casitas allowed in this Planning Area are intended to be an investor owner condominium -hotel unit, with full access to all resort amenities and services and one or more rental opportunities. The allowed type of units may include, but are not limited to residence club, condominium -hotel, or timeshare -designed units. A resort pool area(s) shall be provided for resort casitas. No individually owned casitas unit pools are permitted. The units and resort casitas allowed in this Planning Area may be sold as condominium -hotel units, with full access to all resort amenities and services. No fewer than 90 of the total units at the hotel shall be owned by the owners of the resort. When not in use by the owners, the units shall be offered for rental as a part of the resort. Such rental may be offered by the unit owner, a third party rental agent or an agent affiliated with the resort operator. All use of the units, including by owners, shall be through the resort front desk check -in and check-out procedure, using electronic keys controlled by the resort operator. The resort operator shall have the ability to book all unbooked units as demand dictates within 2 weeks of the date being requested, and may charge a booking fee for such bookings. The individually sold units may include, but are not limited to, such types of ownership as residence club, condominium -hotel, or timeshare -designed units. When not in use by the owners, all units shall be offered for rental as part of the resort. Such rentals may be offered by the unit owner, a third party rental agent or an agent affiliated with the resort operator. All use of the units, including by the owners, shall be through the resort front desk check -in and check-out procedure, using electronic keys controlled by the resort operator. The resort operator shall have the ability to book all unbooked units as demand dictates within 2 weeks of the date being requested, and may charge a booking fee for such booking. The individually sold units may include, but are not limited to, such types of ownership as residence club, condominium -hotel, or timeshare -designed units. The hotel and/or casitas units developed in this Planning Area are required to meet the operational standards and include the specific features identified below: Quality - 4-star quality level or higher providing a luxury experience with expanded resort amenities in a distinctive, usually themed highly finished environment. Public spaces including restrooms, restaurants and meeting spaces are furnished with upgraded materials such as granite, marble, specialty lighting, and custom millwork. Distinctive and authentic architectural details consistent with the resort theme are included throughout. Lobby areas are expansive and feature elegant live plants, floral displays, and outstanding views. Services - Service must be provided at a 4-star level or higher. Services must include, but are not limited to, turndown service, room service, laundry service, personalized wake up calls, pool services, activities center, kids clubs, excursions, concierge and bell services, secure luggage storage facilities, and covered valet parking. Amenities - Amenities must include at least one signature dining restaurant with minimum seating for SO indoor and 30 outdoor, a well appointed lounge/bar with seating for a minimum of 40, a three -meal dining option seating at least 100 indoor and 60 outdoor, guest registration lobby of at least 3,500 sf, a first-class spa and fitness facility of at least 12,000 sf, a kids club and teen center of at least 2,500 sf, at least two fully amenitized resort pool offering food service, cabanas and swim areas for children, one adult pool, and at least 20,000 sf of interior meeting space. Landscaping must include distinctive entry features, use of themed elements, and mature landscaping material. At least 30 percent of the parking shall be in structured or trellised areas. Guest Units and Casitas - Guest units and casitas are to be finished with upgraded materials such as stone, wood, and tile flooring, upgraded carpet and pad, granite or file counters, tile and/or marble baths, decorative wood beam ceilings where applicable, flat screen televisions, LodgeNet or equal services, 2 telephones, kitchenette with top -of -the -line appliances, custom fireplaces in some units, luxurious bedding, and top quality furnishings. Multi -Use Conference -Theater Building - Up to 1 acre of land in Planning Area 4, adjacent to Planning Area 5, may be developed with a multi -use conference -theater building. The building shall be convertible for use for movies, live theater, and conferences. June 2006 23 TABLE 4 PLANNING AREA 4 - LAND USE SilverRock Specific Plan Resort Hotel Planning Area TC- Resort Hotel & Casitas TC 30 405 Units/520 Keys TOTAL Planning Area 5 30 405 Units/520 Keys and Multi -Use Building Planning Area 5 consists of approximately 9 acres planned for development of a mixed -use Resort Retail Village. This specialty retail development is intended to provide a variety of additional retail, restaurant, and entertainment options to hotel guests and members of the local community. This mixed -use village may also include resort -oriented office, live -work loft units, and multi -family residential units. The Resort Retail Village developed in this Planning Area is required to meet the operational standards and include the specific features identified below: • Quality, Design and Parking - The Resort Retail Village design shall be complimentary to the resort hotel and casitas in terms of both quality and aesthetics. Pedestrian access shall be designed to encourage a seamless flow between resort accommodations and resort retail village. Tenant Mix - Allowed tenants include, but are not limited to, themed or signature national presence restaurants, local and national retailers, banks, general store, brokerage, art galleries, gourmet market and resort -oriented offices. Other uses may be approved in writing by the Director of Community Development. TABLE 5 PLANNING AREA 5 - LAND USE SilverRock Specific Plan Resort Retail Village Planning Area TC - Resort Retail Village TC TOTAL 160,000 sq. ft. 160,000 sq. ft. June 2006 24 Planning Area 6 Planning Area 6 consists of approximately 31 acres planned for development of a hotel, including appurtenant resort casitas. The hotel in this Planning Area is intended to be a resort or boutique hotel. Individually owned condominium -hotel units shall have full access to all resort amenities and services and one or more rental opportunities. When not in use by the owners, the units shall be offered for rental as part of the resort. Such rental may be offered by unit owner, a third -party rental agent, or an agent affiliated with the resort operator. All use of the units, including by the owners, shall be through the resort front desk check -in and check-out procedures, using electronic keys controlled by the resort operator. The resort operator shall have the ability to book all unbooked units, as demand dictates, within two weeks of the date being requested and may charge a booking fee for such bookings. The individually sold units may include, but are not limited to, such types of ownership as residence club, condominium -hotel, or timeshare -designed units. The hotel and/or caritas developed in this Planning Area are required to meet the operational standards and include the specific features identified below: • Quality - 4-star quality level or higher providing a luxury experience with expanded resort amenities in a distinctive, usually themed highly finished environment. Public spaces including restrooms, restaurants and meeting spaces are furnished with upgraded materials such as granite, marble, specialty lighting, and custom millwork. Distinctive and authentic architectural details consistent with the resort theme are included throughout. Lobby areas are expansive and feature elegant live plants, floral displays, and outstanding views. • Services - Service must be provided at a 4-star level or higher. Services must include, but are not limited to, turndown service, room service, laundry service, personalized wake up calls, pool services, activities center, kids clubs, excursions, concierge and bell services, secure luggage storage facilities, and covered valet parking. • Amenities - Amenities must include at least one signature dining restaurant, a well appointed lounge/bar, a three -meal dining option, guest registration lobby, at least two fully amenitized resort pools offering food service, cabanas and swim areas for children. At least 50 percent of required parking must be provided in covered or trellised parking areas. • Guest Units and Casitas - Guest units and casitas are finished with upgraded materials such as stone, wood, and rile flooring, upgraded carpet and pad, granite or tile counters, file and/or marble baths, decorative wood beam ceilings where applicable, flat screen televisions, LodgeNet or equal services, 2 telephones, kitchenette with quality appliances, elegant bedding, and quality furnishings. TABLE 6 PLANNING AREA 6 - LAND USE SilverRock Specific Plan Hotel and Casitas Planning Area TC - Hotel & Casitas TOTAL TC 31 450 Units/500 Keys 31 450 Units/500 Keys June 2006 25 2.5 CIRCULATION PLAN 2.5.1 Internal Circulation System The circulation system for the SilverRock Specific Plan Area Plan consists of two streets SilverRock Way — north south access road extending from Avenue 52 to Avenue 54 with a minimum 61' of ROW containing two 10' parkways and 41' of paved travel area accommodating two-way traffic. The northern portion of SilverRock Way extending from Avenue 52 to Planning Area 2 has been constructed to provide access to the Ahmanson Home, which is being used as the clubhouse for the Arnold Palmer Classic Golf Course. Additionally, golf cart lanes and pedestrian walkways will be incorporated, on or adjacent to existing roadways, for improved circulation and safety. Jefferson Access Road — east west access road connecting SilverRock Way to Jefferson Street. 74 feet of ROW with IT parkways, and a two way divided roadway with a 10-foot median and 20 feet of paved travel area in each direction. See Exhibit 8 for a description of the proposed circulation system within the Specific Plan Area. Additionally, golf cart lanes and pedestrian walkways will be incorporated, on or adjacent to existing roadways, for improved circulation and safety. Other local roadways and driveways will be provided. Modifications of street sections may be considered and approved during review of site development permits. 2.5.2 Project Entry Conceptual Designs The center of the SilverRock development is provided public access to the golf amenities by way of Jefferson Street and Avenue 52 from the north. The privacy and serenity of the SilverRock recreational and commercial developments is a signature of the development that is enhanced by way of a series of private, gated residential enclaves accessed from the north, east, and west of the project area. It is envisioned that manned or unmanned project area entry points will provide secured access to all golf and resort development within the plan area. These entry point locations (and potential entry points) are illustrated in Exhibit 9. 2.5.3 Multi -Use Trail A multi -use trail is planned around the edges of the Specific Plan Area that will accommodate golf carts. The trail will run east along Avenue 52, south on Jefferson and a short distance west on Avenue 54. The trail will also run adjacent to SilverRock Way to provide access to the SilverRock Golf Course Clubhouse. A hiking trail located at the base of Coral Mountains maybe provided. 2.5.4 Accessibility All on -site Planning Areas shall be accessible for pedestrians, bikes, and golf carts. Planning Areas 4, 5, and 6 shall have a walkway adjacent to the lake, which shall include interconnected upgraded benches, viewing areas, and other amenities. Golf cart access to and from the Village of La Quinta will be provided to allow the use of golf carts for on- and off -site trips. All development area roadways shall be open for public use and shall not be gated. June 2006 27 3.2.14 In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. 3.2.15 This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is located within or immediately adjacent to a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100 year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95 percent Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots that are so located, the applicant shall receive Conditional Letters of Map Revision based on Fill (CLO:MR/F) from FEMA. Prior to final acceptance by the City of subdivision improvements, the applicant shall have received final LQMR/Fs for all such lots. 3.2.16 The applicant shall prepare a detailed parking management program as part of any Site Development Permit that complies with the following standards (NOTE: These provisions may be modified and updated as part of site development permit or subdivision map approval process): TABLE 15 SILVERROCK RESORT PARKING PROGRAM L- TYPL OF USE SPACE USES UN ['I S HOTEL CASITAS Hotel Casitas Hotel Units 1.00 space per guest unit V 50 units (sPgr) Hotel Units .75 spgr Over 50 units Casitas/Condo Hotel Studio 1.00 space 1 Bedroom 1.25 spaces 2 Bedroom 1.50 spaces 3 Bedroom 2.0 spaces 4 Bedroom 2.5 space Dining/Bar/Dancing 1 space Commercial Within Commercial 1 space Hotel Building Meeting/Conference Meeting/Conference Credit 30 sq. ft. per (largest single room guest unit. Thereafter 1 only) space per 30 sq. ft. of meeting area parking. Hotel Employees (all Hotel Employees 0.5 space functions other than retail/spa use) RESORT RETAIL AREAS Office 1 space Retail 1 space June 2006 Per Unit Per Unit Per Unit Per Unit Per Unit Per 5 seats or Per 60 square feet (sq. ft.), plus 20% employee Per Employee Sq. Ft.* Per Employee (for maximum daily shift) Per 250 sq. ft. Per 300 sq. ft. 51 ATTACHMENT 3 The following standards shall be added to Section 3.2 "Development Review Permits and Process" of the SilverRock Resort Specific Plan: 3.2.17 SP 2006-080 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation measures for Environmental Assessment 2002-453, Addendum 1. In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine precedence. 3.2.18 Site Development and/or other Permits for the Specific Plan area will be subject to review and approval by the City Council. Said City Council review will be conducted as a business item, unless an appeal is filed by a third party, in which case the review would be completed in accordance with the procedures as set forth in the La Quinta Municipal Code. 3.2.19 At the discretion of the Community Development Director, site development permit applications for the Specific Plan area may be required to include site cross sections and computer models of proposed buildings. 3.2.20 The multi -use trail along Avenue 52, Jefferson Street and Avenue 54 may incorporate a standard split -rail fence design, an alternative fence design, and/or remain open as determined by the City Council and/or RDA. ATTACHMENT CI #A 011%1* APPLICANT/OWNER STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION JULY 11, 2006 SKIP LENCH REQUEST: DISCUSSION OF A REQUEST TO CONSIDER ALLOWING TEN FOOT REAR YARD SETBACKS IN A MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT THAT REQUIRES A FIFTEEN FOOT REAR YARD SETBACK LOCATION: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, 17 FOOT HEIGHT, SINGLE STORY [RM (17/1)] ZONED PROPERTIES LOCATED SOUTH OF AVENIDA LA FONDA, NORTH OF AVENUE 52, WEST OF WASHINGTON STREET, AND EAST OF CALLE GUATEMALA. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MDR (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) ZONING: RM (17/1) MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (17 FOOT HEIGHT, SINGLE STORY) BACKGROUND: During the June 13, 2006 public comment portion of the Planning Commission hearing, Mr. Skip Lench, 78-120 Calle Estado, Suite 204, requested Planning Commission consider taking an action to amend the zoning for a neighborhood located south of City Hall from Medium Density Residential (RM 17/1) to Cove Residential (RC). As Mr. Lench explained, the purpose of the request was to ultimately have a 10 foot rear yard setback as allowed in the RC district, as opposed to the current 15 foot setback development standard required in the RM district. This request primarily stems from building permits previously issued for homes in this neighborhood that allowed a ten foot rear yard setback. This was recently corrected and the Building Department staff is now enforcing the required 15-foot rear yard setback. Mr. Lench wishes to maintain the ten foot setback for future development of the remaining vacant lots. One of the reasons for the erroneous approval of building permits is related to the typical size of lots within this neighborhood, primarily 50'x100', and the area's proximity to the Cove Residential zoning district, which allows for a 10 foot rear yard setback. ANALYSIS: Mr. Lench has suggested to the Planning Commission that a reduced setback from 15 to 10 feet could be accomplished through a rezoning from the current special zoning district of RM (17/1) to RC. It should be noted that there are additional differing development standards between the two districts that would require careful consideration should the rezone be considered. In addition, it is staff's recommendation that the rezone process be initiated by Mr. Lench rather than Planning Commission. A zoning text amendment specific to the RM zoning for this neighborhood would be another alternative for consideration. This process would amend the development standards to allow a ten foot rear setback standard to the already existing special development standards for this neighborhood, which currently limits residences to a maximum height of 17 feet and 1 story. Mr. Lench also has the option to apply for a variance. The Planning Commission should limit its discussion to the options listed below and not the specifics or the merits of the request. Discussion of specifics and merits need to occur at a noticed public hearing. Commission Options for Direction: 1. Direct the applicant to apply for either a Change of Zone application (Medium Density Residential (17/1) to Cove Residential) or a Zoning Text Amendment to allow for a reduced setback, or 2. Direct staff to prepare either a City -initiated Change of Zone (from Medium Density Residential (17/1) to Cove Residential) or a Zoning Text Amendment to allow for a reduced setback, or 3. Provide alternative direction as deemed necessary, or 4. Take no action. Prepared by: ArK#ew J. Mogensen Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Current Zoning Map 2. Development Standards - RC and RM Districts 000 Ao RM 17/1 RC Minimum lot size 5000 sq. ft. 7200 sq. ft. Minimum lot frontage 50 ft. 60 ft. Maximum structure height 17 ft. 17 ft. Maximum number of stories 1 1 Minimum front yard setback (non -garage portions of dwelling) 20 ft. 20 ft. Minimum garage setback 25 ft. (20 ft. w/ roll up) 25 ft. (20 ft. w/ roll up) Minimum interior/exterior 5/10 ft. side yard setbacks 5/10 ft. Minimum rear yard setback 15 ft. 10 ft. Maximum lot coverage 60% 60% Minimum livable floor area for single-family detached excluding garage 1400 sq. ft. 1200 sq. ft. Cl #B STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 11, 2006 APPLICANT/OWNER: CITY OF LA QUINTA REQUEST: NOTIFICATION OF THE DRAFT VILLAGE PARKING STUDY AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW LOCATION: SOUTH OF CALLE TAMPICO, NORTH OF AVENUE 52, EAST OF EISENHOWER DRIVE, AND WEST OF WASHINGTON STREET GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING: BACKGROUND: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) In response to anticipated growth within the Village District, Council approved the initiation of a Request for Proposals (RFP) to conduct a Village Parking Development Strategy on August 2, 2005. The objective of the study is to analyze existing parking conditions in the Village and formulate a strategy regarding current and future parking demands. Following an interview of four candidates, the City entered into a contract and Scope of Services with Carl Walker, Inc. on December 20, 2005. The Village Parking Study was divided into three phases. The first phase involved a review of existing background data and the completion of a parking survey. During this phase, a kick-off meeting was held in January with Carl Walker, Inc. to discuss issues in the Village and familiarize them with the community. The second phase of the project involved public outreach, including presentation of the results and analysis of the survey data. As a part of the public outreach, City staff held a Village Parking Workshop at the La Quinta Library on March 27, 2006 in order to incorporate into the report public comments and suggestions. Although surrounding businesses, developers, and property owners were notified of the workshop by mail and advertisements were posted in the local paper, attendance and public participation during the input session was low. The completion of the draft report constitutes the third and final phase of the project. This draft report includes a number of strategies for enhancing and addressing parking as the Village continues to develop. While the results of the parking survey indicated that almost 60% of the current available parking supply remains unused, future development could lead to potential supply issues, especially in certain areas of the Village. The report estimates near -term parking demands based on current development projects and provides alternative approach methods for managing long-term development. If the desired approach includes the creation of new parking facilities, the report includes potential locations and cost estimates for both surface lots and structures. The report also provides the City with a number of recommendations to enhance aspects of the Village District to better accommodate parking and circulation. Among the best examples of these enhancements include: ways of improving existing facilities, lighting, pedestrian access, and way -finding signage through a "Park Once - Pedestrian First" approach. In addition, the report reviews the adequacy of the existing City Parking Ordinance when compared to national standards, techniques for parking management including enforcement and facilities maintenance, and existing vehicular access and circulation. The next step is to make the draft report available for public viewing and schedule formal adoption of the report at a future meeting in the fall. Staff will be forwarding copies of the report to local business owners and making the report available online. The Council has directed staff to continue the Village Parking Study work program and schedule final approval for sometime in the fall. The attached report is provided for informational purposes and no action is necessary. Prepared by: Andrew J. Mogensen Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Village Parking Study Final Draft Report City of La Quinta Village District Parking Study - DRAFT f une 2006 Prepared for.• The City of Ia Quinta 78-495 Calle 'Tampico La Quinta, CA 92247 Prepared by: Carl Walker, Inc. 4y Ci of La Quinta, California 'K P.,.,+s'�ST-:Y^T qd c`8'SY."°:.f^`fj'D �# i 3 �.��<�'d.�x .��3,`.�� �w�7.i.dn.,�.,> sal ��� u- 3rdune 2006 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction.........................................................................1 1.01. Study Purpose and.kpproach....................................... 1 1.02. Scope of Senices............................................................ 1 1.03. Studs.krea........................................................................ 4 2. Current Parking Supply and Demand.................................6 2.01. Current Parking Suppl,%................................................... 6 2.02. Current Parking Demand ............................................... W 2.03. Current Parking .kdequacc.............................................19 2.04. Current Parking Zoning Requirements ........................ 23 3. Future Parking Supply and Demand..................................30 3.01. future Village Dtstnct Development Projects............ 30 3.02. future Parkng .kdequaa............................................... 33 3.03. Planning for Future Parking Needs .............................. 3i 4. Parking Alternatives Analysis..............................................39 5. Parking Management Strategies.........................................57 3.01. Parking Guiding Principles ............................................. i- i02. Parking Organization ...................................................... 62 5.0.3. Parking Communications and Marketing .................... 64 3.04. Parking linforcement...................................................... 66 1.05. Parking Stgnage and WaYfmdmg................................... 69 5.06. Parking Secunn. and Lighting ........................................ -1 11 Cgity of La Quintal, California"] '. -.. `s s,f .: .',, F °��,a ......_�.d'`S uapq."t s.S.�aA it '$<'•fi�Y4 � aIT7-�NIT� dune 2006 i.0". IA)ading and Delicen• Parking ....................................... -3 5.08. Incorporating Parking and Transportation .................. -6 6. Recommendations Summary ..............................................81 Appendix A — Occupancy Survey Data......................................88 Appendix B — Recommended Parking Library ..........................97 Appendix C — Recommended Shared Parking Model...............99 in Ctt� of La Quinta, California <i�,�w'.�3� dune 311116 LIST OF TABLES 1. Overall Occupancy Results -\X'ednesdac........................................... 12 2. Overall Occupancy Results - Saturdac................................................ 12 3. Current Parking.\dequac�....................................................................20 4. Parking Adequacy — North Zone .........................................................21 5. Parking Adequacy — \Vest Zone...........................................................22 6. Parking Adequacy — Core Zone........................................................... 22 7. Parking Adequacy — East Zone ............................................................ 22 A. Parking Adequacy — South Zone ......................................................... 23 9. Parking Demand Ratio Comparison ................................................... 26 10. Future Parking .\dequacy Summan..................................................34 iv Ci of yLga Quinta, California j „i '!a:'''i's�w,ii:.-0..>.�-,3 lune 2006 LIST OFFIGURES 1. StudN-.irea............................................................................................... 2. Total Area Parking Incentorn.............................................................. 3. Off -Street Parking Incentory............................................................... 8 4. ( )n-Street Parking Inventorc............................................................... 9 5. Block Numbering Map......................................................................... 11 G. Overall Parking Occupant} at Peak - Wednesdac ............................ 13 7. Overall Parking Occupancy at Peak - Saturday ................................. 14 8. Parking Zones ......................................................................................... 15 9. Parking Occupancy by Zone - Wednesdayy........................................ 16 10. Parking ( )ccupanc}' by Zone - Saturda........................................... 17 11. Anticipated Development Projects ................................................... 33 12. Arnold Palmer's Restaurant ................................................................ 40 13. Verizon Parking Lot............................................................................ 43 14. Possible lvture Parking Lot Locations .............................................43 15. Sample Parking Map............................................................................ 65 16. Old Town Parking Lot Sign ..................... 17. Current City Lot Sign ................................ 19. Conceptual Sign Design ............................ 19. Sample Parking Signage ............................ 20. La Fonda Pedestrian Amenities ............... City of La Quinta, California e V June 2006 1. Introduction 1.01. Study Purpose and Approach The primary purpose of this parking study is to determine short-term and long-term recommendations to improve parking in the Village Commercial District of La Quinta. The parking study initially evaluated existing conditions, determined primarih. through parking occupancy surveys and stakeholder/public input meetings. '1 he examination of existing conditions provided the base data from which future development, with its impact on parking supply and demand, could be evaluated. "Chen future parking adequacies were calculated based on the likelihood of projected district developments. Finally, parking alternatives are considered to address future needs, including the possibility of additional parking in the district. Future parking alternatives include potential parking supph additions as well as parking management strategies. 1.02. Scope of Services The City of La Quinta commissioned Car/ Walker to complete this tillage Commercial District parking studs ir. December 2005. The study was divided into three phases. The First phase was a review of available background data and the completion of parking occupancy surveys. The second phase provided a public outreach program and anaksis of parking supph. and management alternatives. The final phase covered the compilation of this report. The original scope of services is summarized as follows: = City of La Quinta, California e 7 3 June 2006 • Phase One: o Review Available Background Data and Define Parking Issues ■ Review available statistical information, previous related studies, etc. and review available information concerning future district development projects. ■ I ]old initial kick-off meetings with the City. o Conduct parking Occupants Surveys ■ Inventon• Village District parking spaces within the study area and conduct occupancy surveys for all on -street and off-street parking spaces. Occupancy surveys were completed even- two hours from 9:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. for one typical weekday and one tiptcal Saturday. ■ Obsen e vehicle and pedestrian circulation patterns dunng the parking occupancy surveys. ■ Determine current parking conditions, including current parking adequacies. • Phase Two: o Public Outreach 2 City of La Qutnta, California A 9 June annG ■ .Allow for public input through two large stakeholder group meetings and several individual stakeholder meetings, and draft report and final report public input sessions. ■ Input will be solicited from stakeholders to help define opportunities and constraints. A survec will be provided during the interview process that would allow participants to help prioritize study area parking needs/issues. o Alternatives .Analysis ■ Based on the initial review of current parking conditions in the stud} area, and the information provided during the initial stakeholder input session(s), conduct an anal sis of Village District parking supple, management and operations alternatives. The anah-sis will provide options and recommendations to improve s.� stem operations (customer service, etc.), management and meeting current and projected parking needs. • Determine future parking conditions, relative to the available information concerning future district development, and calculate future parking adequacies using a shared parking model. ■ Develop options for addressing current and project parking demands, based on observed and projected occupancN. ■ Evaluate the feasibilir of the selected parking addition sites, and review the financial impact of future parking development. Cit of La Quinta, California .June 3006 • Provide additional operational and management related options and recommendations that other similar cities have successfully used to improve parking. • Review parking related directional signage and provide recommendations for improvement. • Provide recommendations to improve vehicle and pedestrian movement in the district. • Provide parking technology improvements for the district. ■ Review existing parking related cite ordinances and provide any necessary improvement recommendations. • Develop short-term and long-term parking system improvements and recommend an improvement implementation program. • Phase Three: o Completion of Draft and Final Reports • Produce a final report covering all scope items and public input. A copy of the report will be made available on the city's website. 1.03. Study Area The studs area is roughh bounded by the Calle Tampico to the north (although some areas north of Callc Tampico were included in the occupancN counts), Calle Sinaloa to the south, 4 City of La Quinta, California .." r T An rv, 7 Iunc Zl If IG ey n'm,n` Washington Street to the east and Eisenhower Drive to the west. The following graphic illustrates the stud} area (studs area outlined in purple). 11c�7LJIJ 10��00 � nnnnn Eisenhower and Calle I'amp)co ( )fftce Building Ctt of La Qutnta, California tI l .m `�.,.7 June 2006 2. Current Parldng Supply and Demand 2.01. Current Parldng Supply On January 24, 2006 Carl Walkerconducted an inventory of parking spaces located within the Village District study area. The parking spaces were classified into two priman' categories, on -street and off-street. ()n-street spaces refer to spaces located on a roadwat, adjacent to a block. ( W-street spaces refer to spaces located within a block. Generalh, all on -street spaces were available for public parking while the majority of off-street spaces were reserved for a particular group (e.g. specific customers, reserved parking, etc.) In this report, public parking will refer to city managed parking available to all user groups. Private parking will refer to parking owned privately and designated for a specific business or user group. The Village District has a total parking supply of 2,919 parking spaces within the study area. Of these, 2,41' parking spaces (or 93" �,) are in off-street parking lots and 502 spaces 11",0 are located on -.tree'. 1 he on -street parking inventor includes both marked parking spaces and locations were on -street parking is possible but not currently marked. the amount of non -marked on -street parking was estimated by Carl Walkerbased on black face lengths and acceptable street widths. The parking located on the west side of Eisenhower Dove would add 12 off-street parking spaces to the total parking supply. Some parking areas could not be accurateh inventoried, as thcv lacked parking stripes or the existing stripes wer( un-ecognizable. In these situations, parking inventories were estimated based on the size of the parking area. Residential parking areas were not counted. ? City of La Qutnta, California �nne 21106 The follotting graphic illustrates the total parking supph located at each block as of lanuan 24, 2006 (off street plus on -street). Figure 2. Tota. Area Parking Imenton' M fnfnnnnf I I :nenhuwer and CAIc Tamptm ( )ffice Bud Lng has 12 off street space, and no un-street spaces. The fnllowin{ two subsections summarize the current district parking supph bv npe �off- street versus )n-street). 2.01.1. Off -Street Parking Supply The stud) area contained an approximate total of 2,417 off-street parking spaces. There are currentic 104 public off-street parking spaces (in one cite parking lot) and 7 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 2,313 private parking spaces. Based on current parking space inventories, the cite controls Onh 4.3',, of the total off-street parking supply. The relatively low number of off-street public parking spaces is not unusual, as most privately built parking lots are intended to serve a specific development only. The publicly managed off-street spaces are not currently controlled bY any management method such as parking meters, parking permits, exit cashiering, etc. Of the remaining 2,313 off-street parking spaces, the vast majority are reserved for employees and visitors of specific businesses or buildings. The following graphic illustrates the off-street parking supply located within each block. N N M;26 , 6 184 146 20 1 97 1 16 & 29 ' g 199 F� N > .�City of L� a Qtunta, California? laica".�i5 a!t t'ih..�t •Zf..t� June2000 2.01.2 On -Street Parking Supply The study area contains approximately 502 public on -street spaces, all of which arc controlled by the citN. the on -street parking is available to the pubhc on a first - come -first -serve basis, and there are eurrenth no time restrictions. The majorit of on -street parking spaces are located around the cit% park and in the Village core (on Avenida La honda and Calle Hstado). The following graphic illustrates the on -street parking supply located on each block (sum of all on -street parking on each block face). 17 24 17 132 1 �nnnn-� > r� 2.02. Current Parking Demand Ct� of La Qutnta, California?7 ti'wa June 2006 .after the parking inventory was completed, Carl Walkerconducted an occupancy survey to determine how main parking spaces were utilized during a typical peak parking period. The completed surveys provided "snapshots" of parking occupancy, and did not attempt to determine the absolate peak parking period. Based on other similar municipal parking occupancy studies conducted by Carl Walker, it was determined that the surveys would be conducted even, two hours between 8:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. each day. Occupancy survet s were conducted over two days: Wednesday, Jarman. 25 and Saturday,January 28, 2000. The parking occupancy survey looked at two categories of parking, on -street and off-street. (>cerall, the occupancy survey did not differentiate between public and private off street parking spaces due to the limited supph of public parking. As most of the private parking spaces provided both employee parking and customer parking, dividing the user npes for this limited occupancy survcy would have been impractical. The intent of the surveys was to determine the overall level of parking utilization in the study area, and the results will serve as a baseline for determining future parking expansion needs and management options. Prior to conducting the parking inventory and occupancy surveys, block numbers were assigned to the various blocks located in the study area. The block numbers shown in higure 5 will identity each block throughout this study. The following graphic illustrates the block numbering sequence. Ill a y City of La Quetta, California �unr 20116 TnR5 6 12 n 14 13 � nnnnn L!_�) u l'he overall peak period of parking occupancJ occurred at 12:00 p.m. on %X'ednesdac, lanuan 25, 2006. During this period, a total of 1,193 parking spaces were occupied during the sunveN period. This level of usage translates into 40.9" of the total parking supph. The following two tables illustrate the total observed occupanc\ levels for all blocks in the stud area each dac: Ctty of La Quinta, California . - - ���,�'. - �)�.. � t 1'. �.�..'z �'•, '�..' .�-)7�''i'.1 it June 2006 Fable 1. Overall Occuparto Results - Wednesday Occupancy Survey Summary - Wednesday, January 25, 2006 Parking Tvae Sam loam 12um tom Urn 6nm 8nm Off Street <)cc. i66 981 998 1(Q3 93' 6-4 ills ( in Street ( )cc. 94 149 19i 16- 163 1 "' 1 i3 Off Street Supply 241" 2,41- 2,41- 2,41- 241- 241" 2,41- Space Available 1,851 1,536 1,411) 1 194 1 480 1 -43 1 7o- '.)ccu ted 23.42' 36.4i', 41.29". 4233 ( )n Street Supph i112 5112 502 502 502 i112 il12 Space Available 408 3.i3 30- 335 339 325 341) " ( )ccu ted 18.'3" 29.68",• 18 84" �, 33.2-" , 32.4'° , ii.26' .. 10AM' . Total Su Ix 2,91') 2,919 ":1) 19 2 019 2 917 ? 91) 1,919 Space A%� dAblr 1 1,2591 1,889 1 -26 1 -,()1 1,8191 2,068 °,°56 , ( )ccupted 22.61' , 35 29' �, 40 8-" " 4O."' 3-.68" 29.1 i' ,. 22 -1 ' . fable 2. Overall Occuparcy Results - tiaturdat' Occupancy Survey Summary - Saturday, January 28, 2006 Parkin TvAe Sam loam 12om 2nm 4nm bum Som OtfStreet kc. 2"3 i22 i68 1_S 4"8 611) 6i7 ( in Street < )cc. 65 111 132 151 I it 2114 2112 Off Street Su Iv 2,41- 2,41- 2,41- 241- 241- 2,41- 2,41- Space Available 2,144 1 993 1,949 1,842 1,939 1,-98 1,- i8 '. OCCA ted I 1 29" . 21.60" . 2350",. , r 2- v- „ ( In Street SuppIA 502 502 i02 502 502 i02 iu2 Space Available 43- 391 3"0 351 351 298 300 ' ( )ccu ted 10115'.. 22.11" . 2629" , 3gU8",. 3g08"., 41164' �� 4n?4' Total Su k 2 917 2 719 2 717 2,917 2,719 2,919 2,919 S ace 7,381 1,786 '',''19 ',193 ',290 2,096 2,058 ptewailable ., Uccud 1138".. 21.69", 23.98"" 24.8 21.55'<. 28.19" 295u^, During the peak period of parking occupancy. approximately 38.8",, of the on -street parking supply and 42.3" .. of the off-street parking supply was occupied. Parking occupancy peaked at 12:110 p.m. on Wednesday and 8:00 p.m. on Saturday. Parking demand was greater during 12 Cityof La Quinta, California ti June 2006 the week than on weekends, primarily due to the existing mix of land uses in the district. Block bY block parking occupancy statistics for each day can be found in Appendix A. The following graphics proNide a summanof overall off-street and on -street parking occupancies during the peak period of parking observed on each day. The highest concentrations of parking occupancN. occurred in/near the Village core. A parking occupancy of 11711, Was observed in Block 9 on Saturday night. 'Phis was due to the number of parked cars exceeding the estimated capacity of the on -street parking supplY (e.g. vehicles parked on streets not wide enough to support on -street parking). M 13 ey�N M�J 21% 17% 34% 26% � nnnnn City of La Quetta, California It June 2006 In order to provide a more useful parking adequacy model, the studs area was divided into five separate parking zones. The parking zones provide a more uniform means of looking at current parking occupancy. Viewing parking occupancy from the perspective of the overall studs area, while useful in gauging the overall health of the system, does not provide a picture of the parking environment in adequate detail. Some areas to the district mac have plenty of available parking while other areas may not have enough. Also, looking at the parking occupancy on a block -by -block basis is not entirely accurate, since some blocks have far more parking than others. 14 Cil of La Quinta, California o r ••<"�,� =- June 211116 ey,y My Breaking up the srudN area into multi -block sections provides an intermediate picture of parking adequacy, and also takes into account patron walking distances. is future parking needs are determined, parking supplies and occupancies should be reviewed on a block and zoned basis. The five zones created were: 0 Zone 1 North of Calle Tampico) — Blocks 1, 2, 3 and 4 0 Zone 2 'West Zone) — Blocks 5, 6 and 12 o Zone 3 Village Core) — Blocks R, 9, 13, 14 and 15 0 Zone 4 'E;ast Zone) — Blocks 10 and 11 0 Zone 5 ',South Zone) — Blocks 16 and 17 Figure R. Parking Zones I Zone 1— North I ^J 1:1 U Zone 3 — CoreZone 4 —East Zone 2 — West G 1 Zone 5 — South nnnn­7 15 City of La Quetta, California :�, ar,.t.., ' = s June 2006 The following graphics illustrate the boundary of each zone, as well as the observed parking occupancy during the peak each day for each zone. Figure 9. Parking Occupancy by Zone — Wednesday 12:00 p.m. 13V 53] 321 675 40.8% � 52.6% ��� 56.4% 24.0% } r � = O Space 17.3% nventory ©Spaces 16 y Mks Figure 10. Parking Occupancc be Zone - Saturdac 12:00 p.m. City of La Qutnta, California (une 2006 Current occupancy levels were also compared to cite code requirements within Zone 3, or the core of the Village District. .according to data provided be the cite, Zone 3 contains the following types and amounts of land uses (uith associated code required parking): • Retail - 45,695 square feet (229 parking spaces required) 1- > City of La Quinta, California _ a� June 2006 (Cj(it M, V • Office — 56,861 square feet (228 parking spaces required) • Service — 4,195 square feet (21 parking spaces estimated based on retail) • Restaurant — 22,947 square feet (306 parking spaces estimated at 1 per 75 s.f.) • medical Office — 2,430 square feet (13 parking spaces required) • Utility — 6,900 square feet (parking requirement not available, based on employees) The land uses previoush noted include an estimate of the current development of Old Town, based on a planning commission staff report from May 2002. The total parking requirement to the core would theoretically be '9' parking spaces ;or -10 spaces when adjusted for vacancies), not including the Verizon Building. Zone 3 currently contains approximately 6"5 parking spaces, or 122 spaces short of meeting the total requirement of the com')incd land uses. While the number of parking spaces in Zone 3 cannot cover the total theoretical land use requirements, the impact of shared parking reduces the amount of parking actually needed. Utilizing the data provided by the city concerning Zone 3 land uses, and using the current city parking demand ratios from the city code, the Urban Land Institute's Shared Parking Model provides a theoretical peak parking demand of 619 parking spaces (adjusted to account for vacant space). I'his result is 56 spaces fewer than what is currently provided in the zone. Using parking demand ratios from the ['than land Institute, a theoretical peak shared parking demand of 601 ,paces would occur. This result is relatively close to the estimated shared parking that was calculated using city parking demand ratios 1619 es. 601). ( )ther reductions in parking demand can result from drive ratios and captive market effects (e.g. the number of people driving to "Lone 3 and the number of people walking from one land use within the zone to another). 19 Ctt of La Quints, California June 2006 With an observed peak parking demand of 355, it would appear that the land uses located in Zone 3 are not generating a level of parking demand consistent with demand ratios required by the cite or with those calculated by the Urban land Institute. This would suggest a significant captive market impact. I lowever, the parking demand ratios currently used by the city appear relatively consistent with other municipalities across the country, as well as with those recommended by the Urban Land Institute and other industry organizations. While it is not recommended to adjust zoning code parking requirements at this time, it is recommended that t ie city determine actual parking occupancy prior to deterrmning the amount of parking required for a development (per the methodology outlined in Section 3.03 of this report). 2.03. Current Parking Adequacy In detemuning the current parking adequaci for the study area, it is important to define two terms tepicalh used in analyzing parking adequac : Effective Supply and Design Day Conditions. X"en a parking area's occupancy reaches 95-90" o of the total capacih, depending on the user group, the area becomes effectively full. When parking lot occupancy exceeds effective capacity, users become frustrated as it becomes increasingly difficult to find an available parking space. I'sers will begin to either park illegally in the lot or leave the lot altogether and search for parking elsewhere. In a downtown environment, when visitors are faced with significant parking difficulties, they will often avoid the downtown altogether and shop in the suburbs The accepted effective till percentage for parking in the downtown studs area is 90' o. This 10% "cushion" of spaces is used to accommodate spaces lost temporarily due to construction, improper or illegal parking, and provides for shorter searches for available parking. 19 n City of La Quinta, California jl luny 311116 a' Design day parking conditions attempt to represent typical peak activity that may be exceeded only occasionally dunng the year. Due to the limited nature of the occupancy study for this project, as well as the time of the year the surveys were completed, design day adjustments will not be factored into the adequacy model. The occupancy survey that was conducted proNrided an adequate "snap shoe, of parking conditions during a typical peak parking period. The following table illustrates the total observed parking adequacy for the entire study area. The current parking adequacy is based on the observed parking occupancy at the peak parking period (Wednesday at 12:00 p.m.) Overall, there is a substantial surplus of parking available in the Village District. Fable i. Current Parking kdcqua� Current Total Parking Supply N umber of 2,919 Current Effective Parking 5upph (90" of Total) 1 1 Z,G?' 1 IObseryed Parking Occupancy I 40.87" �, I 1,193 I Current Effective Parking Surplus/Deficit] I 1,433 I Based on the effective parking supply of the study area, there is currenth a parking surplus of 1,434 spaces or approximately 49" of the effective supply. Current land use data for the entire study area was not available for this report. So, parking adequacy is based solch on observed parking demand. District vacancy rates appeared low during field counts, as most buildings appeared occupied. 20 i r >$ City of La Quinta, California ;;d1t'rj )une211116 It is important to note however that while a significant parking surplus exists in almost all areas, most of the parking in these is private and use is restricted. Of the total off-street and on -street parking supphin the study area, only approximately 20.8" ,, (or 606 spaces) is public parking, with the remaining 79.20o (or 2,313 spaces) of the parking supply restricted to private parking (e.g. emplot ee only, customer only, etc.) At the peak parking period, 41.8" of the public parking supply and 39.9" of the private parking supply were utilized. It is important to note that the parking in two blocks was effectively full during the Saturday evening peak. The parking located in Blocks 9 (east of the Old Town) and 17 (Palmer's Restaurant) was effectively full with occupancies of 117" „ and 99" ,, respectively. 'I'hc parking in Block 9 was also very well utilized at -0" Parking adequacy was also estimated based on the parking zones described in Section 2.02. The following parking adequacy tables illustrate the amount of available parking within each designated zone, the effective parking supply and the observed parking occupancN. 'I hcsc tables illustrate parking adequaa based on the different peak parking periods in each zone. As with the overall adequacy calculation, the on -street and off-street supplies are combined. Table 4. Parking Adequack - North Zone Number of (Current Total Parking Supph I I 1,31, I (Current Effective Parking Supply (900 �. of Total) I I 1,185 I IObseryed Parking Occupanct I 31.39 I 545 I Current Effective Parking Surplus-/Deficid I Glu Peak parking penod in XX'edncsdav at 2:00 p.m. 21 City of La Quinta, California rAI L;i- )une 311116 s` Number of Fable 5. Parking .Adequacy — West Zone Spaces Current Total Parking Supply 225 Current Effective Parking Supply (90" of Total) 303 Observed Parking Occupancy 'S -79" ° 58 Current Effective Parking Surplus/Defici 144 Peak parking Perim on A edncadm at I0.uu am. :Number of Table G. Parking .Adeyuacv — Core Zone Spaces Current Total Parking Supply f75 Current Effective Parking Supply (90 of Total) 608 Observed Parking Occupants 5259" 355 Current Effective Parking Surplus/ Dcficil 353 Peak parking penod m \X ednecdac at 1 _':ui I p.m. Number of Table Parking .Adeyuacv — Fast Zone Spaces Current Total Parking Supply 321 Current Effective Parking Supply (90" of Total) 299 Observed Parking OccupancN 64.39 —'( )— Current Effective Parking Surplus/Defi it 82 Peak parking penod on Wednesdav at 3dno p.m. 22 Table R. Parking .adequacy — South Zone Total Parking Supply Effective Parking Supply (90" „ of Total) )bseryed Parking Occupancy Current Effective Parking Surplus/I Peak Parking period ,n �amrdi n at 8:I III p.m. City of La Quetta, California Y f y June 211116 Number of Spaces 391 343 G7.72 2�8 S3 \11 of the tones in the studN area currently have significant surpluses of available parking. The South Zone currently has the smallest percentage of surplus parking at 32.3 of the effective suppl. 'I he West Zone currently has the largest percentage of surplus with '42' of the effective supply. 2.04. Current Parking Zoning Requirements 1s part of this parking study, Cad Wa/kerreviewed the existing City of La `umta parking zoning code (Chapter 9.15W. The results of this review is detailed in the following subsections (based on the individual subsections of the zoning code). • Provision tit Parking I-acilities o 1'he current parking zoning code provides flexibility in meeting parking requirements. Meeting parking requirements may be accomplished through the construction of new supplies or through the use of available parking already available on nearby parcels. The code also requires necessan' 23 City o_ f La Quinta, California June 31106 assurances that the parking will remain available during the lifetime of the approved land use. No changes are recommended for this portion of the zoning code. • Parking Location and .Accessibility o This section of the code describes the approved placement options for parking, as well as accessibility requirements. Parking provided for residential uses must be on the same parcel as the development, or can be provided on an adjacent parcel as long as the parking is x7tlun 100 feet of the development. Parking for non-residential uses can be provided up to 300 feet from the parking demand generator it is designated to serve. If the parking for the development is located across a street, the code requires and appropriate crosswalk be provided. There are no recommended changes to this section of the code. • Determination of Spaces Required o 'the code provides flexibility in determining the number of parking spaces required for individual developments. The code provides standard approved parking demand ratios, a provision for a shared parking model and other alternative methods that could be approved bi the city. The code also provides for parking requirement reductions in the Village District, dependant on the execution of an approved parking agreement. This irrevocaSlc agreement provides the city with assurances that each development will provide sufficient parking through future payments to be 24 / City of La Quinta, California dune 211116 used to construct new parking supplies. This portion of the code provides a sufficient level of flexibility in meeting parking demands, as well as providing assurances that any reduction of parking requirements in the Village District can be mitigated as needed in the future. There are no recommended changes for this section of the parking code. • Spaces Acquired by Use o 'the code divides parking space requirement ratios into residential and non- residential land uses. This section of the code also provides for biarlc parking requirements. In reviewing this portion of the zoning code, Car/ Wa/kercompared City of La Quinta parking requirements to three typical industry standards. The land uses included in the comparison account for those that are currently found in the Village District, or mac be found in the district in the future. The following matrix summarizes the results of the parking requirement comparison. This portion of the zoning code may need to address golf cart parking in the future. Currently, there are no industry standards for providing golf cart parking spaces. Therefore, a conservative approach to providing golf cart parking is warranted. A small number of spaces could be provided in the city public parking lot, and more could be added if demand exceeds supply. once demand can be more accurately measured, zoning standards for the Village District could be set if needed. .also, golf cart parking spaces should include a mechanism to facilitate cart batten' recharging. 25 City of La Quinta, California d 'sit, r une 31111G Cable 9. Parking Demand Ratio Canson ompJ em •Ilat!umra \iu ndl'vAuyr \.�. U'r± Id.ml mJ lmmm� _Li Ironmt,,n lcm.p. •rtam .n I„mp m•m In Re.tdenual ryr wn mJ Spar unu nary r Ih, nyuv. m, nr. h.r rF. '_,ra, , nr l T„nrrh, l m1 IL,rJann.il I Iun,J l i ,paca 1 xi .raa ,ryr unu I ,n , l , 1 NIL, I, —1, 40.Jr•mn .a m•n. rvr unu plu, Ii,pia,fn,ma ,Imhd, hr¢h,r rhw rh-, i p,r oml mJ iry I. -II- y.,n np„dhILL m dIJm md-m, It\ I,I L,% n I'i.rua. ,..p..nmwn�u._' mJu Ba nJ.vKv v.il ...J I',p,u„ '. \p mmmr, I ip,r u0l J, pa nd:n,- .p.,„ryrl l,.a llm:_I It ryr nnn plv, I,rya. n•r,,u„1, I"1'ipar amr v11. 1 J.ruh.J mJ . ,.a n rha numl:.r nha J.,. ­1 ILI i ` ,,. r.. h,J Jflm,;, 6 r ..r, En/ IVi htcluh. I ,p u, ryr'v:,t \ \ I.,c, pa r cl •( appm. I,paa. pu e:•,f appr.. Ialn ,I rhdyyrr M1L, Re.taurana I.m,nnnil K„nuranrI 12u dv It, a w—, I.pna ryr v, Im,R„r m.ranr I.p.r„ r, r;i:,f I)u it, It.I., It, I •pa„ r. It,.nurmr LI, Ita..r.uram I .rya, per• x'tt,f •PP'.. .I .arf`r... rvr;x,1 arP-... ny:nnm,rrr mpr .I ".1 Pv r.' . I h:. I.,t l., J It,.uur.n, I.p.a ryr In,. .J 1,pILL p, rIli ,f .( laa l•.J I.paa. par �� .( I.a 1.•J I.paa .r III p "4v,'rm m:,,In .,r A �a„TM,a •wnr anJounm: I,lw . I_,r rprn.. F, h.rhm rh. .• . pn.ns,na,,.ryr., a. m In, ,n..m It, cul It, It I .raa r,r RetaJ ,I l..nvJli.,.d l.p,.. VI. n firms ,I I,p u. ryr appr.. ,r...a par I.,mmumn J„•pp: .fir l.,, rFm L.m nl .h� ep; .,:mnJ ',rII ev ' ,f JI-.I appr„.,h•gpuy;I ,n �• "•I I,p an ryr ^i.•,I lIt "I, ,pn,. r.r'II ,I appr.., A;,J Ih.,w..... I,pu,ru_'in,f r.r«m.n upr. urnvun a \pplunu It .r., yrnFe J.,r ,pu, o(eee Fy•.,,f t•,naaJllRa, IF, r. ,pvnm I yaaa_ ryr'-x, I ,ppn.. , ( I ,pau ryr 1•i , f appr ^ nl r:., n Ins, LamrJ URi., mJ Rmk, I,pw I,p as ryr ii]11-1( ryr±i., I <„n,rd t rtn,. Iv a,,.n =;. , •,: „par it I , r, .w m, t ,anan,l I Irha m., rlun mJl,. ',( I.pu. Pv _"µ m,J„ d m„ I, Ju il I 11r1a, Huddmt•. l It ±, , \la111L il 1 refi„ IiudJn,y I ._, dun pr .rJ. la" lud•n� rhm ryr],,,f. WI, .,I I II'll . ryr lr.',I \I, JuA )tfia. I,pn. ryr_± it I.ryi„par±x,appr^ rha .umm'�, d' yau. _ :,f nl.rym, 'It 'I'i,t .prn •. ,t n,r i.' .I n1"ca ,I .arPn^ ,nam,r, yam, .man. ryr lx±,f Muaa Thuaoer h. tar. •II I .paa, or,,,n it, mJ; Ipm _".pau, p.r.,n .•r Hl ]r. ,p:u„p,r„s n'x ' n4m1.rry n, . mpl••,,, ,pa., \ \ .pi,a, hn.,.r. i„an ,pau,E•r.,,n i,. n, pu4mn .hm Ijv, Hotel „r1w ±'r. tin I I.paa,�ryr It,ry n,hm, �n rh, mJ _. ... m mJ l,paa. p.r i,f E.r I Ia, WJ,m.nd p•,•p`r •, `tip a, Iv nJ�r..Jhn,l '111",p u. r dims 6 r.r6. r I LrJ,."„� . an, rh, .,m.m II VLI(ran ,.nud..,a I Ind l,pa.. I I; l 2i.paca, rvr n.•m n,paaa. ryr n.�m \Un„h.m_ r.an, I;.pa ,ry. n�u..n I—,, IV).... Jun, n r.vler ..•m sJl,ryu. p,r -i .1 n•. ryn.mpLnmw, 'It!".nnJ.. 1J.1, ILL I II ,p,. 26 > City of La Quinta, California June 2006 ( )verall, the parking required by the City of La Quinta is slightlt higher than tNpical industn standards. The parking demand ratios recommended in the industncan be useful in projecting possible parking demands for planning purposes. I lowever, it is important to keep in mind that industn' parking demand ratios are based on data collected across the countn', and the parking demand generated by land uses in one municipality may differ greatly from those generated in another. Also, other factors such as land use density, captive market impacts and the use of alternative modes of transportation can impact parking demand. Therefore, as stated previously, no changes to the Cin' of La Quinta parking ratios are recommended at this time. 1lowecer, to reduce the likelihood of providing too much parking in the district, it is recommended that the cite adopt the methodology included in Section 3.03 of this studs. This methodology includes monitoring parking utihzation, applt ing parking demand ratios in a shared parking model and improving the utilization of nearbN parking supplies. By encouraging a higher level of utilization of existing parking resources, the amount of parking that needs to be provided in the future will be reduced. \ copy of the parking demand ratios formulated by the Urban land Institute are included in the shared parking model provided to the city by Carl Walker. 2- >. City of La Quinta, California ,,, --� June 2006 • Shared parking o The current city zoning code provides for the use of shared parking in determining the parking required for district developments. The code also includes reasonable accommodations to test the shared parking model and ensure sufficient parking is provided by each development. llow•ever, this section of the code refers to a shared parking methodolom that is adapted for Coachella Valley seasonahty and demographics. This methodologt /model is not detailed in the code, and may or mad not be currently available. It is recommended that this section of the code be updated to detail the cite approved shared parking model/methodology, as well as refer to the latest Urban land Institute shared parking model (2005). shared parking methodology and the latest Urban land Institute shared parking model have been provided to the city as part of this report (See \ppcndix C and Section 3.03). • parking 1'aciliry Design Standards o The . arking facility design standards currently used bt the cih meet or exceed typical mdustn standards with respect to stall sizes, drive aisle widths, landscaping, etc. The current stall size required in the zoning code is 9'-0" wide by 19'-0" long for 90-degree spaces, and T-O" wide by 24'-0" long for parallel spaces. Typical recommended stall sizes are 9'-(1" by W-O" for 90- degree parking and T-0" by 25'-0" for parallel spaces. Compact car .paces are usually not recommended, as they are often used by full sized vehicles amway. City required drive aisle widths vary from 16'-0" for 45-degree 28 City of La Quinta, California 1'NVIIJarc- June ZOtIG parking to 26'-0" for 90-degree parking. 'Typical recommended drive aisle widths vary from 14'-8" for 45-degree parking to 26'-0" for 90-degree parking. The discussion of structured parking in the code (Section 9.150.080 Item'T does not currently specify any ramp slope requirements. A sample of ramp slope requirements- for municipalities in California found slopes of up to 15" arc allowed. Ideally, maximum parkable ramp slopes 'ramps that have parking spaces on them) should be set at 5-6" ., and maximum non-parkable ramp slopes should be set at 1 5' (with the requirement of transition slopes at the top and bottom of ramps with slopes greater than 10" .,). • 1 iandtcapped parking o 11te current zomng code requires all federal American with Disabilities Act parking requirements be met. No changes are required at this time. • Nonconforming parking o No changes to this section are required at this time. 29 City of La Quinta, California �> ... - i,,,,,� - 3 June 200G 3. Future Parldng Supply and Demand 3.01. Future Village District Development Projects Currenth, the City of La Quinta has eleven future development projects in the planning stages. These projects include residential, retail, restaurant and office projects. The potential developments are as follows: 1. Sun Vista Plaza Offices — 19,433 square feet of development is planned for the corner of Avenida La I•onda and `lain Street. The development will include office space and a coffee shop (exact square footage breakdown not available). Standard city code world require 'R spaces (assuming all office space). The development will include 49 parking spaces (or 29 spaces short of code). 2. Palmer's Office Building — A new office building is planned for the northeast corner of Desert Club Drive and Avenue 52. This development is still to the conceptual development stages and square footages and parking demands are unknown. 3. Nispero/Sun Vista Offices — 6,924 square feet of office space is planned on Calle Amigo, west of Desert Club Drive. Standard city code would require 28 spaces. The developmen: wn 1 include 16 parking spaces (or 12 spaces short of code). 4. Kelly Building — 6,354 square feet of office space is planned for the northwest corner of Calle Barcelona and Desert Club Drive. Standard city code would require 26 spaces. The development will include 19 parking spaces (or 7 spaces short of code). 30 City of La Quinta, California 0 F June 20U6 5. Casa La Quinta — 20 residential condo units are planned for the comer of Avenida Villa, south of Calle Tampico. Standard city code would require approximateh 50 spaces. The development will include 66 parking spaces (or 16 spaces more than code). 6. Cornell Building— 11,500 square feet of office space is planned for the southwest corner of Avenida Navarro and Calle'fampico (currently under construction), Standard citri code would require 46 spaces. The development will include 19 parking spaces nor 27 spaces short of code). Patrick Adams Building — 3,025 square feet of office space is planned for the Southwest corner of k%emda Mendoza and Calk Tampico (eurrentl} under construction;. Standard cttt code would require 13 spaces. The development will include 9 parking spaces (or 4 spaces short of code). R. LaBranche Live/Work — 1,353 square feet of office space and 3 residential units are planned for the north side of Calle Amigo, cast of .Avenida Bermudas. Standard cm code would require 17 spaces. The development will include 9 parking spaces ;6 open and 3 in g;.rages), or 8 spaces short of code. 9. John Dixon Office Building — 4,494 square feet of office space is planned for the northeast corner of Calle Cadiz and Desert Club Drive. Standard city code would require 18 spaces. The development will include 17 parking spaces (or 1 space short of code). 31 > City of La Quinta, California ^^11 luny 2006 10. Plaza l:stado - 5,541 square feet of office spaces and 3,854 square feet of retail space is planned to- the southwest corner of Calle Estado and Desert Club Drive. Standard city code would require 43 spaces. The development will include 25 parking spaces (or 18 spaces short of code). 11. Old Town Development - The original development included a total of 13',- 15 square feet of space. This included 20,403 square feet of restaurant, 49,731 square feet of office space and 57,383 square feet of retail. Phase One of this project has been completed, with 56,539 square feet of space and 93 parking spaces. Phases Two and "three will involve the construction of the additional 71,17' square feet of space and 84 parking spaces (providing a total of 176 parking spaces). Phase Two of this development will result in the loss of 47 temporary parking spaces located on the southeast corner of Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas. I -or Phase l'wo and Three of the project, standard an' code would require approximately 433 spaces. The final two phases of the development will include onh 84 parking spaces (or 339 spaces short of code). The following aerial photo illustrates the location of each of the anticipated (or currenth under construction) development projects. The projects are identified by number. 32 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 3.02. Future Parking Adequacy Hach of the aforementioned development projects will impact existing parking supplies and demand. To project future parking adequacc, the anticipated parking demands for each development project were estimated. City parking requirements were used to project future parking demands. 'Then, the estimated parking demand was compared to the available parking within the none each development is located. The following table illustrates the projected parking supply and demand impact of each projected development project. 33 City of La Quinta, California? W6 o�2 � dune .,111 tG fable 10. Future Parking Adequacy Summan' Projected Parking Parlung Supply Zone Parking Parking Zone Surplus/Deficit After Project Demand per City Included with Surplus# Development Requirements* project -a .p,n, lv .P,c,. .urPlu. p Ir U. m,nJ + 19 mu +p,.,. �urPlu, '_I'.Jm,r'n(rtF c, liudd,w \ \ II2U I•h, J,nrm�m,l 6Lr urPlu. M1 V,.P.n• rim b,.n uff�:,. Is ,Pna- It, .urPlm D,mnnd+I6n,u -p,a, ini -umlm L.,m; wt.P,c I.n .urplu. 26'r,", I"(nnc. 4 KA, B-11.; ?6,P rc., 1•, •p,c,. -urPlu. dor ❑.mod I'n .y p. a} urPLn u'r"'• "-mnuv dl /..n,_ I-].p„­ ...... urplu- ;I n, I,I1ulat l R,.,d, and ti•h,dr „gym mia„ 66.Pu,. ^Ioph', -66 a, .p „I. -jar-," urP4�, / In, _ a4.pIII Lunn: surpm. 46 ,pn,• I •r I I h•. 61 .m,II IAuIJ,m, i!„P u, Iv.P s,. urplu.�m,r Ikm and+'un,v-p lr,--16I .,• , urplu. I i I r I II lI - I'rtncA \dim, Nuddm_ Ii,p ,,,. ', .Pn, .urplu. afnr Pr q,cn a mJ 14mmJ+•, n„ -ry,•- li -P �„ =6 P:u. /..n• , 2•16 "n 1, .P ,c.. f:r n!" and II .Irlu- It", I,�" .urPlu. i-,Pn,.I o,h, I ,I A ,k nn nad'ell 11 I'n n,11I and J,mmd .nnnw .P,a, ❑"��nm =y L m.i '•q .Pu I"'11114 .urPh,- Is •PIc..IrnIF:, do lln.nnlfic, RuNldm, Ir•P dnr U, m and II- n,„, p LL, '_'m .pn, /.m1 2yn Ir.dl:, and .urPlu. JI,r J,mand-2;e„-pu.•--_2 =,11, lu I'hr�l-I �d 11_Nc,. rc r_nd i'nq,cr. =Imd u Iu, /. •n, i _-]-P,r, -�, , • p,r,- o I v mlu. *21, rn,,, I I Ild I .un IhII11, pm.m A r,1, 1_'i ppn..,m, „'rPlu. ,fnr d,mmd.na uP m,-In+I � xA n,,, .p u,• I'hn,- In. and lhn,, •Pn„ Pr I„n=I, av p,., ILI. d,oal Lod alu p„ ( Ir I d,, n unJ,J u, r th, n,ur,-I „hI d, nurrh,r ,..um,, u t I It Pr .Ian a,mPL ,d m Ph e, (In, u,d nm unm , .yu n, f , -t IF n dh hudl ot 1 t,r Ph,.,. tr.m rh, P,rI.Id d1-v,m-, •„rIO Pu6n {, c,vpm„ G(,dm.dn 34 „ City of La Quinta, California ts , TMsu s dune 2006 Overall, mane of the development projects currently anticipated by the Cite of La Quinta will not result in the development of negative parking adequacies. This assumes that private parking supplies could be tapped to provide shared parking for new and existing developments. However, the continued development of the Old Town project mat result in parking supply shortages within the core of the Village District. This will mean that future visitors of the ( )ld Mown development will need to walk greater than two blocks from available parking to the (Nd Town, or additional parking supplies will be needed. This will also increase the perception of the public and local merchants that there is insufficient parking during peak periods of parking occupancy. 'I he lack of significant parking shortages illustrated in Table 10 also assumes that Village District visitors and cmplotces will be wilhng to walk a minimum of one to two blocks to reach their desired destinations. 3.03. Planning for Future Parking Needs 'lhe current vision for the Village District includes mam elements. The district is planned to become a more important social and commercial center, with the continued development of Old Town and new retail and office space as central focal paints. The city hopes to improve existing store fronts, incorporate more residential space and increase evening and weekend activity in the district. This will clearly require additional retail, restaurant and entertainment space. This vision will result to higher parking demands, and denser land uses, than the current environment. T o support the current district vision, the city desires to create a more pedestrian friendly environment with adequate parking. 35 City of La Quinta, California tuneZIII6 While there is currently a substantial parking surplus of parking located in the district, and mans' of the currentic anticipated future developments projects µnil not result in parking deficits, significant new parking supplies may not be currently necessary. I iowever, future development projects, especially ( )ld Toxvn could result in parking deficits and new facilities may be needed. In order to address future parking needs not currenth anticipated, Carl Walker recommends the follow methodologc: • Ensure the land use information for the Village District is current. This will provide additional insight into existing parking demands. The land use data should be updated as new developments occur. • The first step in planning for future parking needs is to determine typical parking demands. This is usually achieved bt completing a parking suppIN and demand survey. As was completed as part of this study, this would entail maintaining current parking space inventories and conducting parking occupanct counts (idealh at least annuallv;. This will provide a baseline of demand data from which to project future parking needs. These surveys gill also help determine the correct mix of short-term and long-term parking (based on the utilization of each ttpe of parking;. • Project the parking needs of each proposed development using existing Cite parking requirements. Determine how parking demand for the new development', ill fluctuate during the day by using the shared parking model provided by Carl Walker as part of this report (based on Urban band Institute data). Detertrune how parking 36 443z City of La Quinta, California lunc 1 )06 demand for the proposed development will impact parking supplies during the observed peak parking period (or the period of greatest parking demand). • Use the concept of shared parking to ensure the efficient use of available parking supplies (especiallt for mixed-usc developments). Shared parking is defined as parking that can serve more than one single land use, without conflict. Shared parking is generally applied to mixed -use developments, or commercial developments composed of several different land uses (e.g. retail, office, theater, etc.; that are significantly integrated. Using the shared parking model reduces the amount of parking needed for a mixed -use development, as the effect of sharing parking requires fewer spaces than the sum of the parking needed for the individual land uses. An electronic shared parking spreadsheet will be provided to the city, based on the model created b% the Urban band Institute. • Once parking demands have been projected, deternune how the development will impact existing conditions. If the development creates a parking deficit within the zone it is located ;the zone would typically be a one -block radius surrounding the devclopment)', additional on -site or off site parking supplies will be necessan'. • While the parking demand for man) land uses can be spread over greater distances, the creation of residential ,pace in the district should include sufficient on -site parking. Residential projects that lack sufficient parking are rarely marketable, and conflicts will arise should the use of public parking spaces be necessan'. • future Village District developments should include sufficient ADA accessible parking on -site. The cin should require developments to provide a suitable portion 3- s City of La Quinta, California T — tune 3000 MNIM of their required parking on -site (or directly adjacent to the site) to ensure enough accessible parking is provided. • future parking lots should include landscaping and/or shade structures that can provide shade to parked vehicles. This could be accomplished through the use of fast growing, low water use shade trees. 'these trees can be planted around parking lots and in internal landscaped islands. Pedestrian paths to/from parking facilities should also provide shade in a similar fashion. Current cite code alreach requires 50° ,, of the parking area to be shaded if the lot contains five or more parking spaces. • As the existing City of La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan does not include significant information concerning parking planning and management, it is recommended to expand upon Chapter 3 of the General Plan to include parking system planring. At least with respect to the Village District, the information and recommendations contained in this report could serve as a starting point for improving the Comprehensive General Plan. ``Chile planning for tuture parking needs, parking for disabled visitors/community members also needs to be addressed. When parking is planned for new developments, or when new public parking supplies are created, sufficient accessible parking must be provided (as required by federal and state guidelines). Sometimes, parking demand for accessible parking may be larger than t)c minimum requirements. In order to ensure sufficient space is provided, periodic reviews of accessible parking demand should be part of larger parking inventor- and occupancy surveys. Through periodic occupanc- studies, and community input, the city will be in position to ensure sufficient accessible parking is provided. 38 6r.- City of La Quinta, California A) tune 2006 4. Parldng Alternatives Analysis After reviewing the current parking adequacy in the Village District, and projecting the future adequacy, it is clear that sufficient parking supplies exist to cover most currentl} proposed future development projects. "Phis assumes that the private parking supph could be tapped to provide parking for new developments, which should occur am -way in some cases. The core zone of parking may be the exception, as the continued development of Old 'I own (coupled with other anticipated projects) mac result in a deficit of parking. In any case, additional development projects in the future could lead to parking deficits. To meet future parking demands-, several options are available to the city: • '['he city could decide to work with private parking lot owners within the impact areas to better utilize existing parking supplies. Using the concept of shared parking, existing parking resources could be more effectiveh utilized to meet needs. • The city could create additional parking spaces (either on -street or off-street) to provide additional parking. New surface parking spaces could be created in existing unimproved areas. 'I he land used for surface parking could be developed in the future to a higher and better use (e.g. land banking). If space is not available for surface parking, or surface parking cannot be located close enough to parking demand generators, structured parking could become a viable option. The cost for providing parking could be covered through parking user fees and/or fees charged to developers (e.g. in -lieu fees, special assessments-, development fees, etc.) 39 City of La Quinta, California June 2000 • The city could require new district developments to provide sufficient parking. New developments would provide their own parking for employees and visitors. This will result in higher costs for developers and very likely the overdevelopment of parking supplies. • The city could utilize a combination of alternatives. With any of these alternatives, it is important to provide adequate considerations for alternative modes of transportation. This would include adequate pedestrian paths, bicvcle paths and parking, transit stops and accommodations for other alternative modes of transit (e.g. electrical vehicles, etc.) A good example of this is the current golf cart route plan currently under consideration. Transportation and pedestrian issues are discussed further in Section 5.08 of this -eport. In the First Alternative, the cin would work with district parking lot owners to better utilize available parking supplies. This would mitigate the need to construct additional parking. As sufficient parking is Figure 12..\mold Palmer's Restaurant available in most areas where development is planned (based on the parking occupancy stud,), this alternative has merit. Better utilizing the available supply would eliminate at least the need for near -term parking supply additions, maintain existing vacant land or future development 40 w City of La Quinta, California ' - June 2006 space, encourage pedestrian movement through the district and reduce cite parking responsibilities (e.g. maintenance, signage, etc.) Based on the observed occupancy in the Village District, some options could include the use of the existing Arnold Palmer's Restaurant parking lot (for the associated future office project), Blend Restaurant parking (for the anticipated office projects to Gone 5) and the use of available on -street and off-street public parking supplies around the core (Zone 3) and the Community Park. 'fhe use of restaurant parking lots (especially those with little or no lunch parking demand) for office parking would provide a beneficial shared parking opportumtn. Other parking lots could serve as overflow parking for the completed Old Town development (e.g. the Verizon facility parking lot, the librart parking lot, etc.) Additional overflow parking could be available north of Calle Tamptco in Gone 1. Wide ample parking exists in Zone 1, Calle Tampico can create a perceived barrier to pedestrian traffic from available parking supplies. Also, most parking supplies in Gone 1 are located a significant distance from the Village District core, necessitating a longer walking distance. I lowever, the parking available in Gone 1 could be available for parking during Village District events such as the La Quinta Arts I,estival. In order to encourage the shared use of private parking facihtics, the City could use one or more of the following techniques/incentives: • The city could communicate the positives of shared parking to the private parking lot owners. The positives include increased pedestrian traffic near their businesses, continued district development, maintaining future development sites and other non - parking land -uses, easier to use parking for district visitors, etc. 11 City of La Quinta, California y une 2006 • Shared parking could be limited to evenings and weekends. Signage would need to convet the set parking requirements. This could help solve some parking demand problems around the district core. • The cirY could provide various incentives for private parking lot owners that agree to allow shared parking. • The city could provide improved and better looking signage for private parking lots. The signage could denote parking restrictions and periods of open public parking. Communities the size of La Quinta tnpicalk make arrangements for shared -use parking on an as needed basis, developing agreements with private parking owners permitting public use after certain hours, on weekends, etc. ()nc advanced example of a downtown working with private parking facility owners to facilitate shared parking is "Tempe, Arizona. The Downtown Tempe Community's (DTC) "Park -It" program organizes a series of privatelt owned facilities into what appears to be a single parking sN stem. The various parking facilities permit public parking, after the needs of the individual developments are addressed. The system uses a common marketing and signage program providing the appearance of a unified parking system. The DTC operates and manages the private parking facilities, taking a small percentage of the revenues for covering operating costs and strectseape projects in downtown. While La `uinta does not require such an advanced system, this example shows what is possible with respect to improving the utilization of existing private parking supplies. I lowever, this approach to dealing with future parking needs may not adequately meet the projected parking deficit. First, the number of parking lot owners willing to cooperate mai 42 w City of La Quinta, California - June 3000 not be sufficient to provide the nccessan' parking. Second, the location of available parking supplies may not provide "acceptable" parking to existing and future district developments. 'I he available parking supplies mat not be within an acceptable walking distance, lot conditions could be poor, etc. Finally, the available parking supple may be insufficient to meet anticipated parking demands. The Second Alternative available to the Cite is to create additional parking spaces, or improve the capacities of existing lots to provide sufficient parking to meet future demands. This alternative would involve an anal sis of existing parking lot physical lat outs to determine if improN ements could be made to increase lot capacities. Theoretically, both public and private parking supplies could be included in this analysis with the consent of private parking owners. Some parking improvement options are: • Explore a joint .ise agreement with Vertzon and increase the capacity of the existing Vcrizon Building parking lot. The parking provided could be used for overflow core area parking. • To encourage the u,e of available on street parking space, the Citt could add on - Figurc 13. Verizon parking Lot street parking markings to areas with sufficient space. Actual on -street parking addition opportunities will be determined b� local traffic policies and regulations. Additional on -street spaces could also be created through the use of parking 43 7�r City of La Quinta, California Tune 2006 pullouts. Pullouts create on -street parking by effectively removing the vehicles from the roadway, chminating street width concerns. 'I he parking created could provide parallel or angled parking. Providing parallel parking would require narrower pullouts that angled parking, thereby reducing the impact on developable land. The recommended dimensions for parallel pullouts would be approximately 9'-0" wide and 24'-0" to 25'-0" long per space. Using pullouts could create on -street parking opportunities (or create additional opportunities) on Avenida Buena Ventura/%lain Street (between the Library,and Old Town), .Avenida Navarro (bcm,een Calle Tampico and Calle Montezuma) and Avenida Villa, Calle Amigo (Between Avenida Bermudas and Desert Club Drive). I lowever, the creation of pullouts would reduce the amount of developable land. • Landscaping could be reduced in some parking lots to free space for more parking (perhaps additional covered parking). I,or example, the existing Old Town parking lot on Deser• Club Drive could possibly be reconfigured to provide more surface parking. T he improved utilization of existing parking areas is substantially less costly than creating new spaces. I lowever, if sufficient parking could not be created through lot improvements, additional parking supplies could be created using available unimproved land. Most likely, new parking construction would take place on the perimeter of the Village District core. New surface parking lots arc typically much less expensive to construct than parking garages. Construction costs for surface parking lots are approximately one -tenth the costs associated with parking structures. .also, surface lots are less expensive to maintain and operate. As the construction costs are so low, the newly created surface parking lots could be viewed as 44 Figure 14 illustrates possible locations for new off-street parking facilities, when the need for more parking arises the figure does not include parking already planned to support future development projects). nnn The following fist explains each potential parking lot site (each estimate of parking created assumes a conservative narking efticienc� of 340 square feet per parking space): 45 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 1. 'I wo parcels of land may be available near the existing libran' parking lot for a surface parking lot. Depending on the amount of land used for parking, 60 — 100 parking spaces could be created. Assuming $60 per square foot, land costs would be Sl 2 to S2.0 million. Construction costs would be estimated at S2,000 per space, or S121!000 to C200,000. The cost per space to provide parking on this site is preliminan' estimated at approximately S22,000. The distance of this parking from the core could discourage its use. I Iowever, the parking could be used by employees working within the core, and future development could be required to reimburse the cih for the cost of constructing the parking (on a one to one basis). 'Phis could be used as an economic development tool/incentive to allow private developments in the core to provide at least a portion of their required parking off site. The parking created in this location could also be used for Village District special events. 2. Additional parking could be created adjacent to the existing Senior Center, in space that is currently landscaped. As the land is currently owned by the cite, the cost of providing parking would be significantly reduced. 'I he cost per space created would be estimated at N2,000 per space, and approximately 20 spaces could be created /estimated S40,000 total construction cost). As with Option 1, the distance from the core could discourage the use of the parking created. I lowever, this parking could be used by employees working within the core, and future development could be required to reimburse the city for the cost of constructing the parking (on a one to one basis). As with Item #1, this could be used as an economic development tool/incentive to allow private developments in the core to provide at least a portion of their required parking off -site. Also, the parking created in this location could be used for Village District special events. 46 City of La Quinta, California dune 2006 3. If an agreement with Vcrizon could be negotiated, the existing parking lot next to the Verizon Building could be expanded to provide additional parking. The existing parking lot currently provides approximately 20 parking spaces that are reserved each day. Assuming Verium would permit the city to expand the lot, and use the available parking for overflow, an additional 20 parking spaces could be created. As with Location #2, the estimated cost for this option would be S40,000 (assuming S2,000 per space. 'l his does not include am additional fees that mac be paid to Venzon for the right to utilize the parking. 3. Two parcels of land could be available on the southeast corner of Desert Club Drive and Avenida La : onda. Depending on the amount of land used for parking, 61) — 1 W) parking spaces could be created �sunilar to Location # 1,. Assuming land costs of S60 per square foot and construction costs of approximately S2,000 per space, the cost per space to provide parking on this site is preliminary estimated at approximately S22,I IU11 per space (or a total of S1.3 to S2.2 million. The distance of this parking from the care could encourage its use over Locations #1 and #2. i. To support c.evelopments on the south side of the Village District, the city could develop land it alreadi owns for additional parking. 'the site is awkwardly shaped, and parking efficiency mac be reduced. Also, there is no anticipated need for parking in 'Lone 5. It is recommended that the city wait to create parking on this site, unless unanticipated future parking demands arise. 6. Additional parking could be constructed south of the community park to help support the parking needs of the Village core. The amount of parking created will 47 r > `w� Ciry of La Quinta, California? June 2006 p �4iq .na,J1 depend on the amount of property available for parking. The city should assume a developmenr cost of S22,000 per space constructed. The distance from the Pillage District core may discourage its use by visitors. I Iowever, the parking could be used by employees working within the core. 7. Due to the high cost of land in the Village District, as well as the location of available land, the city could decide to construct a parking structure on the existing city surface lot located west of the Old Town development on .Avenida Bermudas. In order to improve the efficiency of the site, the city would be required to purchase additional land north of the existing surface lot (approximately an additional 1,900 square feet). Assuming a land cost of S60 per square foot for the additional land, approximateh S300,1 0) would be needed to purchase the necessary space 1 he site could then provide approximately 352 parking spaces and fG 000 square feet of commercial space in a three -floor parking structure (one level at grade with two supported levels). The approximate height of the structure would be 26'-0" to 27'- 0". Construction costs would depend on the architecture of the facility, but are estimated at S20,600 per space (including a 23" " mark-up for soft costs) based on average mdustn costs in California. 'Ihs estimate includes the commercial space provided in the structure This would provide an estimated project cost of approximately S7.6 million. The structure would provide a net parking space gain of 248 ,paces located in the Village District core. preliminan la}out drawings for this parking structure are included on the following pages. 49 Y = a MO Y w F= e F m =o Um do3r- "_oaallou— Eww Amy J I I = () I I I I I Z.6 O I I I— I I g rc C� CO I I I I I U U Q J a i 2 6 J 'o Q I I CO tl I I LlJ � a O0 fn o _ i danwti39dalN3nd N gig N W H Z O 0 w z g � w Q b4 ObtNVAVN VGIN3AV 16 5 co F & 3 g 0 U $�3; wQ a� 3LL. xa 3m�ga = c`C° ���a 3oz 4>U N W NJIa/I OZJ O N W U -L Q I J ^mar J LL w < w J Z Q O U �? Z ml U- O w O w J O O J O Z an an J 00 awva anva ou 2' n x o C7 O 4 lei I I 5 rc Rqqe Y w Hz- sI s PH c ��d s Z Wa JZ �QoCU OD f0 9 00 ;tv� gN 6 6u5 \aJ d o m �i-6 j9, � Y .00 EL Z UPN gOo �o ��L I I O a J a O i TFFII I I Q U � z I J W O 1111 O i I I J do arvra - f ewva Q Uo drvra j .6-.9Z- a U s� E co hex 5 ° CO E g $ 8 0 c i Qoo1r'' w 5 n a ,°1e ui mq3� WO iN a LL c y w f6 fl[[ � CU Q O R o � V o O n % a E; SfLL N O IHIH Z Q O e a z _O N p U Z LL II O W II II �3 NO i II W w dnva W it II J II II Q 0 II � ==-________________ City of La Quinta, California �unc 2IIII6 Idealh, these possible off-street parking facilities would provide long-term parking to visitors and employees, leaving the short-term on -street parking spaces for visitors. If multiple locations are designated for parking, the lots could be designated for a single user group or provide parking for both visitors and employees However, it is important to note the disadvantages to new parking facility construction. First, the new facilities mac be constructed outside of the designated impact area of a development (based on available land). 'Phis mat mean that walking distances are not acceptable, and therefore the lots may be underutilized or the lots may not be utilized bt the developments for which they were intended. Second, the city would have to pay for the construction of the rew parking facilities, as well as annual maintenance and operating costs. I-mally, locating additional surface parking lots on the perimeter of the district would limit the size of the area the lots could serve. The Third Alternative available to the citt would be to require new Village District developments to provide their own parking resources. This would involve setting parking requirements for new developments, based on projected land uses, and enforcing parking zoning codes. The main advantage to this alternative is that the city would not be required to construct, maintain and operate new parking supplies in the district. While some towns and cities require developments to provide their own parking supplies, the malontt of downtowns that are encouraging development do not use am parking requirements. Instead, the ciry works with the development to provide sufficient parking. \ variation of this altemative is to require developers to pay a fee to cover the creation of new public parking resources. ":'his could be a specific development fee or an in -lieu fee. Illy City of La Quinta eurrenth has a similar option in the city zoning code. Many 53 eE City of La Quinta, California lone 211116 municipalities across California use in -lieu fees such as Berkeley, Carmel, Manhattan Beach, Palm Springs, San Rafael and Palo alto just to name a few. These fees typically allow developers to paY the ctt' for the right to not create parking for their development. The cir' would then use the find, to create public parking facilities in the future, when needed. The use of parking fees like to -lieu can have several advantages: • Offering parking in-Geu fees provide developers with an option to providing expensive tin -site parking. The cost of purchasing the necessary land and funding lot construction is tiptcallt more expensive for developers than pa} ing the in -lieu fees. • Parking in -lieu fees encourage shared parking. As developers stop constructing small private parking facilities, parking is consolidated into larger public parking supplies. This results in a more efficient use of available land, the creation of fewer parking spaces and conditions that encourage pedestrian movement between developments. • The City would have more control over where parking resources are located and how they are operated and managed. • As less parking is created, and the parking that is created is consolidated, more space is available for other land uses. While the use of developer parking fees can provide a lot of benefits to the city, there are also some drawbacks: 54 City of La Quinta, Califomia June 2006 v.ri �• • Parking may have to be located less conveniently to priman destinations. As parking is consolidated into fewer locations, some priman' destinations will be located further away than if the provided their own parking. • As the eitt creates more public parking facilities, the city will have to cover annual operating, maintenance and management costs. • As shared parking would be used, fewer parking spaces would be created. This could mean more traffic and frustration during unusually high periods of parking demand, such as during special events. • The use of these fees could discourage development of the Village District in fax -or of suburban locations with space for surface parking. • Depending on how the construction of the parking facility is financed, the city could be limited in how the facility is used to provide parking for private developments. 'I he fees charged to developers arc typically determined be either the cost of land or the tipical construction cost of surface parking per parking space. The construction cost per space could be set at the cost to provide surface or structured parking. For example, a municipality may decide to charge the current approximate construction cost of a surface parking space (plus land acquisition costs estimated at S60 per square foot and 340 square feet per space) at S2 001) per space. A development that would typically be required to provide 50 parking spaces would therefore he charged $1,120,000 in -lieu of providing the necessan' parking. This fee could be converted into an impact fee of "X" dollars per square foot by dividing the total calculated parking in -lieu fee be the gross square footage of the 55 City of La Quints, California June 2006 development. Cad Walketwould recommend setting development fees or in-heu fees at a minimum equivalent of providing surface parking (including land acquisition costs), or approximately S22,000 to S23,000 per space to help fund future parking construction. The Final Alternative is actually a combination of the previous three alternatives. This alternative would in%olvc the city working with private parking lot owners to better utilize the existing parking surplus before adding additional parking supplies. If sufficient parking could not be secure(. using this approach, then the city would consider improving existing parking supplies and/or adding new supplies as appropriate. If new parking spaces were added, either through surface lots, on -street spaces or parking structures, the city could look to developers to help defray at least some of the costs. Cad Walker recommends this alternative, as it proN ides a reasonable approach to dealing with future parking demands and should help limit future parking system expenses. also, this approach will allow the city to show the communin that all options were explored prior to expending city funds for building a parking facility. 56 City of La Quinta, California i ' S dune 31106 5. Parking Management Strategies The purpose of this section is to provide parking management strategies to help improve district parking conditions, both currenth and in the future. The parking management options detailed in this section will help improve parking efficiency, increase utilization, and meet future needs. 5.01. Parking Guiding Principles When planning for parking there is a built in confect to which all stakeholders can easily relate. The conflict revolves around three priman' factors: Cost, Convenience and Supph. Unfortunately, usually you can have onh' two of the three. For example, parking can be inexpensive and convenient, but you will not have enough. Or, Coo can have enough inexpensive parking, but it v ill not be convenient. Lasth t-ou can have enough parking conveniently located, but it will not be cheap. INEXPENSIVE �E\ CONVENIENT E ENOLGH Given this basic problem, keeping all customers satisfied is an on -going challenge. As much as even one would like to, not evert one can park at the front door. l laving well-dctined parking principles is a good first step to attempting to balance this inherent conflict. 57 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 statement of operating guidelines or principles is a worthwhile effort for any enterprise, but it seems especially useful for parking systems. Given the diverse base of customers that parking operations serve, defining operating philosophies and service parameters can help keep the operation focused on set goals and objectives. For parking operations that do not already have a set of parking principles, taking a pro -active role in the development of these principles can provide significant benefits. I laving an approved set of parking principles protects the city from being perceived as unwilling to provide services that are clearlNoutside of the approved parking guidelines. When faced with a new development proposal which will cause the elimination of parking spaces, having a predefined and approved pofic}' to address the funding of replacement parking can help the citN meet operational budgets and avoid unexpected capital expenses. Another advantage to haying a well-defined set of parking principles is that it provides cin planners with a concise set of guidelines, within which they are free to be creative and resourceful in providing development services to their various clienteles. It also gives them boundaries so that theyknow when a request falls outside the approved scope of parking guidelines. I laving a well -crafted set of parking principles establishes the goals and objectives that will ultimateh' define the character of the Village District. I laving established these principles, the community will {now what is expected, and hopefully, have had the opporturuty to be involved in the definition of the district parking principles. Community involvement and consensus is crucial to t'ie development of strong guiding principles. 59 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 Parking principles are not intended to replace traditional policies and procedures. In general, the parking principles should be kept short and concise, a maximum of one or two aped pages. Some of the items tpically incorporated in such a document include: • Mission Statement/Statement of Purpose — Describes how the parking operation contributes to the success or mission of the Village District community. • Operations/Funding Strategies —Describes how parking facilities and/or operations are to be funded and also whether the operation is intended to be a self- supporting entity, a profit/revenue center, or a support service sustained through other primanrevenue sources. • Interdepartmental Relationships —Defines relationships between carious departments with respect to district parking, especially other support departments such as Nlaintenanec, Security, Communications, Development, etc. • Responsibility for Parking Operations — Is parking to be managed by the city or another ancillary organization? Are all parking operations to be managed through a centralized operation or can other departments get involved in limited parking management? • Rate Setting Guidelines — Should parking require a charge/fee? If yes, how are the parking rates set' This is generalh done in conjunction with the annual budget planning cycle. Should rates be set to cover operational costs% Should parking rates cover bond debt? 59 w City of" Quinta, California - — June 2006 • Options for Allocating Parking— Defining how parking is allocated goes to the heart of parking operations, due to the prioritization process that is required. I low much short-term parking should be provided? I low much long-term% • Inclusion of Parking in Strategic and Master Planning Processes — One of the most important outcomes of having a parking principles document is getting cite administration buv-in of the importance of having parking represented in strategic and master planning processes. • Procedures for Managing Losses of Parking Supply (both temporary and long-term) — I laving procedures/guidelines in place for the coordination and replacement of parking spaces lost due to new development is another benefit of establishing "parking planning" as a fundamental element of Your parking principles. • Definition and Communication of Parking Rules and Regulations— I faNing clearly defined parking rules and regulations is essential to anc parking operation. I low these odes and regulations are communicated can van' uidelh depending on the customer groups served and the environment. I laving an effective communications plan can also keep tour customers informed of changes brought on bY construction and maintenance projects, implementation of new technologies, rate changes, new policies, etc. Additionally, a good communications plan can act as a marketing and public relations tool for district parking. Parking departments are often criticized because of misperceptions or a lack of information about the performance and contributions made by parking. 60 City of La Quinta, California s s.. a June 2006 • Enforcing and Adjudicating Parking Rules and Regulations — Will parking enforcement be provided in the district, and by whom? Defining who is responsible for day-to-day parking enforcement and adjudication is an important operational decision. Other key parking enforcement issues that should be defined include: Who defines parking enforcement policies? Who administers the adjudication process% Who set the rates for parking fines? • Defining Parking Facility Maintenance Responsibilities — Parking facility maintenance is something that is too easily cut from capital budgets. 11ic result is often a larger price tag at a later date and can involve significant operational disruptions. Identification of parking facility maintenance as an important parking management principle should not be overlooked. • Special Event Parking — If any one area requires a cooperative effort from the larger community, it is providing parking for special events/meetings. If parking supplies are tight, even small seminars or other functions can have a big impact on available parking. I laving a well-defined system for coordination of special events parking can provide improved service for all patrons. • Budgeting and Planning Cycles — Because of the high costs associated with the development of new parking resources, and the lead-time required for design and construction of new facilities, parking budgets can benefit greatly by the development of extended budgeting and planning ct cles. In summary, Parking Principles add value in two priman areas: 61 City of La Quinta, California June 211116 • Establishing a set of approved operating guidelines, which help define the role and relationships of parking within the larger cite government and community structure • Emphasizing the importance of planning for parking. Establishing a set of "Parking Principles" for the ("ih• of La Quinta is just one opporrunin for improving the way district parking is perceived. ['sing this approach as a first step to parking management can build recognition and increase respect and support for parking goals and management. Carl Walkerstrongly recommends that the City of La Quinta create and approve a set of guiding parking principles. 5.02. Parking Organization Communities the size of La Quinta rareli have complicated parking management structures. As parking revenues are not collected, and there are no parking service emploNecs, a distinct parking departments not currently necessary. I lowever, parking service related responsibilities do exist. For example, some person or department must be responsible for issues like parking st stem maintenance, planning for future developments, special event planning, handling parking related complaints/concerns, communicating parking issues to the public, etc. Also, additional responsibilities could arise in the future, such as parking enforcement or parking revenue collections. Chile a parking specific department is not currently recommended, the cin should designated one department as responsible for parking related issues. This department would coordinate parking maintenance, participate in planning for future parking needs, provide assistance with planning for special event parking, deal with parking complaints/concerns, 62 City of La Quinta, California gy June 2006 etc. This department need not directh' provide all of these services, as these responsibilities could be distributed horizontally throughout the existing cite department structure. For example, parking maintenance could be provided by Public Works, special event parking arrangements could be handled by Community Development and parking communtcations could be developed by Community Services. I iowever, the community should have a single city contact for all of their parking related concerns. As the district grows in the future, the need for a parking specific department could arise. Downtown parking ieryices tend to evolve over time. At first, parking is largeh unregulated. During this stage most off-street parking is privately owned, and the largest supply of public parking exist on -street. the initial formation of parking system management rnpicalh begins as a small component of an existing city department, such as Public Works or the City Police Department. As a downtown becomes more densely developed, parking tends to combine into larger facilities or structures. At this point, paid parking is established to pay for the growing infrastructure and parking enforcement is instituted. As structures tend to be pubhch owned, the need arises for an organization to operate and manage the parking supply. 'there are typically three approaches commonly used to address the need for parking system operations and management. First, an internal city parking services division could be created. This department could stand alone, or be a sub -department of another department (e.g. a division of Pubhc Works, Economic Development, etc.) The operation of the system could be completely in-house, or the department could receive services from another city department or priva c parking operator. Second, the city could create a parking authority. This authority' would consist of an executive director and a board composed of members of 63 City of La Quints, California June 2006 the district community. Board members could include members of other organizations ;c.g. the Chamber of Commerce, Downtown Business .association, etc.), district business o vncrs, members of the general public, and city staff. Finally, the city could contract with an outside organization to provide parking system operations and management. For example, the cit\ could contract with a district business organization to provide parking system management. It is important to note that whatever the parking management approach taken by the Cin of La Quinta, several concepts are always necessan'. First, the management of district parking resources requires the input and involvement of the private business stakeholders. 1'he\ must remain a part of the parking planning process, and they can offer real world options based on their experience. Also, lines of communication must remain open between those responsible for parking within the city and district stakeholders. Second, parking policies and regulations mus be consistentl} applied. Once the s.% stem guiding principles have been established, they must be adhered to, or they will lose their importance. Third, the parking system must be properly maintained and provide a safe parking environment. finally, the parking system must be promoted effecttyeh to ensure both visitors and business owners understand the system. In order to assist the cityin becoming more familiar with parking related issues, Carl Walker recommends that the cirn invest in a parking reference hbrar . Possible items to include in the parking libran are listed in .appendix B. 5.03. Parking Communications and Marketing While the current Village District parking system is not overly complex, a breakdown in communications can foster a perception of parking problems. Parking communications and 04 City of La Quinta, California 1 �s June 2006 marketing refer to two kcv issues. First, communicating parking policies, regulations and services to parking customers. Second, communicating parking system issues, challenges and improvements to district community stakeholders. Communicating parking policies and regulations to parkers is typically done through the use of parking maps and the cite website. one page parking maps could be created to show the locations of public parking supplies, provide district parking policies and regulations, provide contact information ror questions and provide other district information (see Figure 14). These maps would be available at cite offices, the Chamber of Commerce and at district businesses. The map would also be available for download from the city website. Other district marketing materials, either developed by the city or other organizations, should include parking information for visitors. figure 15. Sample parking Map jV In i• 4 i ■ ■ M F'UFU IC PARX NC. 65 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 5.04. Parking Enforcement \\Bile Cad Wa/kerdid not observe gross abuses of any parking regulations in the district, the need for parking enforcement may become more important in the future. The decision to provide parking enforcement is not one to be entered lightly. If parking enforcement is provided, it must be fair and, above all, consistent. If parking enforcement is not consistent, a ver strong negative perception of public parking can develop. There are many ancillary services that must be provided should parking enforcement be instituted. I -or example, if parking enforcement is instituted the billowing decisions will need to be made (including, but not limited to;: • What will the parking enforcement regulations be and who will decide them? • Who will provide parking enforcement (e.g. police, Public Works, new department, etc.)? • What type of parking tickets will be issued (e.g. traditional hand written rickets, handheld citation computers, etc.)? • What is the chain of command for parking enforcementr • Will both or -street and off-street parking be enforced? Can parking be enforced in private parking areas? • l low will vehicle durations be tracked/timed? 66 City of La Quinta, California • How will ticket collections be handled? How will fines be collected for out of state plates and re-ital vehicles • Where can pcop'.e pay for their parking tickets% I low can parking tickets be appealed • I low will parking enforcement be conducted ;c.g. on foot, bicycles, parking enforcement scooters, etc.)% • Can vehicles be immobilized/impounded% If so, how is a determined to immobilize/Impound a vehicle (e.g. certain number of parking tickets, ctc.) • I low can vehicle owners recover their vehicle once it has been immobilized / impounded • How will parking tickets be processed and recordedt • I low will parking enforcement tines be set and by whom? • [low will parking enforcement officers be uniformed+ Clearly there can be a lot of questions concerning the development of a parking enforcement program. 'Therefore, prior to instituting a strict parking enforcement system, the citN should work with district business owners to ensure visitor parking spaces are not taken by store owners and employees. This can be done through education and communication, but also 67 ie City of La Quinta, California June 2006 through the development of long-term parking resources in the district. Ideally, long-term parking would be designated in off-street lots or in underutilized perimeter on -street spaces. When a district parking enforcement program is deemed necessary in the future, Car/ Wa&errccommends an approach that reduces the impact on Village District visitors and increases the penalties on continual parking police violators. This is apical\ achieved through the use of an escalating fine structure. 1-orexample, the first ticket for a specific offense received within a certain timeframe (e.g. even' six months or per % ear) is an automatic warning. The second ticket received within the set timeframe would result in a set fine, perhaps S 10. The third ticket received for the same offense within the set timeframe would result in a higher fine, perhaps 520. The tine would continue to escalate to discourage breaking the same regulation. This would reduce the impact on visitors, as it is less likely they will continually break the rules. l lowever, the penalties will continue to grow for district employees abusing set parking time -limits. .Another option to encourage short-term parking is through the use of paid parking (m conjunction with parking enforcement). \\'tide not necessar at this point, charging for parking could encourage people to park for shorter amounts of time as longer staff s would become more expensive. This can be accomplished through the use of electronic single space parking meters, or through the use of more modern multi -space meters (pay-bt - space/pay-and-display machines). Traditional single space meters offer easy to understand mechanisms to pay for parking at each space, while multi -space meters and other pay machines can be used to collect parking fees for entire block faces. Electronic single space meters currently cost approximately S5011-S7tltl each, and multi -space meters are S10,000 and up (not including site preparations and installation). 68 }� City of La Quinta, California 3 _.r dune 311116 While paid parking could be an option for the future, the parking environment in the district will need to change before paid parking can be completely successful. The large supph of free private parking will discourage people from using paid parking spaces/lots. Also, tighter parking enforcement and a larger parking management system will also be required. 5.05. Parking Signage and Wayfinding � rare_ Currently, parking signage in the Village District is limited to time restriction signage, some lot identification signage, no 3 HOURS FREE PARKING ]l parking si},mage and private parking/tow away signage. The � WHILE SHOPPING AND DINING AT one public off-street parking lot is currenth identified by lot • emn signage (see higure 16;, but there is no way$nding signage directing parkers to the lot. All otM1ers will be towetl away a[awners expense art .Yie In order to better direct visitors to available public I figure 16. ( )ld Town parking Lot Sign parking, the city should provide adequate waytinding signage to locate public parking facilities as well as parking facility regulations. Ideally, parking signage should be part of a larger district waytinding sy stem. Directional signagc should be provided to help visuors locate parking resources within the district, depending on the type of parking they need. Then, signs should be located in each parking lot that provides a name for the lot, who can park there, as well as any specific restrictions. For example, signage should be located on Avenida Bermudas to direct visitors to the city's public parking lot. Then, the existing signagc would identify the public parking lot, as well as am necessan' restrictiors. Parking signage should be simple to read, and match the basic design of other waytind ng signage being designed by the city. 69 City of La Quinta, California i3 c dune 2006 Directional signage should be placed on local streets to direct visitors to both on -street and figure 17. Current City Lot Sign off-street parking options. Additional parking identification signs should be placed at the entrances to each significant on - street OF public parking location e La Fonda and Fstado to denote LA OUINTAP P g (�'g' ) PUBLIC public parking and any applicable restrictions (e.g. time limits). A PARKING possible sign design for on -street parking could include a "P" with a circle around it and the following wording. "Visitor Parking — 2-flour Limit". This signage will simultaneously reinforce visitor parking and a apecitied time limit. Finally, signage will be required to direct visitors of the expanding Village District developments to additional parking resources. For example, the parking on La honda and in the existing Old Town surface lots will fill quickh. Wa%finding signage will be required to direct visitors to other parking locations, such as the existing cite surface parking lot or additional parking supplies created to the future. The yin' is currenth in the process of designing a Figure 18. Conceptual Sign Design new Village District wactinding signage system. Figure 18 illustrates examples of conceptual designs for new city parking related signs. The parking wavfnding and identification concepts incorporated in these designs will improve district parking utilization. Some of the no -parking signage currently in private parking lots can discourage visitor use, as they are fairh threatening and not clear as to who is authorized to park. While reserved parking signs are common, they should clearly denote which business c2, City of La Quinta, California ji "• i t une 2006 the parking serves. Ideally, parking located behind businesses should first be used bN employees, in order to keep the spaces reserved and open more on -street or other public parking for visitors. Figure 19 illustrates parking signage used by other communities: Figure 19. Sample Parking Signage 5.06. Parking Security and Lighting 9 common concern in mam communities is the need to improve security and lighting to parking lots and on pedestrian paths to/from parking areas. This section will provide options for improving parking facility security and lighting. There are basically two apes of parking facility security options, passive security and active security. Passive security refers to designing a facility to create a secure environment, \vithout the need for an active human security response. This t picalh includes eliminating City of La Quinta, California (une 2000 `v„ Mts potential hiding Places, appropriate lighting levels, low-level landscaping around the parking facility perimeter, etc. "These elements promote a secure environment. Active seeurinrefers to the addition of systems that require a human response, such as panic alarms, closed-circuit television, etc. While passive security creates an environment that deters criminal activity, sometimes additional steps are necessan. to further discourage come or to improve perceived facifin security. Clearly, all public facilities should embody mans' of the concepts of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (or CP1'HD). Parking is no exception. Parking facilities should be properly landscaped, fines of sight should be unobstructed, potential hiding places should be eliminates and adequate lighting should be provided. Local law enforcement should be able to provide a CPTF.D review of city parking facilities and provide additional security design recommendations. Several active security methods could be included in public parking facilities to improve real and perceived security. First, panic alarms could be installed in parking areas. These alarms would generate it loud noise when activated, and could also incorporate a pulsating light to indicate where help is needed. Several types of alarm ststems are available including wireless and systems with intercom features. The intercoms could provide a voice connection directly to local police in the event of an emergency. Ideally, the alarms should be placed within a 100-foot walking distance from anywhere in the parking area. Other active security measures, such as closed-circuit television, would not be recommended at this time due to costs and/or the lack of personnel to continually monitor the system (liability concern,. -r2 sufficient in parking areas and pedestrian pathways, Carl Wa/ketrecommends that the cite conduct a Village District lighting study in the future. 5.07. Loading and Delivery Parking During the parking inventor and occupancy counts, Carl Walketobsen ed several occurrences of delat s and inconveniences associated with defiven vehicles in the Village District (particularly near the OId'Town development). Currently, deliver) vehicles park on - street, in off-street parking facilities and/or to no parking area., to deliver products and services to district 1)isinesses. The deliven' vehicles can impede traffic flow, block allc wat s, block visitor parking spaces and inhibit pedestrian visibility. This was observed when delivery trucks parked on La I-onda, impeding traffic and blocking vehicles from entering or leaving public parking spaces. 'There are currently few designated loading zones in the district. Deliven' vehicles are an inevitable component of district business. Dehvenes can often create an environment to conflict with visitor and emploNee parking, pedestrians and other groups. Obviously, the loading/unloading needs of delivers vehicles will increase as the Village District continues to develop. 7; City of La Quinta, California (une 2006 Although deliver- ve•aicles cannot be removed from district, their impact can be minimized through coordinated etforts among district businesses. Potential strategies for addressing deliver- vehicle challenges could include the following: • Debvery vehicles should be discouraged from parking on la Fonda (south of Old Town) or on F.stado, between Desert Club Drive and Avenida Bermudas. The areas are already marked "No Parking", although adding red paint to curbs would be recommended. Deliven parking in these areas can cause traffic delays, impede emergent- vehicles, cause visitors to wait to enter or exit the on -street public parking and can cause pedestrian obstacles. Parking for deliver\' vehicles for Old'Town businesses may be better provided within the development, in marked deliver spaces. • The an should consider the creation of dehven loading zones in strategic locations ;e.g. on -street on Desert Club Drive, possibly some alleys between la Ihonda and Callc Cadiz, etc.) The loading zones would provide time -limited parking for dehven vehicles, and provide a designated loading area. 'I he zones should be appropriately marked, tipicalh with Yellow curb paint and stenciling or signage. 'These loading zones should be developed in conjunction with district businesses and future developmems in order to mitigate dcliven problems as demand grows. • The cite should identih deliver\. vehicle concerns and work with district businesses to encourage deliveries during off-peak parking periods (e.g. mornings, etc.), as well as encourage the use of smaller deliver\ vehicles whenever possible. 74 City of La Quinta, California �' t .� • ) une 2006 n M` A related issue to loading and delivery parking is the impact of fleet vehicle parking for local businesses. Some of the businesses located in the Village District have several delivers' vehicles they use on a daily basis to deliver their products and services throughout the Coachella Valley, Some of these vehicles are parked in private off-street parking lots, while others are parked in public on -street parking spaces. Generally speaking, the impact of these vehicles in a downtown environment is minimal as they are being driver. by emplo} ces making deliveries during peak parking periods. 'I he vehicles then return at the end of the day, when parking demand is lower. I lowever, in the Village District (especially in the core) the parking demand is higher during evening hours when the businesses using the deliver vehicles are closed. If these vehicles are parked in public parking areas, they can reduce the parking supple available to district visitors. Therefore, the city should discourage commercial vehicles from parking in public parking areas. This can be aecomp ished through a eanety of means. hirst, the city would enact an ordinance restricting the use of public on -street parking for commercial vehicles. 'I his has already been addressed by the city (<)r(.bnance 12.32). Second, the city should contact those businesses that are parking commercial vehicles in public parking areas and ask them to park their vehicles in off-street private lots. Obviously, the goal of this is achieving eoluntan' compliance vtth the restriction. If necessar, the ein could assist district businesses in finding appropriate parking. I-mally, if district businesses are still abusing the public parking supply, enforcement of the existing ordinance would be recommended. At first, written warnings could be issued. If these yearnings are ignored, then parking citations would be issued. 75 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 5.08. Incorporating Parking and Transportation The concept of integrating transportation and parking elements as part of the larger strategic vision for the Village District supports the adoption of a "Park Once — Pedestrian First" planning concept. This concept encourages employees and visitors to park their vehicles in one location and then use another form of transportation to move around the Village District with excellent pedestrian, transit, parking and bicycle facilities. This concept will become ven import; nt as the district develops. Three key elements and needed to achieve this vision and are outlined below: • Ensure district streets and sidewalks adequately serve the needs of pedestrians, transit users, bic� clists, other alternative modes of transportation and cars with the focus on serving pedestrians first. ''his action clement can be supported by: o The creation of safe, attractive, shaded and inviting pedestrian linkages to connect district destinations and parking facilities. A great example of this is the current pedestrian path from the cite public parking lot to the ( Ad Town development (across .Avenida Bermudas). Pedestrian movements through this r.rea were observed to be safe and efficient. Also, the speed humps appeared to effectiveh calm traffic traveling on .Avenida Bermudas. A similar approach may be necessan in the future on Desert Club Drive as additional developments and new parking facilities are constructed on the cast side of the street. o Ensure pedestrian crossings across major streets provide sufficient time for people to crosa the street. 'phis will be important if parking supplies north of 76 City of La Quinta, California s June 2006 Cane Tampico are used to support the Village District core or special events in the Village District. o Ensure there are pedestrian linkages throughout the Village District. o Where necessan, use traffic calming strategies such as speed humps, lower speed limits, etc. The pedestrian paths to/from the existing city owned public parking lot in Block 7 provide an excellent example of this. o Where possible, include bicycle paths on roadways. o Amenities such as improved lighting, signaKc, street furniture, landscaping, etc. should be provided in public right-of-ways to support and encourage pedestrian activity. The amenities provided on La Fonc-a and Calle F.stado are great examples of bigcle and pedestrian figure 3o. La honda pedestrian \menitics improvements. o Bict cle racks, lockers or other bicycle friendly facilities should be provided throughout the district. The city currenth has a bicycle parking requirement that :s based on land use, and this requirement should be enforced. The required bicycle parking could be provided in consolidated areas around the Village District if desired. City of La Quinta, California tune 2006 o The cite is currently in the process of instituting a golf cart pathway program. Cin staff has already drafted a golf cart usage ordinance, pathway plan and regulations for this program. The routes will provide three classes of pathways for golf carts including: • Class I paths separate from roadways for golf carts, pedestrians and bicycles; ■ Class 11 paths with eight -foot wide lanes on roadways for golf carts and bicycles; • Class 11I paths that provide shared -use lanes for automobiles, golf carts and bicycles. As part of this program, the city will need to consider how golf cart parking will be provided. There are currently no industry standards concerning how much golf cart parking should be provided for developments. One example of a zoning requirement including golf cart parking is found in Key Biscayne, hlorida, where one golf cart space is required for even. 50 automobile spaces to one planning zone As this program is new in La Quinta, a conservative approach to providing golf cart parking would be warranted. A limited number of spaces could be provided in the city public parking lot (perhaps two or three), and more could be added if demand warrants. Idcalh, the spaces would include a mechanism to facilitate cart batten recharging. • Developing, managing and operating parking as an essential civic infrastructure and reducing overall parking ratios over time to create a "Park Once" environment. "Phis action element is supported b}': 78 n City of La Quinta, California 3 --r june 2006 0 The usage of in -lieu parking assessments for developments planned in the district to support the future funding of strategically located parking resources. o Encouraging the "Park -Once" strategy through shared parking for both public and private parking resources. o I :nst.re all public parking resources are efficiently and effectiveh designed and managed. Encourage efficient design and management to private parking resources as well. o Maxttruze on -street parking throughout the district and monitor vehicle duration and turnover. h:ncourage turnover of this critical parking resource through monitoring, communication, a7th district business owners and if necessary other means (e.g. parking enforcement, paid parking, etc.) o Locate long-term parking facilities on the perimeter of the district and locate short-term parking throughout the district. Ensure the proper mix of parking through periodic parking occupancy counts. o Should a parking structure he developed in the future, incorporate ground floor commercial activity into all designs. o Where necessary, improve existing surface parking lots to the district (c.g. paving, :andscaping, lighting, identification signage, etc.). 79 City of La Quinta, California one 2006 • Modifying the identity of the Village District to make it more understandable and attractive to infrequent user. This element is supported by: o Actively promote new district attractions and developments including parking availabiltq'/locations and alternative transportation options. This can be done using printed materials, as well as the city website. o Develop and implement a district informational and directional (wacfindtng) stgna{c program with a special emphasis on available parking resources. 92 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 6. Recommendations Summary Currenth, ahnost 60" of the available parking supply in the district is unused during the typical peak parking period. With the level of surplus parking in most areas, it is unlike]}' that new parking resources will be necessary or financially viable today. I-Iowever, future developments in the Village District core could lead to significant parking supply deficits. Therefore, future Village core development may necessitate the development of additional parking resources. With this in mind, Catl Walker recommends the following steps be taken be the city: Short -Term CWithin the Next Twelve Months): • Develop and approve a set of Guiding Principles for Village District parking. 'the Guiding Principles will guide the future development of the district parking system, as well as provide reasonable constraints within which future parking issues can be addressed. • Designate a +ingle cindepartment as responsible for district parking planning and management. While the actual operation, maintenance and planning of the st stem mac be handled by several cite departments, the system will appear to have a single responsible department. • Improve district parking signage. Incorporate parking signage to any new district signage plans. Trailblazing signs should be located on incoming streets (Calls Tampico, Avenida Bermudas, Desert Club Drive and Washington Strect) to direct 81 City of La Quinta, California tune 2006 visitors to available parking supplies. Parking lots should have identifying signagc that includes user group restrictions. On -street parking signs should remind users they are intended for short-term visitors by denoting visitor parking and utilizing a time restriction. • Using the suggestions provided in this report, ensure adequate pedestrian paths exist to and from parking areas. Work with community stakeholders to improve both real and perceived safety levels to parking areas and on pedestrian pathways. Parking areas should provide a minimum of 2.0 footcandles per square foot. • Designate long-term parking in the district, such as the existing City" Parking Lot. Long -tern parking should be provided in off-street parking lots and underutilized on -street parking spaces. Ideally, these spaces would be located more on the perimeter of the district, with the parking located closer to district core destinations reserved for ahort term visitor parking. -\nv parking facilities developed on the perimeter of the Village District should provide long-term parking. • Work with \"illage District businesses to determine loading and deliver' needs. I or example, loading and dchver' zones are needed around the businesses located in the Old Town &velopmem. Where possible designate specific loading zones, and determine adequate hours for deliver' vehicle parking. Loading zones could be used for short-term visitor parking after designated loading zone hours. • With respect to new developments, attempt to better utilize existing parking supplies prior to designing and constructing new parking areas. There is currenth enough unused parking to accommodate projected parking needs. The city. should work 82 City of La Quinta, California June ?WIG with private larking lot owners to better utilize existing supplies, to the benefit of the city, developers and the private lot owners. The continued development of the Village District may warrant the city constructing additional parking supplies within an acceptable walking distance of the village core (perhaps funded by parking m-heu fees). • Develop a parking marketing program to include information for district visitors and businesses. Create simple district parking maps, detailing on -street and off-street parking supplies. Include parking information on the cite website and encourage other district businesses/organizations to include parking information. Create lines of communication between the cith and district businesses concerning parking issues. • Update the cm parking zoning code to better define the approved shared parking model/methodolop, as well as acceptable parking structure ramp dopes. • once the new golf cart pathways are official designated, provide sufficient parking for golf carts in the Village District. Start small and increase the number of spaces as demand warrants. Monitor the progress of the program and measure the impacts to the parking si stem. As the existing City of La ( )uinta Comprehensive General Plan does not include significant information concerning parking planning and management, it is recommended to expand upon Chapter 3 of the General Plan to include parking system planning. \k'ith respect to the Village District, the information and recommendations contained in this report could serve as a starting point for improving the Comprehensive General Plan. 93 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 Mid -Term Wear Two): • Ensure the city has sufficient land use data for the Village District, and update annually or a; necessan'. • Conduct an update of the parking inventory and occupancy surveys contained in this report. These counts should be updated as necessary (when new developments occur), and t.pdates should be conducted annuallt at a minimum. • provide sufficient support for alternative modes of transportation. Provide adequate bicycle racks, comfortable pedestrian paths, bike paths, etc. to the district to encourage a pedestrian first mentahty. A marketing campaign could be created to encourage people (especialk district employees) to walk, bike, carpool, vanpool, or use public transit to travel to the district. Also, electric cart access could become an option in the future. • If it appears business owners and emplot ees are abusing the on -street parking, conduct periodic surevs of vehicle turnover. The surge,\ s would log how long vehicles are parked in short-term visitor parking areas. Should average short-term parking durr-tfon begin to exceed expected or posted time limits, additional steps will be necessan to deter excessive parking. These steps could include educational notices, parking enforcement or a combination of parking enforcement and paid parking. \Xhile comprehensive parking enforcement may not be necessanat this time, develop a system to monitor on -street parking turnover through periodic duration/tumover surveys and community "policing". 84 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 Long -Term (Years Three and Later): • Develop additional parking supplies when needed. The lots should be placed and sized appropriately, using the parking supply and demand analysis methodology detailed in this parking study report. pedestrian paths to/from the parking should encourage use bN providing level walking surfaces, shading, pedestrian amenities (e.g. benches, etc.,, and traffic calming measures as needed. This will be particularly important should public parking be developed cast of Desert Club Drive. • The creation of structured parking should be viewed as an option for the future. 'Ioda), a district parking garage will likely not be financialh viable, relative to the revenues anc? expenses generated if parking fees are charged at all). I lowevcr, a garage may be a possible option should the development of the Village core warrant. This mac be the best option available should the city decide to provide convenient parking for the core without the assistance of private parking lot owners. \`i'tth the current land values in the district, the construction of a structure on cirY owned land could he less expensive than purchasing land for a large surface lot. It is also important to remember that the value of a parking garage could extend bci and the revenues it generates by providing an additional incentive for Village District dcvelopmen:. • Ideally, the development of a parking garage would coincide with the devclopmcnt�s) it is serving. Building a parking garage with the hope of attracting development should only occur if sufficient district development demand warrants. Should developments not occur, a garage built on speculation could result in a severely 85 v� City of La Quinta, California June 211116 �`M:M ihvJ• underutilized facility. If a developer is interested in developing a portion of the district, and sufficient parking supplies cannot be provided using other methods, then the city' could propose providing the necessan parking along with the construction of the development. In -lieu fees could be used to provide/supplement the funds necessary for parking facility design and construction. • If significant public parking development occurs, the city' will need to change how it views district parking management. To fund new public parking facilities and encourage use, there would need to be a charge in place for on -street parking. Theoretically, the charge for parking should be such that it encourages short-term parking on the street and encourages long-term parking in off-street lots. It may be difficult to achieve community buy -off for the creation of paid on -street parking. Iiyen if there is a fee for on -street parking, there will still be an ample amount of free off-street parking in private parking lots. Once fees are put into place for parking, tither management issues will arise such as parking validation programs, reserved parking, greater parking enforcement responsibilities, etc. This may necessitate the creation of a city department charged with the management of the parking system. • As it is unlikely hat the district parkingsystem would be able to generate sufficient funds to fully pa} for public parking facilities, other revenue streams should be explored. 1•irst, the citN could seek the use of tax increment financing in the future. "Phis would be a terrific way to fund parking system expansion, and is used b}many communities today. Second, the cite could team with district developers in funding public parking facilities. lssuming the demand patterns are favorable, a mule -use faciliy could help reduce city expenses. hinalh, the city could create a parking fee charged to district developers to help fund the additional parking facilities. 86 City of La Quinta, California June 21006 H7 Appendix A — Occupancy Survey Data City of La Quinta, California . §' - dune 31111E ss City of La Quinta, California June 2006 Aai M•U Appendix B — Recommended Parking Library City of La Quinta, California y_ dune 2006 Appendix C — Recommended Shared Parldng Model 99 City of La Quinta, California June 2006 Shared Parking Model This shared parking model is designed to estimate the peak parking demand for a single development or a group of developments within a set zone or area. .is stated previously, shared parking is defined as parking that can serve more than one land use, yvithout conflict. This model is to be used xith the planning methodology outlined in Section 3.03. The first step in using the model is determining the square footage, number of seats, number of units, etc. for each land use that will be included. once this information has been gathered, it can be input into the model: Input Square l'ootage Information into the Appropriate Cells CM Parking Demand --- ---_ . -- Ratios can be I'sed, or Standard L LI Ratios -- a Add Tonal Factors such as Din c Ratios and Captive \Iark,.t Ratios can be Input s -" Cite of La Quinta, California 1 If other parking demand ratios are being used, they must be entered based on the number of parking spaces per 1,000 square feet, per seat, per room or per unit. once the land use information has been entered, the model will automatically calculate an estimated peak parking demand. The peak parking demand is calculated using weekly and seasonal parking demand adjustments formulated by the Urban Land Institute. These adjustment factors are applied to the parking demand ratios to project the number of spaces required by each land use during weekdays, weekends as well as seasonally. 'the factors are listed in separate spreadsheets in the model. The "Results Sheet' spreadsheet will display the results of the model Shared Parking Model -Results The Base Parking Demands for each Land Use are l sted Here The Results of the Shared parking Model are listed I Jere >� `z City of La Quinta, California - ..- June 2006 -i�'4 n M•J-a The "Calculation Sheet" spreadsheet will provide additional information concerning the calculated parking demands. In addition to detailing the estimated parking demand for visitors and employees, it also provides parking accumulation graphs for each weekdat and weekend, for each month. The remaining spreadsheets in the model provide the parking demand ratios, weekh adjustment factors and seasonal adjustment factors. 102 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 11, 2006 APPLICANT/OWNER: CITY OF LA QUINTA REQUEST: REVEW OF THE VISTA SANTA ROSA DESIGN GUIDELINES LOCATION: VISTA SANTA ROSA AREA SPHERE OF INFLUENCE BACKGROUND: At the direction of City Council, staff is currently evaluating the Vista Santa Rosa Design Guidelines. In addition, Council further directed staff to forward the guidelines to the Planning Commission for discussion. Copies of the Guidelines were provided to Planning Commission members at the June 27 meeting in anticipation of discussing the matter at the July 11 meeting. The purpose of reviewing the Guidelines is precursor to La Quinta establishing guidelines for the VSR sphere of influence area. The Vista Santa Rosa Design Guidelines were established in 2003 and have served a general purpose of providing a visual representation of key land uses and features of the area combined with emphasizing certain design icons. New development in the unincorporated area is encouraged to implement improvements consistent with the guidelines. ANALYSIS: Staff has evaluated the Guidelines and noted the following: • The Guidelines are mainly comprised of a photographic tour of key land uses & features and establishing a Vista Santa Rosa logo. • The Guidelines provide a good visual representation of the agricultural and equestrian uses area. • There are a limited number of pages identifying perimeter design features, icons, and/or specific standards. Though the Guidelines may be deemed adequate for unincorporated development in Vista Santa Rosa, there is a need to provide greater detail for development projects proposed for incorporation into the City of La Quinta. Design guidelines identifying consistent features or icons that help define the area are necessary. However, in addition to the guidelines, specific development standards addressing such items as perimeter/frontage setbacks, multi -purpose trails, landscaping treatment, fences, walls, lighting, signs, etc. need to be developed in order to ensure that the image of Vista Santa Rosa is retained. At the July 11 meeting, staff will be prepared to discuss the existing Vista Santa Rosa Design Guidelines with Planning Commission with the intent and purpose of establishing guidelines and standards for the area anticipated for future annexation into La Quinta. RECOMMENDATION: The attached report is provided for discussion purposes and no action is necessary at this time. Prepared by:r Jo Manager Attachments: 1. Vista Santa Rosa Design Guidelines (previously distributed) CI #D c&t(t 4 4 Q" MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Chairperson and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Douglas R. Evans, Community Development Director A" DATE: July 7, 2006 SUBJECT: Year 2006/2007 Community Development Department Budget As was mentioned at the June 27 Planning Commission meeting, City Council recently adopted the year 2006/2007 Budget. Attached is the Community Development Department segment of the Budget document. Please note that the goals for this budget year can be found on pages E-61 - E-64. We will be prepared to answer any questions you may have at the July 11 Planning Commission meeting. I Y( Q cc IL c 2 •v. cl: d m c .E v, > c c a c0 c] CD m U C m L yy > Q Q t: N m m c > C @ > m m -O m U c 7 N N O. L W m N 'L U O J N (n cm C CF 'O V O m ° a° p a° a ¢ E m m E U � m U m m N `l Q E Q c > V � C O O E° O 7 U N E O m m N C a 7 _ m `m m N p mCi. '= > a D N E a' LU OQ Q O n' U N C C m a) �- cm p> O +-� ,!- 0 C O l) -C c m E t, m U N Y c S= C: = N 'N Y t� a D• C y m C ? C N v. E O �' N 1 CL m . > Y N O p C o c c N m S U M W m M ° —y Q N 2 v C E a c a m c YO O N m O. w w m 007 f' G3 .L 'o ° U p .Y c m m m m Urn ¢ +N- ° E 'n_ c„ m cc O c/ c` c tp p N O C: m m w !_ L .N N y m N c O m m C o r c o d °_ ° S c D o m a dL m m c m c-°p Nm m m U _ a) N° ° 'n C C E ° O o N m O O 'U m ,m- o :OL Cp E C m C �" N 2� N C O U a °� N w m a S O C •c - '- C E O. L c 't7 O° m G7 N N .F w N p O 6 U N 0 7 CA 'O c> E p Y °- �- n O C C D U m N U O m 'C 'O C C C C°° C C N ° V 0 m 3 m m m m O fl m L Y c m C m m L O E Y O) E EQ C :7 `° a E N 0 M 0 0 N c m m ,O E` O O O O c O O. Q m +' ° m C7 L > E°m a c c c C c� E E>= .O mom-° > c m o m o o m m p E m E m a� a a pUVv�U_v_¢Z �IJ h e W 2 S tR M cc nv In u ¢ N C N CL L N E U m > O O) rn r v .0co C m o a c 0.> � c ti . a 0 m p m y m o a m U N c°i C j Oi 10 � N N cC0 0) m 0 > oE > CL o =o m C Cn O _ V CL m m L tm J .+_T' LL �+ C C m U Q Q 7 m E U 4)0 -1 � m C y0) ccU m~ : C m yO., N N E m U ., M m 'a+ M 0) £ o E CL cmi 0 c �' 'ca m >'O TO Cc yCC)C m CLO =U U CL 0) c ° a ai o *0 'OmT 00 m CL m O Loti > 'C cn E 'm a .`0 0)0� m U O` a O C: m C W c E ++ X U U CL []E E mm mLL c m U to C J H R U c T O C d m 'O R ma `°'D E m a> LO 3=� oo.3mcc� v_w C r �- U � �° CM m c cm =ow ca�m>,«c m m � C 'O O m m •O m N m-OC ?ta4) 0- Emd0) E o a m aEi ° o U m 0 o 4) m 0 CL C N> 0 C O W 0 m C Cm' N 3 m IL mp CL2Ua[ NU c 0 O) � C C m t m N m U a m 0 0)° 2 d D p T w m 0 O a> N 0 y m C U C l0 S C E m N m 0= CL y ° m N CL E CL X ° fA = m CL CL O C m m m y U p a m m ° o n °° = Ec i me rpt *+p m o m o CL= co .O O 7 p0) Q C 'O +' m O` .R O m m v ° m Q c d a co o co 0 o cg mf' o'E° m`rnm m m E 0 L *' ° c ` o rn c E E mU.m. �' °° m n y 0 0 m t+ c C C7 m C p o a N O c a 2 m m m m v0 > aE c ° ayiF N L C O O. 0 0 L•' ._ m. >, 7 >? ` N m U 7 N C m p M m crn E�(D C3 CO 0- o +L+ (Am C O) •7 •O > p r X O CL m �O L y« t, m m G C CL 'y +' m m (ar- 0 .0 c 0 c ?� 0 O y* v U m CL m m o° m `E dam? m�0 W7d0 a+ CL O 0`p Q,p •O N Q > CC N o � act c 0. ny�T o> m m ® X m y� m M mV 0 Owe 0 Or mm C vp U m CL. «• N m •� •• m 3 0 0 m m CL +m+ Y c CLE o000 0000 0000UU2000Du 0002tuW0 G y w l0 A tm C W W W O m p U y LL 0 G V O E C O N N N W m 7 y E H N W m° L ° w o ° E 0 c m o V W W C Cl)_C N +. W m O N + a) O i+ cL a " > L O M 10`W rt' a ot°o 7m •vn Gc co co E 00m E N � ° m o N NEoV �N � M=. 0 = E° G mc cE C1 •o r .- E 0 0 Cl G r a m c`a aN`' 0fn� = p >` Q w m o. W m E 0 O. (� .0 O N N 0 n C •d W o W 7 G N cn C U (aE y O m 'O O) C W 'O N C c m C C o O� mO Ec0cco aaoco9EN EEvcWm 0on c E a `cmc> aa WC O) N W '++ W O c.1 C Yd m t l_ 7 >`E W d N� W N ma cn W.Lv V U O) U •C C '++ N O C:W -O J W W° W m o m y 3 W 0 C. W W W o o > N >, O C` "' y' W > N 'V C E r t G. W N _ C W N y W C 0 .y. O> > y N .O +' E C U C C O y +' U W t' Q� C y W i v°-• O E N m c Q W as W E o(� o a°_° o W E c 3 3 o E E o) 0 c W E °' E o W N W o m o_ o W a o ooy °orc ° oy.Lc °OUEmo.-.� a) o m p Z'p y N> '0 N U `-' m E �N > m= o E m m Wmc °Ea°coi rn 0)i��°M"'a°iaa)i C-)c'�y°V Eo.� U O y 0 0 W W W d O) O• E 0 0 N l0 W W C W Q) W O W 'O W O V.. 0> C V O is LL. O O' U U>>E N vi —W b C G. > W W m O !r/) ° N +W o m m P v W W m me Q d 7 '= U°> 0 a° H W X .� _Z y W y y E N y` O. ry ` N to N m o¢ C W N M 0> Z N Z W C O) 0 0 0 0 0 m W N 0) r N N N O Z ti W N 'fl W W E W W !*' m !_' *'' W W N >' W p N C a W . x > N o p 0 c a,G c c o.a.am c m N o E 0M Gc' W W O 2 O p a m W m O y 0 0 m m N m W W y 0 p O N aO d a`aa`U NOC 0 & in��a`a"IL>g CL<0 0ILLO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . N z W S CO) co Ch O :1 ' G. 00 O N (.) O a U. OQ t0 �0 N !� tQ = E y • m m cc CO a. to 7 ti 0 > N v 0 & ^ C m v o C O. ch = W otn�� W c aCV)3 m N L) M m C N E N •O Y 'C T f--' p C o d Sm�E O W oo N Q ^ Q c N C � 'p m 1m' CL a c U atp aMa r 00 w c C V C c y m> ECG �N m "' m N y m N p 4 ) CD m ` U a c c,4 � m o E w t ° y m°Em m> j tm m C V mQaN N c a) co -0 mEEa�o«. m W � - _ . _ mt'a 'E CL a. m; 7 o > > UDaa- ocn. r. N V C C7 m O U v aC m E o m W O `-0 E 0 C ` W �• CL < 0 M o ++ M W O N M T W N N m N W O C W N E 0 0 a m O O C O m N 7 Y 'v C m x m N 0 C 0 r in c c m o U y a W a tL m c U M m= v m E E L rn m m m a CL rs Crn coo��3m > «•v mQm C N N m C N m c > > m E �v`5-.. m O � O c E `o E E c a 0 0 0 0 0 UUUU 0 o�tn U NW C C d 0 Q W M 0 O 'C C O m m W W 0 `m tnOL 0C N 3 Q C 0 ► c m U o�c gO W N N C j m O m 3 Y n ° = > oc+��d C W m E m d x W!=w ° CMW Co 4mQ�am M W NSE6 0 U .N m o > W N > N C N TC o+' a`Qwa c m x w E m c y c m W W LL C 'O y a m 0 mda°d W °E$-W ai W v m `U� m IL a` V� O n 4 m 0 N N q U m C 'U N Cto 0 W U ° 'C m Y N y N = W W c c W 7 N d E m W J o c aE� C o 1m +m+ W 0 N C O +, O 00 y Y•- >` a E i A G 7 aN W W a a W CL `0�0 E+W,tn m o a n - W o W ; Q 0 cra=o (3 v W o'C N 0)_MW W m 0 N C) :O CL 4m +`• c v cy N ' V W m C c` W m e t c a O VCL ° m C m �'m C U M 0 CL Co v o •Ei m m a+ W N C N CL M m W L N l�0 C V> E +' Q ?� Q E(D w•�N NL Q .. m O)iDmC7 10c ID Cm N«mom S m m m toW E cr CL N m m W o W m o °o o V c aa`wol-L2 sUUU 3:m O N O y- ,7�, cU m a m m a Q C •C c W CL 0 C m v m Q M C �C N v W C W CL v C W m N a N C J 0 0 c_ E N E Ol C 4m+ N T U) U) y a N m C co 0 m V m C W m C = y allo co O c m « c N .N O O W 7 7 a y CDtm to ."0- Ned m c0aWCL O C W ` U fi m C ma c-o = 41),o N m m a W w M In �., •` O J -O 0-6 a a � c y m « m 2 OR N U Y 0 t •" m m o. •' Cam o cN : C 3�r-o.N v ° a O o 5 _ m 3 E— = m m E ai> m m m m 0 a�> a cD $ o c+Q SO aa° 2U,O.UUC30. E E m o m CL � � � C � _k � I c 2�� / co E = 2 42 ® 0 »r2(0i tm < 2 �\)�/i �i K �x < k E � I . [ . 5;Y a W �§=E k2- uj IL % cn mkt <I� B . � \2 � Z mkk /C S.6 CL 22� a««. �