2005 07 26 PCsT4ht 4
�
r OF
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 26, 2005
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2005-031
Beginning Minute Motion 2005-010
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
A. Approval of the Minutes for the Regular Meeting of July 12, 2005.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc
V. PUBLIC HEARING:
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 La Quinta 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 97-337-
ADDENDUM, AND SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029,
AMENDMENT NO. 4
Applicant.......... Stamko Development Co.
Location........... East of Adams Street, south of Auto Centre Drive
Request............ Consideration of an Addendum to a previously certified
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (Schedule No.
97011055) for Environmental Assessment 97-337, for
the Specific Plan and a new driveway access on Adams
Street and a design change to the internal circulation
pattern, internal access, and a retention basin.
Action .............. Resolution 2005- and Resolution 2005-
B. Item ................ VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2005-027
Applicant ......... South West Concepts
Location .......... Southwest corner of Calle Estado and Desert Club Drive
Request ........... Consideration of development plans, including a Parking
Management Agreement, for construction of a + 10,709
square foot two-story retail/office building in the Village
La Quinta.
Action ............. Resolution 2005-
C. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-814 -
AMENDMENT #1
Applicant ......... Entin Family Trust
Location .......... East side of Washington Street, +960 feet north of Fred
Waring Drive
Request ........... Consideration of revised architectural plans for
construction of a +23,760 square foot two-story office
building.
Action ............. Resolution 2005-
VI. BUSINESS ITEM: None.
GAWPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Review of City Council meeting of July 19, 2005.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular
Meeting to be held on August 9, 2005, at 7:00 p.m.
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare
that the foregoing agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of
Tuesday, July 26, 2005, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber,
78-495 Calle Tampico, the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office,
Chamber of Commerce, and Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 111, on Friday, July 22,
2005,
DATED: July 22, 2005
B X SAWYER, Executive Secretary
City 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
777-7025, 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 777-7025. A one (1) week notice is required.
If background material 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.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
July 12, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Daniels to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Rick Daniels, Paul Quill and
Chairman Kirk. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Daniels/Alderson to excuse Commissioner Ladner. Unanimously
approved.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Assistant
City Attorney Michael Houston, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer,
Principal Planner Fred Baker, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
II. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of June
28, 2005. There being none, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to approve the minutes as submitted
IV. CONSENT ITEMS: None.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 2005-835; a request of Stamko Development
Co. for consideration of development plans for a multi -tenant retail store
consisting of 23,000 square feet, located at the southwest corner of
Highway 1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-12-05.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
July 12, 2005
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked about the location of the trash
enclosures. Staff informed the Commission the applicant had
brought a drawing showing a new location for the trash enclosure.
The drawing shows a driveway access easement off the Sam's
Club gas station site.
3. Commissioner Daniels asked if staff was recommending the signs
or boulders that were to have the signs on, were to be reduced.
Staff stated both were being requested to be reduced.
4. Commissioner Quill asked if the ALRC recommendations and what
staff was recommending were contained in the staff report. Staff
stated yes and explained the changes proposed.
5. Commissioner Alderson asked about the location of the sky blue
awning. Staff explained the location. Community Development
Director Doug Evans explained the concerns regarding the
driveway off of Dune Palms Road.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Ms. Chris Clarke, Stamko Development Co., gave a
presentation on the project and explained the request for the
relocation of the trash enclosure. She stated the trash enclosures
will be the same color as all the other trash enclosures in the
Center. Mr. Russ Beckner, Stamko Development Co., addressed
Conditions No. 78 and 79.
7. Chairman Kirk asked the applicant to identify what staff conditions
they would like to change. Mr. Beckner explained their concerns.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Alderson stated he does not believe asking for
architectural changes are a detriment to the project.
9. Commissioner Quill asked if the conditions were agreeable to the
applicant. Mr. Beckner explained the changes they were willing to
make on the building. Commissioner Quill stated his concern is
that the building needs to have architectural details. He asked if
the applicant could supply some suggestions. Mr. Beckner gave
some alternatives and went on to explain the sign program.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-12-05.doc 2
Planning Commission Minutes
July 12, 2005
10. Chairman Kirk asked if there was a representation from Sam's
Club. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated that if
the sign is shared with the Sam's Club and there is no menu
board, staff would have no objection.
11. Chairman Kirk asked how you would handle a sign for a business
that is not a part of this program. Staff explained the process.
Mr. Beckner requested the sign contain Sam's Club plus three
additional tenants on both sides. Ms. Clarke explained her request
for the sign.
12. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, the public hearing was closed and open for
Commission discussion.
13. Commissioner Daniels stated he agrees with the canopies, but not
the popout on the buildings. On the signs, he likes splitting the
sign up between Sam's Club and the other tenants of this building.
14. Commissioner Alderson stated that in terms of the architectural
enhancement, the deeper tones are attractive. He does agree with
the applicant's concerns on the popouts. In regard to the
canopies, he believes they would be a benefit. Concerning the
signs, he concurs with the applicant.
15. Commissioner Quill stated he concurs with staff's
recommendation. Regarding the canopies on the east elevation,
they would be helpful. The architectural suggestions by the ALRC
are good, and with the applicant not submitting anything new, he
would agree with approving staff's recommendation. On the
signage, he has no concerns.
16. Chairman Kirk asked if this was part of the Specific Plan. Staff
stated yes. Chairman Kirk stated he believes that if the applicant
has gone to the trouble to design a specific plan, then the
Commission should not expect any changes to the design. He is
torn in that it should be better and yet the applicant has made a
good argument that the design should not be changed. He is not
comfortable voting for something that he does not know the
ultimate outcome. Community Development Director Doug Evans
stated staff too struggled with how to create a better design. The
conditions were written to allow the architect the opportunity to
create depth and design.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-12-05.doc 3
Planning Commission Minutes
July 12, 2005
17. It was moved by Commissioners Quill/Daniels to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 2005-031, approving Site Development
Permit 2005-835, as recommended by staff and as amended:
a. Condition #78.B. added to allow for the sign to remain as it
is proposed size, if it is combined with the Sam's Club and
two or three additional tenant signs.
b. Condition added: trash enclosure design and location are
approved as requested by the applicant.
18. Chairman Kirk reopened the public hearing. Ms. Clarke stated that
with the condition as written, she is at the whim of staff to design
the building. She currently is in negotiations with the City and she
15 days from the approval of the SDP to purchase the land. If she
has to wait for the architect and staff to redesign the building, she
cannot meet the time constraints of the Agreement. If the
Commission approves the application, she will be forced to appeal
the decision to the City Council. She would prefer the
Commission continue the application to give her time to work with
her architect and resubmit a new design to the Commission for
their approval.
19. Commissioner Quill stated that if the applicant is willing to
resubmit the design he is willing to agree to a continuance to allow
the applicant the opportunity to redesign the building.
20. Commissioners Quill/Daniels withdrew their motion.
21. It was moved and seconded by Commissioner Daniels/Quill to
continue Site Development Permit 2005-835, to September 13,
2005.
22. Chairman Kirk asked the Commissioners to provide the developer
with direction in regard to what is expected.
23. Commissioner Quill stated the architect is well known for his
quality, and his direction would be to provide more relief, color,
and shade.
24. Chairman Kirk suggested they also consider different materials.
25. Commissioner Alderson stated he too would prefer the applicant
work with their architect to redesign the building.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-12-05.doc 4
Planniig Commission Minutes
July 12, 2005
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Following discussion, it was determine the Commission would go dark
the second meeting in August.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Daniels/Alderson to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on July 26, 2005, at 7:00 p.m.
This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:11 p.m. on July 12,
2005.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\7-12-05.doc 5
PH #A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JULY 26, 2005
CASE NOS.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-337- ADDENDUM, AND
SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029, AMENDMENT NO.4
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO A PREVIOUSLY
CERTIFIED SUPPLEMENTAL EIR (SCHEDULE NO. 97011055) FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-337, FOR THE SPECIFIC
PLAN AND A NEW DRIVEWAY ACCESS ON ADAMS STREET
AND A DESIGN CHANGE TO THE INTERNAL CIRCULATION
PATTERN, INTERNAL ACCESS, AND A RETENTION BASIN
LOCATION: EAST OF ADAMS STREET, SOUTH OF AUTO CENTRE DRIVE
APPLICANT/PROPERTY
OWNER: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
ENGINEER: THE KEITH COMPANIES
ZONING: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS:
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED
THIS PROJECT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), AND HAS
DETERMINED THAT NEITHER THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE
PROJECT, NOR ANY NEW INFORMATION EXISTS THAT WILL
RESULT IN THE IDENTIFICATION OF NEW SIGNIFICANT
IMPACTS, OR THE SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE SEVERITY
OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN CERTIFIED EIR SCH
NO. #97011055, AND AN ADDENDUM TO THE EIR HAS BEEN
PREPARED.
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
SOUTH: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RH)/ AVENTINE
APARTMENTS
EAST: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL)/ LAKE LA
QUINTA
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
At the applicant's request this Public Hearing was continued from the Planning
Commission meetings of June 14' and June 28`h.
The City Council approved, under Resolution, No. 97-64, Centre at La Quinta Specific
Plan 97-029. The Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan as amended includes property
between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road south of Highway 111 and
approximately 1000 feet north of Avenue 48 (Attachment 1). The Specific Plan
allows auto dealerships such as the existing three dealers and the approved Mazda
dealership and mixed regional commercial uses including Super Walmart and Sam's
Club. The General Plan allows High Density Residential use with an affordable
component if it is 600 feet south of Highway 111.
Applications Under Consideration
The Specific Plan Amendment No. 4 requests a new right -in and right -out access
driveway into the commercial Center on Adams Street, realigning the internal
circulation in Planning Area 2 (the southwest portion of the center), reconfiguring a
proposed retention basin, and a new internal access to the property at the southwest
corner of Highway 111 and Dunes Palms Road.
COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES:
The applicant's request was sent to City departments and affected public agencies on
April 21, 2005, requesting comments be returned by May 6, 2005. No significant
comments were received.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on June 4, 2005.
All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice.
ANALYSIS AND ISSUES:
The proposed new driveway access on Adams Street and the proposed internal
circulation change into the commercial Center meet General Plan standards and provide
an additional entry/exit point for the vehicles using the commercial businesses in the
Center including Super Wal-Mart and the approved Sam's Club. The proposed new
driveway also provides an additional southern street frontage for the approved Mazda
dealership. A representative of the Auto Dealer's has expressed the concern that this
driveway will take traffic off (i.e. potential customers) Auto Centre Drive. The three
existing dealers have street exposure and identity on Auto Centre Drive. On June 24',
staff delivered staff reports to each existing auto dealer. To date, no further
correspondence has been received.
Staff is recommending a Conditions of Approval requiring the applicant to add the
following language to the Specific Plan:
• A Traffic Study will be completed to consider operational expansion of the north
bound turn pockets on Adams Street and Highway 1 1 1. The Traffic Study and
any additional improvements needed, including reconstruction of the median
island, shall be completed within two years of the application submittal date for
the next Site Development Permit requested within Planning Area 2 in the
Centre at La Quinta.
• The applicant shall prepare a final street design including round -about design
options at intersections for the proposed new internal road and submit plans, for
approval by the Planning Commission, as an independent Site Development
Permit or concurrent with the next Site Development Permit submittal in
Planning Area 2 of the Specific Plan.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The findings necessary to approve the Specific Plan Amendment can be made provided
the recommended Conditions of Approval are imposed per Section 9.210.010 and
Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Code as noted in the attached Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 97-337 for
Specific Plan 97-029.
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- recommending to the City
Council approval of Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment No. 4 allowing a new
driveway access on Adams Street and a change of the internal circulation,
access, and retention basin design, subject to conditions.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Project Location Exhibit
2. Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment No. 4
Prepared by:
Fred Baker, AICP
Principal Planner
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA
APPROVAL OF AN ADDENDUM TO A SUPPLEMENTAL EIR
(SCHEDULE NO. 97011055) FOR ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 97-337
CASE NO.: ADDENDUM TO A SUPPLEMENTAL EIR FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-337
APPLICANT: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
WHEREAS, an Addendum to a Supplemental EIR (Schedule No.
9701 1055) for Environmental Assessment 97-337 has been prepared and determined
that the Specific Plan Amendment as part of the Implementing Project does not trigger
the need for the preparation of an additional Environmental Assessment, pursuant to
CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public Resources Code Section 21166, in that the
Implementing Project does not involve:
1. Substantial changes to the project analyzed in the Environmental Addendum
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 Environmental Addendum; or
3. New information of substantial importance which would involve new significant
effects on the environment not analyzed in the Environmental Addendum to
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 a recommendation to certify an Addendum to a
Supplemental EIR (Schedule No. 97011055) for Environmental Assessment 97-337
and;
1. The Implementing 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 Environmental Addendum.
2. The Implementing 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
P:\Reperts - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC Reso Environmental Addendum.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Addendum to Supplemental EIR for Environmental Assessment 97-337
Stamko Development Co.
Adopted: July 26, 2005
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 Environmental Addendum.
3. There is no evidence before the City that the Implementing Project will have the
potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the
wildlife depends in that no significant effects on environmental factors have
been identified by the Environmental Assessment.
4. The Implementing 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
Environmental Assessment.
5. The Implementing 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 proposed Project.
6. The Implementing 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 and that the Specific Plan Amendment complies with all
mitigation measures adopted in Environmental Assessment 97-337.
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.
S. The Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 97-337
and said Assessment reflects the independent judgement 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 753.51d►.
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.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Addendum to Supplemental EIR for Environmental Assessment 97-337
Stamko Development Co.
Adopted: July 26, 2005
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did, on the 14 nth day of June, 2005 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and continued
said hearing to the 28`h day of June, 2005, and again continued said hearing to the
26`h day of July, 2005 to consider a request by Stamko Development Co. for approval
of a Specific Plan Amendment to add a new driveway access on Adams Street and a
change of the design of the internal circulation pattern, internal access, and retention
basin the Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan, generally located at the southwest of
Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street, a portion of Planning Area 2 of Specific Plan 97-029,
as Amended.
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 Sections
9.240.010 of the Zoning Code to justify recommending approval of said Specific Plan
Amendment, respectively:
1. Consistency with the General Plan: The Implementing Project as proposed is
consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the design,
height, scale and mass of the project is compatible with the Mixed/Regional
Commercial Land Use designation.
2. Land Use Compatibility: The Implementing Project is consistent with the
development standards of the Regional Commercial Zoning District, including
but not limited to, setbacks, architecture, building heights, building mass,
exterior lighting, parking, sign program, circulation, open space and landscaping.
3. Public Welfare: The Amended Specific Plan will not create conditions materially
detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare in that the proposed
changes are compatible with surrounding development and as conditioned meet
the street design standards of the City.
4. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The
Implementing Project is consistent with the requirements of CEQA, in that an
Addendum to a Supplemental EIR (Schedule No. 97011055) for Environmental
Assessment 97-337 has been prepared and determined that consideration of an
Implementing Project does not call for the preparation of an additional
Environmental Assessment, pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public
Resources Code Section 21166, in that the Implementing Project does not
involve:
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Addendum to Supplemental EIR for Environmental Assessment 97-337
Stamko Development Co.
Adopted: July 26, 2005
a. Substantial changes to the project analyzed in the Environmental
Addendum which would involve new significant effects on the
environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified
impacts;
b. 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 Environmental Addendum; or
C. New information of substantial importance which would involve new
significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the Environmental
Addendum substantially increases the severity of previously identified
impacts.
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 21166.
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 to recommend approval of the Addendum to
Environmental Assessment 97-733 and this Specific Plan Amendment;
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council of the City of La Quinta
approval of the Addendum to a Supplemental EIR (Schedule No. 9701 1055) for
Environmental Assessment 97-337 and approve Specific Plan 97-029,
Amendment No. 4 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the
Conditions of Approval attached hereto;
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 26th day of July, 2005, by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Addendum to Supplemental EIR for Environmental Assessment 97-337
Stamko Development Co.
Adopted: July 26, 2005
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
ADDENDUM TO SUPPLEMENTAL EIR
(SCH NO. 97011055)
(CEQA GUIDELINE 15164)
FOR
SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 4
APPROVAL OF A NEW DRIVEWAY ACCESS ON ADAMS STREET AND A CHANGE
OF THE INTERNAL CIRCULATION PATTERN FOR THE SOUTHEAST PORTION OF
THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA, SOUTH OF AUTO CENTRE DRIVE AND EAST OF
ADAMS
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The City of La Quinta ("City"), as lead agency under the California Environmental
Quality Act, Public Resources Code section 21000, et seq. ("CEQA") has prepared
this Addendum pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15164 to address the potential
environmental impacts of development of a 22 acre portion of Planning Area II of
the Centre at La Quinta Specific. The environmental impacts associated with the
development of that portion of Planning Area II of the Centre at La Quinta Specific
Plan located at the southwest portion of the center; east of Adams Street and
south of Highway 111, were analyzed in the Supplemental EIR adopted in
connection with the approval of Amendment #1 to the Centre at La Quinta Specific
Plan.
PURPOSE OF ADDEND
This Addendum is intended to address whether changes or additions must be made
to the previously adopted Supplemental EIR. Moreover, this Addendum is intended
to verify that the proposed changes in the Specific Plan would be consistent with
the scope of development analyzed in the Supplemental EIR, and to further verify
that there have been no changes in circumstances or disclosure of new information
which would trigger the requirement to do a subsequent environmental assessment
of the: project. The previous Supplemental EIR and supporting Environmental
Assessment 97-337 identified that subsequent site development permit
applications would be part of the overall project assessed at that time, namely,
disposition and development of the 22 acres of property located at the southwest
portion of the center; east of Adams Street and south of Highway 1 1 1 .
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the development
assumptions relied upon in conducting the environmental analysis in the
Supplemental EIR. There has been no change in the proposed development of the
site. The only difference in the proposed Specific Plan Amendment when compared
to the development assumptions reflected in the Supplemental EIR is the addition of
an access driveway into the Commercial Center and a modification of the internal
circulation. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment includes a requirement a
Traffic: Study to be completed which considers operational expansion of the north
bound turn pockets on Adams Street and Highway 11 1 . The Traffic Study and any
additional improvements needed, including reconstruction of the median island,
shall be to be completed within two years of the application submittal date for the
next Site Development Permit request within Planning Area 2 in the Centre at La
Quinta.
The City has compared the impacts of the proposed Specific Plan with those
impacts analyzed in the Supplemental EIR and finds as follows:
P:\Repon.s - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond EA Addendum. for SP 97-029 Amd 4.doc
Aesthetics — Impacts
identical to those
previously analyzed.
The allowed land uses
(retail commercial, high
density affordable
housing, and auto
dealers) has not
changed from that
reviewed in the original
Supplemental EIR.
Agriculture Resources -
Impacts no greater than
previously analyzed. The
site is in the urban core
of the City, and is not in
agriculture, nor is it
within several miles of
lands in agriculture.
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials - Impacts
identical to those
previously analyzed.
Implementation of the
proposed Specific Plan
Amendment will not
change the land uses on
the site, which will be
regulated for hazardous
materials storage and
transport by the City
and County.
Hydrology and Water
Quality — Impacts
equivalent to those
previously analyzed. The
City still requires the
implementation of
NPDES standards and
on -site retention, which
will be implemented for
the proposed Specific
Plan Amendment. -
Public Services - Impacts
identical to those
previously analyzed. The
land uses proposed for the
site have not changed,
and will require the same
level of service as that
evaluated in the
Supplemental EIR.
Recreation - Impacts
equivalent to those
previously analyzed. The
allowed land uses will
have no impact on
recreational facilities in the
City.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond EA Addendum. for SP 97-029 Amd 4.doc
Air Quality - Impacts
equivalent to those
previously analyzed. No
changes have been
proposed in the project
which would result in a
greater number of
vehicle trips, which are
the primary source of
emissions associated
with buildout of the
project.
Biological Resources -
Impacts equivalent to
those previously
analyzed.
No physical changes are
proposed in the project.
The impacts to
biological resources will
not change.
Cultural Resources -
Impacts no greater than
those previously
analyzed. The required
mitigation associated
with the Supplemental
EIR will be implemented
with Site Development
Permits for the Project,
and will reduce impacts
to less than significant
levels.
Land Use Planning -
Impacts equivalent to
those previously
analyzed. The property
is vacant and will not
impact an established
community. The
proposed project is
consistent with the uses
contemplated and
allowed in the General
Plan and Zoning
Ordinance. It serves to
implement the Specific
Plan for the Centre at La
Quinta.
Mineral Resources — The
site does not contain
mineral resources.
Noise - Impacts no
greater than those
previously analyzed. The
land uses proposed
consist of commercial
uses which are not
sensitive receptors.
There no changes in
proposed land uses.
Transportation/Traffic -
Impacts less than or equal
to those previously
analyzed. An additional
driveway into the
Commercial Center will
provide dispersion of
traffic. Evaluation of street
designs for the project,
and determination of the
need for redesigning left
turn lane pockets which
will provide equivalent or
better traffic safety, and
that the level of service
associated with the
existing street design and
improvements will remain
at better than acceptable
levels at project buildout
based on the refined
street traffic and design
study.
Utilities and Service
Systems Impacts identical
to those previously
analyzed. No physical
change is proposed to the
project, and impacts to
utilities will be as
previously analyzed.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7 26 cond EA Addendum. for SP 97-029 Amd 4.doc
Geology and Soils -
Impacts identical to
those previously
analyzed. The structures
proposed for the project
site have not changed,
and the mitigation
measures originally
approved will be
implemented with Site
Development Permits
for the Project.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
Population and Housing -
Impacts identical to those
previously analyzed. The
proposed commercial land
uses will not induce
significant population
growth.
The City finds that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA
Guidelines requiring preparation of a subsequent or supplemental MND or EIR have
occurred. More specifically, the City has determined that:
Finding 1. There are no substantial changes to the Specific Plan that would
require major revisions of the Supplemental EIR due to new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of impacts
identified in the previous Supplemental EIR.
Facts in Support of Finding. The project has not changed substantially
from the development assumptions contained in the previously Supplemental
EIR. The Supplemental EIR assumed development of approximately 850,000
square feet of general retail, auto dealer, and high density housing uses for the
entire Specific Plan Area. A portion of the site, 22 acres is within Planning
Area II of the Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan.
The proposed Specific Plan Amendment provides no change in the allowed
square footage in the adopted Specific Plan. Accordingly, the Specific Plan
Amendment is consistent with the development assumptions contained in the
Supplemental EIR. The proposed design changes i.e. a new driveway entrance
does not result in additional or more severe significant impacts since the
development potential remains the same as the in the Supplemental EIR.
Finding 2. No substantial changes have occurred in the circumstances
under which the proposed Specific Plan Amendment is being undertaken that
will require major revisions of the previously adopted Supplemental EIR to
disclose new significant environmental effects or that would result in a
substantial increase in the severity of the impacts identified in the MND.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond EA Addendum. for SP 97-029 Amd 4.doc
Facts Supporting the Finding. The circumstances under which the
proposed Specific Plan Amendment will be undertaken are accurately and
adequately described in the previously adopted. The new driveway access
does not result in additional or more sever significant impacts since the
development potential remains the same as in the Supplemental EIR. There
have been no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the
proposed Specific Plan Amendment will be developed resulting in new or more
severe significant impacts.
Finding 3. There is no additional new information of substantial
importance, which was not known at the time of the adoption of the previous
Supplemental EIR, indicating that: (1) The project will have one or more
significant effects not discussed in the Supplemental EIR; (2) There are no
impacts that were determined to be significant in the Supplemental EIR that
would be substantially more severe; (3) There are no additional mitigation
measures or alternatives to the project that would substantially reduce one or
more identified significant impacts; and (4) There are no additional mitigation
measures or alternatives which were rejected by the City that would
substantially reduce any identified significant impact identified in the
Supplemental EIR.
Facts Supporting the Finding. No new information of substantial
importance to the conclusions of the previously adopted Supplemental EIR
has been identified with the analysis of this Addendum Moreover, the
previously adopted Supplemental EIR concluded that all potentially significant
impacts may be reduced to less than significant levels with the implementation
of identified mitigation measures. The mitigation measures identified in the
Supplemental EIR will be adopted and implemented with Site Developemnt
Permits for the Project. Finally, no additional significant impacts are identified
pursuant this Addendum.
June 3, 2005
Date
PAReports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond EA Addendum. for SP 97-029 Amd 4.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2005
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A FOURTH
AMENDMENT TO SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029 (CENTRE AT
LA QUINTA)
CASE: SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029, AMENDMENT # 4
APPLICANT: STAMKO DVELOPMENT CO.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California
did, on the 141" day of June, 2005, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, and continued
said hearing to the 28`" day of June, 2005, and again continued said hearing to the
26" day of July, 2005 to consider a request by Stamko Development Co., to
recommend to the City Council approval of a Specific Plan Amendment to add a new
driveway access on Adams Street and a change of the design of the internal
circulation pattern, internal access, and retention basin for the Centre at La Quinta
Specific Plan, located east of Adams Street, south of Auto Centre Drive; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published a
public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on the 4`" day of June, 2005, as
prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all
property owners within 500 feet of the site; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department mailed case file
materials to all affected agencies for their review and comment on the proposed
project. All written comments are on file with the Community Development
Department; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department has reviewed
this project under the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), and has determined that neither the proposed changes to the project, nor
new information will result in the identification of new significant impacts, or the
substantial increase in the severity of significant impacts identified in certified EIR
SCH#97011055, and an Addendum to the EIR has been prepared.
WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings to justify
recommending approval of said Specific Plan Amendment #4:
PARepo,ts - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond. PC Reso SP 97-029 Amd. 4.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment #4
Stamko Development Co.
Adopted: July 26, 2005
Page 2
Finding A - Consistency with General Plan
The property is designated Mixed/Regional Commercial. The proposed project will
be developed with commercial uses and within the development intensity (FAR)
specified for this designation as allowed under the General Plan.
Finding B — Public Welfare Enhancement
The project will not be detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare in that
the project is designed in compliance with the City's General Plan Circulation
Element and design of the Specific Plan, as well as other County and State
standards, such as CEQA.
Findings C and D — Land Use Compatibility and Property Suitability
The project site is an already commercially designated and zoned area. The
project will provide adequate buffering through landscaping and walls to ensure
compatibility with surrounding land uses. Additionally, the project will provide
adequate perimeter landscaping and acceptable architectural design guidelines,
consistent with those requirements of the existing Specific Plan.
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 said Planning Commission in this case; and
2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Specific
Plan 97-029, Amendment #4, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution
and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 26th day of July, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond. PC Reso SP 97-029 Amd. 4.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Specific. Plan 97-029, Amendment #4
Stamko Development Co.
Adopted: July 26, 2005
Page 3
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond. PC Reso SP 97-029 Amd. 4.doc
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED
:PECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 4
:TAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
1DOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
iENERAL
The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta
("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to
attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Specific Plan, or any Final Map
recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense
counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
?. Specific Plan No. 97-029, Amendment No. 4, shall comply with the requirements and
standards of Government Code § § 66410 through 66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map
Act"), Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC") and all applicable
conditions of approval for Specific Plan No. 97-029 and Amendments No. 1, 2 and 3,
Tentative Parcel Maps 30420 and 28525 and Site Development Permit 97-603 and
Amendments No.1 and 2.
The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at
www.la-quinta.org.
3. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the
applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following
agencies:
• Fire Marshal
Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
Community Development Department
Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
Desert Sands Unified School District
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
SunLine Transit Agency
SCAQMD Coachella Valley
Caltrans
PAReports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc
)LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
;PECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 4
'TAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
\DOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from
the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement
plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those
improvements plans for City approval.
If previous NPDES construction permits are no longer applicable, a project -specific
NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the applicant; and who then shall
submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ("RWQCB")
acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOI" ), prior to the issuance of a
grading or site construction permit by the City.
1. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater
discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge
Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County
Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-
DWQ.
A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that
disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of
land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than
one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water
Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP").
The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater
Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use
in their SWPPP preparation.
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on
or off -site grading being done in relation to this project.
C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection
at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all
improvements by the City.
D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best
Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC):
1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2) Temporary Sediment Control.
3) Wind Erosion Control.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend NoA.doc 2
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
'PECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO.4
iTAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
1DOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be
approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant
to this project.
F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of
project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the
City.
Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time
of issuance of building permit(s).
PROPERTY RIGHTS
Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and
other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the
proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate
or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance,
construction and reconstruction of essential improvements.
The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street right-of-ways
in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific
plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer.
The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this amendment shall
include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1) Adams Street (Primary Arterial, Option A - 1 10' ROW) - No additional
right of way except for an additional right of way dedication at the
proposed realigned road connecting Adams Street and La Quinta Drive
measured 63 feet east from the centerline of Adams Street and a
minimum of 100 feet long plus a variable dedication of an additional 50
feet to accommodate improvements conditioned under STREET AND
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS.
':\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO.4
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
9. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left
turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction
plans.
Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet
containing the draft final map submitted for map checking, an offsite street geometric
layout, drawn at 1 " equals 40 feet, detailing the following design aspects: median
curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane widths, left turn lanes,
deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The geometric layout shall be
accompanied with sufficient professional engineering studies to confirm the
appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and auxiliary lanes that may impact
the right of way dedication required of the project and the associated landscape
setback requirement.
10. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right-of-
ways shown on the approved Specific Plan are necessary prior to approval of the
Final Map dedicating such right-of-ways, the applicant shall grant the necessary right-
of-ways within 60 days of a written request by the City.
1 1 . The applicant shall offer for dedication on the Final Map a ten -foot wide public utility
easement contiguous with, and along both sides of all private streets. Such
easement may be reduced to five feet in width with the express written approval of
IID.
12. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of-
ways as follows:
A. Adams Street (Primary Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L.
The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to,
remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the
applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on the Final
Map.
13. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement
of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park
lands, and common areas on the Final Map.
14. Applicable to this amendment to the specific plan, direct vehicular access to Adams
Street from parcels with frontage along Adams Street is restricted, except for those
access points identified on previously recorded parcel maps and the site plan for
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc [�
ILANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
1PECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO.4
iTAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
tDOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
Amendment No. 4 of the specific plan, or as otherwise conditioned in these
conditions of approval.
5. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate,
from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall
construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur.
6. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of
the subject property between the date of approval of the Specific Plan and the date
of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City
Engineer.
3RADING
17. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
18. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the
applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer.
19. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval
of all of the following:
A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer,
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer,
C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16,
(Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and
D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with Sections
8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm
Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC.
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils
Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an
engineering geologist.
A statement shall appear on the Final Map that a soils report has been prepared in
accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953.
�:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend NoA.doc 5
)LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
,ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
P'PECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO.4
iTAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
1DOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control
Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit.
t0. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent
wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall
either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion
control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan.
21 . Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain
and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as
otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not
exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e.
the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted
with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb
shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the
curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All
unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half
inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb.
22. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining
properties and the lots within this development.
Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider
alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and
neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
23. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by
more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the
approved Specific Plan, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to
the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review.
24. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall
provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor.
Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading
plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad
certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be
organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc 6
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
;PECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 4
;TAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
tDOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
PGG
>5. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage),
LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on site
during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the
centerline of adjacent public streets and highways. The design storm shall be either
the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off.
?6. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per
hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides
site specific data indicating otherwise.
Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in a
trickling sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City
Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain first flush storm
water and nuisance water surges from landscape area, commercial activity and off -
site street nuisance water. The sand filter design shall be per La Quinta Standard 370
with the equivalent of 137.2 gph of water feed per sand filter to accept the
abovementioned nuisance water requirements. Leach line requirements are 1.108
feet of leach line per gph of flow. Flow from adjacent well sites shall be designed for
retention area percolation by separate infiltration system approved by the City
Engineer.
27. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through
underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or adjacent well sites
granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a requirement for
development of this property.
28. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall be according to
Engineering Bulletin 97.03, and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1 and shall be planted
with maintenance free ground cover.
29. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots
along Adams Street. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls
onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas.
The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped
with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC.
30. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc 7
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 4
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
31. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity
to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic
drainage relief route.
32. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
UTILITIES
33. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities),
LQMC.
34. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all
utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including,
but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone
stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes.
35. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and
all proposed utilities shall be installed underground.
All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are
exempt from the requirement to be placed underground.
36. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of
utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench
restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer.
The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for
approval by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
37. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street
Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For
Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section
13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed.
38. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the
General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
PAReports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend NoA.doc 8
DLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
;ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO.4
5TAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
4DOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
1) Highway 1 1 1 (Major Arterial — State Highway; 140' R/W):
No additional widening on the south side of Highway 1 1 1 is required for the
Specific Plan under this amendment.
2) Adams Street (Primary Arterial; Option A, 1 10' R/W):
No additional street widening is required on the east side of Adams Street
along the Specific Plan boundary, except at locations where additional street
width is needed to accommodate:
a) A deceleration/right turn only lane at the proposed realigned road
connecting Adams Street and La Quinta Drive. The east curb
face shall be located fifty one feet (51') east of the centerline
and length to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the
applicant by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering Bulletin #
03-08. As a minimum, the required right of way shall be for a
length of 100 feet plus a variable dedication of an additional 50
feet.
Other required improvements in the Adams Street right of way and/or adjacent
landscape setback area include:
b) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb,
gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs.
c) Reconstruct the existing 6' meandering sidewalk along the
deceleration/right turn only lane at the proposed realigned road
connecting Adams Street and La Quinta Drive.
The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure
they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices
and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks).
The applicant is responsible for construction of all improvements mentioned above.
The development is eligible for reimbursement from the City's Development Impact
Fee fund in accordance with policies established for that program.
3) The applicant shall install the traffic signal at the Adams Street and
Avenue 47 intersection as conditioned of Tentative Parcel Map 28525.
Applicant is responsible for 100 % of the cost to design and install the
traffic signal. Applicant shall enter into a SIA to post security for 50 %
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7.26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc 9
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 4
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
of the cost to design and install the traffic signal prior to issuance of an
on -site grading permit; the security shall remain in full force and effect
until the signal is actually installed by the applicant.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus
turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction
plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer.
39. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure
for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated
traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be
as follows:
Parking Lot 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b.
Primary Arterial 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
40. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of
construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The
submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure.
For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six
months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming
that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not
schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved.
41. All access points and turning movements of traffic previously approved shall remain.
Additional access points and turning movements of traffic as proposed for this
amendment to the Specific Plan 97-029 are limited to the following:
A. Adams Street entry for realigned road from Adams Street to La Quinta drive
(Adams Street): Right turn in and out movements are permitted. Left turn in
and out movements are prohibited.
42. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and
other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. Mid -block
street lighting is not required.
43. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted
standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City
Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be
stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend NoA.doc 10
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 4
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
CONSTRUCTION
44. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings
have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets.
The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings
and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially
constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the
pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the
development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first.
LANDSCAPING
45. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
46. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots and park areas.
47. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention
basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect.
48. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community
Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works
Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant shall
obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner,
prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer.
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer.
49. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no
lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public
streets.
PUBLIC SERVICES
50. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine
Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc 11
DLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 4
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
4DOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
1UALITY ASSURANCE
51. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with
the approval of the City Engineer.
52. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such other
appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to
prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction
supervision.
53. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and
testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be
required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods
employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations.
54. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the
Oty. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As -
Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying
to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all
AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the
as -built conditions.
MAINTENANCE
55. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance),
LQMC.
56. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of
all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and
sidewalks.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
57. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and
Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for
plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those
in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits.
58. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time
of issuance of building permit(s).
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc 12
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT 97-029, AMENDMENT NO.4
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 26, 2005
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
59. Prior to final approval of the Specific Plan Amendment, applicant shall add the
following language to the Specific Plan text:
The applicant shall prepare a final street design including round -about design options
at intersections for the proposed new internal road and submit plans, for approval by
the Planning Commission, as an independent Site Development Permit or concurrent
with the next Site Development Permit submittal in Planning Area 2 of the Specific
Plan.
60. Prior to final approval of the Specific Plan Amendment applicant will add the
following language to the Specific Plan text:
A Traffic Study will be completed to consider operational expansion of the north
bound turn pockets on Adams Street and Highway 111. The Traffic Study
and any additional improvements needed, including reconstruction of the
median island, shall be completed within two years of the application submittal
date for the next Site Development Permit request within Planning Area 2 in
the Centre at La Quinta.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\Stamko\7-26 cond PC COA - SP 97-029, Amend No.4.doc 13
ATTACHMEW
PROJECT LOCATION
n 4
use T,
O�
arae,e
N
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
PH #B
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JULY 26, 2005
CASE NO: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2005-027
APPLICANT: SOUTH WEST CONCEPTS
PROPERTY OWNER: CALLE ESTADO, LLC
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS,
INCLUDING A PARKING MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT,
FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A ±10,709 GROSS S.F. TWO-
STORY RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING IN THE VILLAGE AT
LA QUINTA
LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CALLE ESTADO AND DESERT
CLUB DRIVE (ATTACHMENT #1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS
EXEMPT FROM CEQA REVIEW UNDER GUIDELINES
SECTION 15332 (INFILL DEVELOPMENT)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: VC (VILLAGE COMMERCIAL)
ZONING: VC (VILLAGE COMMERCIAL)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES: NORTH - EXISTING OFFICE/RETAIL ZONED VC
SOUTH - EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ZONED VC
EAST - VACANT ZONED VC
WEST - EXISTING RETAIL ZONED VC
SITE BACKGROUND:
This proposed building is on a 0.34 acre site, which is made up of three 50 x 100
foot lots in the Village. The site has been cleared and is devoid of any vegetation,
topography or landmarks. An existing fire hydrant is located at the east side of the
property, and curb, gutter and sidewalk exist along its frontages on Calle Estado
perptvup027
and Desert Club Drive. An existing improved 20-foot alley runs along the south side
of the property. A Plot Plan approval was granted by the Planning Commission for
this site (PP 86-361) in October 1986, but was withdrawn by the applicant.
PROJECT BACKGROUND:
The proposed building is a 10,709 gross s.f. structure intended for general office
and retail uses (Attachment 2). The first floor will contain about 3,854 s.f. of gross
floor area as retail, with 5,541 s.f. of gross floor area as general office on the
second floor. The building requires 42 total parking stalls, with 25 provided on -site.
Staff and the applicant have worked out a proposed parking agreement, which is
discussed later in this report. The building is generally sited on the north portion of
the site, with the front of the building facing on Calle Estado (north, or front
elevation). The parking area occupies the remainder of the site. The building has
exterior stairwells at the east and west sides, oriented to the parking area and
Desert Club sidewalk. An elevator is provided at the central pedestrian entry off of
Calle Estado. The parking area and alley along the south property line will be
separated by a garden wall, placed on the north alley right-of-way line.
The architecture is best described as a blending of Traditional Spanish and
Mediterranean design elements (Attachment 3). The building walls will be stucco,
with an off-white finish. The roofing material will be a two-piece mission clay tile in
a darker tri-color earth tone (El Camino) color blend. Accent tile areas as shown are
actually a painted faux -tile. The window surrounds, doors and mullions will be
framed in a finished aluminum. The roof eaves will be accented with exposed rafter
tails, :stained in a dark wood color. In general, the building has a significant amount
of architectural detail. The main roof ridge line height is at 30.5 feet from finish
grade, with architectural treatments that extend up to 32.5 feet at the highest
point of the roof dormers. The height limit for the Village is set at 35 feet.
In regard to the landscaping plan, other than street trees, the landscaping is
predominantly shrubs and groundcover. There are no turf areas provided, as the
area available for landscaping is very minimal. There are several trees shown along
the alley (south PL).
A material and color board, along with full-size color illustrations, will be provided
at the meeting.
ALRC Action - On May 4, 2005, the ALRC reviewed the project landscaping and
building architecture (Attachment #4, ALRC minutes). The following issues were
raised by the Committee:
1. Building Design - The ALRC wanted to see more attention to detailing the
west building elevation, to relieve the blank wall appearance. They
recommend a use of elements such as extending use of the painted faux -tile
treatment, some architectural recesses, and the potential for integration of a
wall mural as part of the elevation. They also requested that there be
intermittent use of mudding on the roof tiles.
2. Landscaping - The ALRC requested that some additional trees be added
along the south property line; this has been incorporated into the plans under
review. They also requested that some appropriately sized planting pots
(with automatic irrigation) be placed at appropriate intervals at street level,
to make up for the lack of planter areas around the building.
On a 3-0 vote, the ALRC adopted Minute Motion 2005-020, recommending
approval of the proposed project subject to the above provisions.
The applicant subsequently revised the west building elevation to show some
detailing within the surface area (refer to Attachment 3) consisting of arched
recesses augmented with tile inserts. Given the limitations of a zero -line wall
construction, staff believes this to be a design treatment which will greatly improve
the wall appearance within the referenced design limitations. The ALRC
recommendation with regard to this issue rests with the Planning Commission, in
determining if the revision meets with the intent of the ALRC. Staff has included
Condition 44.13 as recommended by ALRC in the event that this revision is
determined as needing additional enhancement.
Public Notice
This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 15, 2005. All
property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice as required. No comments have been received. Any correspondence
received before the meeting will be transmitted to the Planning Commission.
Public Agency Review
Staff transmitted the applicant's request to all responsible and concerned public
agencies. All comments received are on file at the Community Development
Department, and have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval,
as appropriate.
ANALYSIS:
Consistency with Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines - In regard to site and
building design, the Guidelines suggest that corner buildings "shah attempt to orient
pedestrian entryways to the corner, providing an opportunity for a small entry court
or plaza, water feature location, etc. This also allows for better intersection
visibility." (Guidelines II.C.1.). The building itself does not provide a significant,
directly open treatment at the corner. However, it does incorporate an opening
along Desert Club Dive just off the corner, at the proposed east stairwell. In
addition, an open entry is provided at the midpoint of the building, along Calle
Estado, which narrows to a six-foot wide breezeway as it extends south into the
rear parking area.
An entirely open corner is generally more appropriate for sites larger than this one,
where there is more flexibility to design open spaces as an appropriate pedestrian
draw into the site interior. For this particular project, such a design may not be
appropriate or necessary, for the following reasons:
• The site is restricted by the existing alley on its south and its relatively small
size. Compliance with the Village parking area guidelines requires that the
parking areas be placed in back of buildings, and with no setback required on
Desert Club or Estado, the applicant has designed the building in such a way
that the pedestrian entryway is midway along the Calle Estado frontage.
• There are no interior spaces other than the parking area and back of tenant
spaces to draw pedestrians into. Pedestrian traffic on Desert Club moves
primarily to access the main east/west streets, which serve as the draw into
the Village proper.
• The subject corner opens out on to Desert Club Drive, essentially the eastern
limit of the Village. The pedestrian flow would be toward the west, and
north.
• While Desert Club provides sidewalk along its entire length, it functions
primarily to move traffic between the north and south ends of the east side
of the Village, and as secondary parking.
• Land uses east of Desert Club in this area are primarily residential. The
Village land use then expands east, farther north at Tampico and farther
south at Calle Barcelona.
The building design does have a framing effect, which directs attention to the
streetscape and serves to channel pedestrians and traffic west along Calle Estado.
The building does provide open retail storefront access to Calle Estado, and
provides an open entry and water feature at the Estado entry. The Calle Estado
street elevation and floor plan modules make up a series of storefronts, which will
create pedestrian scale and interest, with up to six storefronts, and a breezeway
leading to the parking area at the rear. This breezeway starts at 18 six -feet wide at
the sidewalk, and progressively narrows to a six-foot wide walkway through to the
parking area. Staff recommends that the Commission explore expanding upon the
entry off Estado and widening the proposed 6-foot wide passage between the
parking area and Calle Estado, to provide a more inviting walkway and some
architectural relief.
It should be noted that the Village Guidelines are intended as a general document,
to provide basic direction in relation to site design and architecture relative to
creation and enhancement of a Village -style atmosphere. They are not ordinance -
based, and are not intended to be applied universally, or in all situations; they are
to be considered for each design case that comes before the City, and assessed for
their appropriateness in consideration of the site design issues for any given
project.
Parking - The site requires 42 spaces, where 25 have been provided. Staff has
been working with the applicant to develop a parking management agreement,
based on the Municipal Code provisions of the Village Commercial district and the
parking code. In the past, several projects have been approved without requiring
full compliance wit the required number of parking spaces. There have been
questions and concerns regarding this practice, and whether shifting the burden of
parking from private developments to the City is a sound long-term parking
strategy. The subject property size and configuration makes compliance with
parking requirements impractical and likely infeasible. Options available would be to
process a variance, have the applicant revise the project to reduce building area,
acquire off -site land to provide parking, or other alternatives.
City staff has been evaluating various parking strategies for the Village area, and
does not want to hold up projects while these future strategies are being
developed.
The City Council has approved the preparation of a Village Parking Study, in this
year's budget. A Request for Proposals (RFP) for this study will be on the August
2, 2005 City Council agenda. The study will evaluate parking utilization, demand,
programs and options. Additionally, the RDA has commenced construction of
parking improvements at the existing RDA -owned parking facility, at Avenida
Montezuma and Avenida Bermudas. These improvements should cause an increase
in use of this facility.
The Municipal Zoning Code allows for consideration of various options for
compliance with the parking requirements. One such option is to request a
reduction in parking, through execution of a parking agreement. This is the
recommended option, as the agreement sets forth a contractual obligation to
provide required parking, in part through assessment of a parking fee to pay for
future facilities that would provide a benefit to the Village as a whole.
The parking agreement would take the form of a Development Agreement (DA).
The agreement must be reviewed by the Planning Commission and approved by
City Council prior to issuance of any grading and/or building permit. The key points
of the agreement are:
Developer is to pay a deposit and enter into a Letter of Agreement for
preparation of the Development Agreement (DA).
Developer to pay into a City Parking Fund for each deficient space for the
project. A credit of 2 spaces for available on -street parking on Calle Estado is
allowable. The deficient number of spaces with this credit is 15.
• The required Parking Fund payment would be paid prior to issuing any
grading and/or building permit for the project.
• Developer must agree not to restrict parking on his property; project parking
areas shall be available for public use when on -site businesses are closed. In
addition, employees associated with these businesses shall be encouraged to
park in the RDA -owned parking lot at Avenida Montezuma and Avenida
Bermudas.
These are the key points forming the basis of the agreement. The actual DA will
include the details of the agreement; as previously noted, the DA will require
Planning Commission review and City Council approval.
The parking area complies with all development standards for commercial parking,
with the exception of the entry driveway. The code requires such driveways to be
a 20 foot depth into the site, from the edge of the adjoining street curb. This entry
driveway only provides 11 feet. The general development standards for the Village
district allow for variations to any parking standard to be approved for Village
district uses. Compliance with this standard would result in the loss of one parking
space, for a project that is already severely under parked. Based on the minimal
traffic volume and conflict anticipated, staff recommends that the varying standard
allowance under the code be employed for this requirement, and that the entry be
designed as proposed. This has been reflected in the conditions, as they pertain to
parking lot design.
An additional point relating to parking requirements is recommended for inclusion
as an approval condition, to restrict the office uses to general office and limit the
retail spaces to preclude restaurant and food service uses. This project has elevator
facilities which may imply leasing some office space as medical, which mandates a
more restrictive parking standard. This is also the case for restaurants and retail
food with ancillary seating.
The building elevations along Calle Estado and Desert Club Drive incorporate
exposed rafter tail treatments which extend from 0.5 up to 2.5 feet into the rights -
of -way along these streets. The lowest point of these extensions is along the
building corner, where they are about 9.5 feet above grade. Public Works has
indicated that these extensions can be accommodated by an encroachment
allowance during plan check. Building and Safety was also consulted, but could not
be definitive in how the UBC would treat these. Staff has discussed this with the
architect, who has indicated that these extensions can be pulled back to flush with
the property line, if required during the plan check process. At this time, staff
would recommend that this feature be retained, but include a condition stating that
no signing is permitted to be placed on these features.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Based on the provisions of the General Plan, Zoning Code, and the Village at La
Quinta3 Design Guidelines, findings necessary to approve this proposal can be made
as noised in the attached draft Resolution to be adopted for this case.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-_, confirming the
environmental determination of the Community Development Director, and
granting approval of Village Use Permit 2005-027, subject to conditions as
recommended by staff.
Prepared by:
Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Project site plan
3. Building elevations
4. ALRC minutes of May 4, 2005 (2 pgs.)
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2005-027, FOR DEVELOPMENT
OF A ± 10,709 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL
RETAIL/OFFICE BUILDING, INCLUSIVE OF A PARKING
MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2005-027
CALLE ESTADO, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 26`" day of July, 2005, consider Village Use Permit 2005-027
for a ± 10,709 square -foot commercial retail/office building, inclusive of a Parking
Management Agreement, located at the southwest corner of Calle Estado and
Desert Club Drive, more particularly described as:
LOTS 10, 11 & 12, BLOCK 9 OF DESERT CLUB
TRACT UNIT #1
WHEREAS, said Village Use Permit application has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development
Department has determined that the proposed Village Use Permit is exempt from
CEQA review under Guidelines Section 15332 (Infill Development); and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval
of said Village Use Permit:
1. The proposed Village Use Permit 2005-027 is consistent with the La Quinta
General Plan, as it will not be developed in any manner inconsistent with the
General Plan land use designation of Village Commercial and other current
City standards when considering the conditions to be imposed.
2. The proposed Village Use Permit 2005-027 is consistent with the
requirements and /or intent of the La Quinta Zoning Code, as the project
contemplates land uses that are substantially equivalent to those permitted
under existing zoning of permitted uses, and which were previously
addressed in the EIR certified for the General Plan. Specifically, development
of existing Village Commercial land is considered to implement zoning
consistency with the General Plan. Parking as provided, and secured through
peresovup027
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Village Use Permit 2005-027
July 26, 2005 -
the associated Parking Management Agreement for this project, is consistent
with parking reduction allowances authorized in Section 9.150.050.D of the
Municipal Zoning Code.
3. The proposed Village Use Permit 2005-027 complies with the requirements
of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" as amended (City Council Resolution 83-63), as it has been
determined that said Village Use Permit is exempt from CEQA review under
Guidelines Section 15332 (Infill Development), and that a Notice of
Exemption will be filed.
4. Approval of the proposed Village Use Permit 2005-027 will not create
conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general
welfare, nor injurious to or incompatible with, other properties or land uses in
the vicinity. All immediately surrounding property is zoned for Village
Commercial Development, and existing properties to the north, west and
south are developed as commercial retail/office, commercial retail and
residential, respectively. Development of office and retail uses proximate to
residential uses in the area will not significantly impact quality of life for area
residents.
5. The architectural design aspects of the proposed Village Use Permit 2005-
027, including but not limited to, architectural style, scale, building mass,
materials, colors, architectural detailing, roof style and other elements, are
compatible with surrounding development and quality of design illustrated in
the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines, and with the overall design
quality prevalent in the City, with the recommended conditions of approval.
6. The site design aspects of the proposed Village Use Permit 2005-027,
including but not limited to, project entries, parking provisions, interior
circulation, pedestrian access and amenities, screening and other elements,
are compatible with surrounding development and quality of design
illustrated in the Village at La Quinta Design Guidelines, and with the overall
design quality prevalent in the City.
7. The project landscaping for the proposed Village Use Permit 2005-027,
including but not limited to, location, size, type and coverage of plant
materials, has been reviewed to insure it is designed to provide visual relief,
complement the building, unify and enhance visual continuity of the site with
surrounding development, and is consistent with the concepts in the Village
at La Quinta Design Guidelines.
PAReports - PC\2005V-26-05\VUP 027\peresovup027.rtt
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Village Use Permit 2005-027
July 26, 2005 -
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 constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby approve Village Use Permit 2005-027 for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City
of La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this the 261" day of July, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
Il'I *91
NOES:
ABSENT:
/i\Rff1LA
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\VUP 027\peresovup027.rtf
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005- EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2005-027
CALLE ESTADO, LLC
JULY 26, 2005
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Village Use Permit 2005-027 (VUP 2005-027) shall be developed in
compliance with these conditions and all approved site plan, elevation, color,
materials and other approved exhibits submitted for this application, and any
subsequent amendment(s). In the event of any conflicts, these conditions
shall take precedence. In the event the Development Agreement referenced in
Condition #43 is not entered into, this Village Use Permit approval is null and
void.
2. This approval shall expire two years after its effective date, as determined
pursuant to Section 9.200.060.0 of the Zoning Code, unless extended
pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.200.080.
3. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action
or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this
development application or any application thereunder. The City shall have
sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the developer of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
4. Prior to the issuance of any permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the
necessary permits and/or clearances from the following agencies:
• Riverside County Fire Marshal
• La Quinta Building and Safety Department
• La Quinta Public Works Department (Grading/
Improvement/Encroachment Permits)
• La Quinta Community Development Department
• Riverside County Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Southern California Gas Company
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• Waste Management of the Desert
CADocunents and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\0LK7\coapcvup027.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances
from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement
plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City
approval of the plans.
5. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater
Management and Discharge Controls) and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean
Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water
Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ.
6. Handicap access and facilities shall be provided in accordance with Federal
ADA), State and local requirements. Handicap accessible parking shall
generally conform to the approved exhibits for VUP 2005-027.
7. All parking area civil plans and improvements shall be developed in
accordance with the standards set forth in applicable portions of Section
9.150.080 of the Zoning Code, and these conditions, which shall take
precedence in the event of any conflicts with said Section.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
8. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer
easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper
functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include
irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for
emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of
essential improvements.
9. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the
placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins,
mailbox clusters, and common areas shown on the Village Use Permit.
10. Direct vehicular access from any portion of the site with frontage along
Desert Club Drive and Calle Estado is restricted, except for those access
points identified on the approved site plan, or as otherwise conditioned in
these conditions of approval.
11. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as
appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading,
C:\Documents and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\coapcvup027.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are
to occur.
12. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted, or recorded, over
any portion of the subject property, between the date of approval of this
Village Use Permit and the date of final acceptance of the on -site and off -
site improvements for this Village Use Permit, unless such easements are
approved by the City Engineer.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such
as "engineer", "surveyor", and "architect" refer to persons currently
certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of
California.
13. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with
the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC.
14. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for
review and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item
specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale
specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans
may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is
desired.
Note: the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans
not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and
utility purveyors.
A.
On -Site Rough Grading Plans
1 "
= 30'
Horizontal
B.
PM10 Plan
1"
= 40'
Horizontal
C.
SWPPP
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently.
D. On -Site Precise Grading Plans (Commercial Development)
1 " = 30' Horizontal
C:\Documents and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LK7\coapcvup027.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not
listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer
prior to commencing plan preparation.
On -Site Precise Grading Plans shall normally include all on -site surface
improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for
curbs & gutters, sidewalks, building floor elevations, parking lot
improvements and ADA requirements for the parking lot and access to the
building; and showing the existing street improvements out to at least the
center lines of adjacent existing streets_including ADA accessibility route to
surrounding buildings, parking facilities and public streets.
15. The City maintains standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction on the Public Works Online Engineering Library at
http://www.la-
quinta.org/publicworks/tractl/z onlinelibrary/0 intropage.htm
16. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all
approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City
Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they
may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program.
At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the
improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in
order to reflect the as -built conditions.
Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD
format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the
City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans
GRADING
17. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other
purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City
Engineer.
18. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain
approval of all of the following:
CADocLments and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LK7\c0apcvup027.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
A. A precise grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect,
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified
engineer,
C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter
6.16 (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC.
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the
Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils
engineer, or by an engineering geologist.
The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in
an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive
Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading
permit.
19. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land to prevent
wind and water erosion of soils. All such land shall be planted with interim
landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures as approved
by the Public Works Departments under the Fugitive Dust Control Plan.
20. Prior to issuance of the main building permit, the applicant shall provide a
lot pad certification, stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyor.
DRAINAGE
21. Nuisance water shall be retained onsite and disposed of in a manner
acceptable to the City Engineer.
UTILITIES
22. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location
of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility
structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical
vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement
for practical and aesthetic purposes.
23. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For
installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall
comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the
C:\Documents and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\coapcvupO27.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility
trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
24. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060
(Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100
(Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public
streets.
25. No additional street improvements are required, except for:
A. Desert Club Drive
1) Reconstruct the curb ramp at the Desert Club Drive/Alley "D"
intersection as required by the City Engineer.
B. Alley "D"
1) Reconstruct the north edge of Alley "D" along the Village Use
Permit site's south boundary as required by the City Engineer to
facilitate proposed curb construction.
PARKING LOTS AND ACCESS POINTS
26. The applicant shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150, particularly drive isle
width, parking stall dimensions, and parking stall marking design
requirements. Parking space markings shall be double four inch wide hairpin
stripes as specified in LQMC Chapter 9.150.
27. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design
procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and
anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum
structural sections shall be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate
materials):
Parking Areas Concrete as proposed by the applicant.
Alley "D" 3.0" a.c./4.0" c.a.b.
28. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the
time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement
CADocuments and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\coapcvup027.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in
the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal
;shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction)
aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be
achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction
operations until mix designs are approved.
29. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
proposed access driveway on Calle Desert Club Drive. All turn movements are
permitted. A colored concrete shall be used for the access drive ramp, with a
paver system used to define the continuation of the existing pedestrian
sidewalk along Desert Club Drive. The entry driveway throat shall be
permitted to be constructed as designed, at 11 feet in depth rather than the
required 20 feet, as permitted under Section 9.65.030.A.3.a., in order to
retain the parking space count of 25 on -site spaces.
30. A five-foot wide landscape planter strip shall be provided at the two west
property line parking stalls, with a minimum 4-foot high wall along the
property line in front of these two stalls. This shall be shown on the civil and
landscape plans as submitted for plan check.
LANDSCAPING
31. On -site landscape, landscape lighting and irrigation plans shall be submitted
for approval by the Community Development Department. Plans shall be in
substantial conformance with the conceptual landscaping as approved for the
project by Planning Commission. When plan checking is complete, the
applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County
Agricultural Commissioner prior to submitting for final acceptance by the
Community Development Department.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
32. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which
meet the approval of the City Engineer.
33. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified engineers, surveyors, or other
appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which
to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate
construction supervision.
CADocuments and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LK7\coapcvup027.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
34. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurement,
sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection
program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and
methods employed comply with plans, specifications and other applicable
regulations.
35. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved
by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built"
or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or
surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The
applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to
the City revised to reflect the as -built conditions.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
36. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and
construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the
applicant makes application for plan checking and permits.
37. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the
City's adopted Art in Public Places program in effect at the time of issuance
of building permits.
38. Permit(s) issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time said permit(s) are
issued.
FIRE PROTECTION
39. Specific fire protection requirements will be determined when final building
plans are submitted for review. Final conditions will be addressed when
building plans are submitted. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire
Department at the time building plans are submitted.
MISCELLANEOUS
40. The applicant shall submit a detailed project area lighting plan. All pole -
mounted light standards shall conform to lighting standards as in effect when
plans are reviewed. Under canopy lighting for building areas shall incorporate
flush lens caps or similar recessed ceiling lighting.
C:\Documents and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK7\coapcvupO27.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
The lighting plan shall be submitted for review at the time construction plan
check for the permanent building permit is made to Building and Safety.
41. A comprehensive sign program shall be submitted for review and approval by
the Planning Commission prior to establishment of any individual tenant signs
for the project. Provisions of the sign program shall be in compliance with
applicable sections of Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Code. No signs shall be
permitted to be placed on any portion of the roof projections along Calle
Estado and/or Desert Club Drive.
42. All roof -mounted mechanical equipment must be internal to the roof design,
or screened as an integral part of the roof structure, in a manner so as not to
be visible from surrounding properties and streets. Working drawings showing
all such equipment and locations shall be submitted to the Building and Safety
Department along with the construction plan submittal for building permits.
'The method and design must be approved by the Community Development
Department, prior to any issuance of the main structural building permit.
43. The building plans submitted for plan check shall incorporate the following
revisions:
A. Appropriately sized planting pots, and/or other similar containers, shall
be placed at appropriate intervals at street level, to make up for the
lack of planter areas around the building. Automatic irrigation shall be
provided to all such containers.
B. Add architectural detailing to the west building elevation, to relieve the
blank wall appearance. Detailing shall employ use of elements such as
extended use of the painted faux -tile treatment, some architectural
recesses, and the potential for integration of a wall mural as part of
the elevation.
C. Roof tile shall incorporate a random mudded clay appearance.
D. Second -story planter areas and/or containers shall incorporate a down
drain system to avoid discoloration damage to the building finish.
E. Exposed rafter tail areas on the first and second floor ceiling lines may
be reduced in depth if deemed necessary due to encroachment into
the existing rights -of -way for Calle Estado and Desert Club Drive.
Design changes necessitated by such reduction shall be reviewed and
C:\Documents and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\OLK7\coapcvupO27.rtf
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Jse Permit 2003-027
July 26, 2005
approved by the Community Development Department.
44. It is understood by the Applicant that Calle Estado, LLC, has entered into a
Letter of Agreement with the City, dated 7/19/05, relating to preparation and
possible approval of a Development Agreement for the purpose of clarifying
the applicant's parking obligations associated with development of Village
Use Permit 2005-027.This Village Use Permit shall not be effective unless
and until the Development Agreement has been approved by the City Council
and recorded; the applicant further understands that the City Council may
choose to reject entering the Development Agreement or modify its contents.
While this approval will not be effective until such time as a Development
Agreement may become effective, the time limits associated with approval of
VUP 2005-027 shall be in effect with respect to expiration, as stated under
Condition #2.
45. 'The permitted office and retail uses shall be limited to those of a general
Intensity, consistent with the parking ratios of 1 space per 250 s.f. of office
and 1 space per 200 s.f. of retail to general office and limit the retail spaces
to preclude restaurant and food service uses. This precludes use of office
space as a medical use, and retail space for restaurant use and retail food
with ancillary seating, unless shared parking or tenant space reductions are
determined to maintain the approved parking ratios for this building, or the
Development Agreement is amended to allow payment of per -space fees to
increase use intensity for the project.
C:\Documents and Settings\bsawyer\Local Settings\Temporary Internet F0es\OLK7\coapcvup027.rtf
Fsba
it
g
0 O w � 0
w,w
�3wO ■
�{
C
O w
w O 6
o
tion: Riverside, CA Assessor Map 770.15 Page: 1 of 2)
to rose radius Comment:
ATTACHMENT 1
1 _
a
g
i
0
P
1
O
_ _
S
v
I
0
Yr� �
�aS3g
J
i
ATTACHMENT 4
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
F. to Develo me Permit 2005-832; A request of William K Trust
for nsideration of architectural and landscaping plans a 4,600
square got one story office building in the La/unProfessional
Plaza loc d on Parcel 12 of Parcel Map 2988east side of
Washington eat 300 feet south of Avenue 47.
1. Associate\staff
ce Nesbit pry nted the information
contained iort, a copwhich is on file in the
CommunityDepartm t.Staff introduced D. Bill
Kelly, the AIC , the architect who gave a
presentatiot.
2. Committee Member Chris ^ stated he would prefer the light
aqua accent color prop ed. L. Cook stated he would prefer
the color proposed. a would\behe
a little deeper
green or bronze.
3. There being no rther questions t, it was moved
and seconde by Committee Mpher/Thoms to
adopt Min Motion 2005-019 pproval of Site
Develop nt Permit 2005-832, e by staff and
amend
a. 04 Coordinate the landscaping between this projectNid the
project to the south.
Change the accent color on the window frames to eiihor
a bronze or deeper green.
Unanimously approved.
G. Village Use Permit 2005-027; a request of Calle Estado, LLC for
consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a 10,896
gross s.f. two story retail/office building in the Village at La Quinta
located on the southwest corner of Calle Estado.
1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information
contained in the staff report. Staff introduced Steve Nieto,
designer of the building.
2. Committee Member Christopher asked if any greenery was
proposed along the streetscape. Staff stated there are only two
tree wells.
G:\WPD0CSVLLRC15-4-05 ALRCAOC 8
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
3. Committee Member Thoms suggested pots or something of that
nature be added. The east elevation is very blank as well.
Staff suggested something in the nature of murals until a
building is built next to it. Committee Member Thoms stated it
currently is a parking lot. Staff stated it is an illegal use.
Committee Member Thoms stated this is the elevation you see
as you come down the street. The applicant stated they would
be willing to add a mural. Mr. Nieto stated they are at the
property line and will not be able to add any projections, but
they would be willing to add tiles or color to that end of the
building. Their landscaping is minimal as the site is restrictive
on area. They would like to add a canopy tree.
4. Committee Member Thoms suggested the Tiduana Tipu.
5. Committee Member Christopher asked what plants would be in
the planters. Mr. Nieto stated it was yet to be determined.
Also, the detail is a faux finish, not a tile. Committee Member
Christopher asked if they could do a sporadic use of the
mudding on the roof tile.
6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Thoms to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-020 recommending approval of
Village Use Permit 2005-027, as recommended and as follows:
a. A design shall be added to the west facing wall with
architectural detailing/mural.
b. Trees shall be added on the south property line
C. Sporadic large planting pots shall be added at the street
level.
Unanimously approved.
VI. N%,CXRRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
VII. COMMITTt'64AEMBER ITEMS:
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
further business, it was m7h
Babbitt/Thoms to adjourn this regular
and seconded by Committee
etiaq 9f the Architectural and
GAWPD0CS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 9
PH #C
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JULY 26, 2005
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-814, AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: ENTIN FAMILY TRUST
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF REVISED ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF A ±23,760 SQUARE FOOT, TWO-STORY
OFFICE BUILDING
LOCATION: EAST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET, ±960 FEET NORTH OF
FRED WARING DRIVE (ATTACHMENT 1)
ARCHITECT: WARE MALCOMB ARCHITECTS
GENERAL PLAN: CC - (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL)
ZONING: CC - (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2003-525, FOR
SDP 2004-814. THE PROJECT WAS APPROVED AND THE EA
CERTIFIED ON NOVEMBER 9, 2004. BASED ON THIS
ASSESSMENT, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
HAS DETERMINED THAT NONE OF THE CIRCUMSTANCES SET
FORTH IN PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE 21166 HAVE BEEN
SHOWN TO EXIST AND, ACCORDINGLY, NO FURTHER
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS WARRANTED.
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: CC (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL)
ZONING: CC (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES: NORTH - DSUSD SCHOOL SITE, ZONED OFFICE
SOUTH - VACANT ZONED VC
EAST - DSUSD SCHOOL SITE, ZONED OFFICE
WEST - RESIDENTIAL CONDOS (DESERT BREEZES)
CITY OF PALM DESERT
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\SDP 814 Al\perptsdp814al.doc
SITE BACKGROUND:
The project as approved involves two parcels, comprising 1.82 acres, to be
developed with a two-story general office building consisting of 23,760 square feet
(Attachment 2). The site is zoned Community Commercial, and does allow the
proposed use. It is currently vacant but was previously developed as a medical
office use. The original structures were removed several years ago, with only the
asphalt parking area remaining. The remainder of the site is vacant desert land,
with undulating terrain and minimal vegetation.
PROJECT BACKGROUND:
The applicant is requesting a revised Site Development Permit approval, in order to
allow an increase in the building height necessary to accommodate HVAC
equipment (Attachment 3). According to the applicant, this will necessitate
increases to areas above the second floor line that vary between six and seven
feet, depending on the building element. The majority of the building is less than
40 feet in height; however, the highest point, at the main tower element of the
north elevation, is at 45 feet, 6 inches. While this exceeds the height limit of 40
feet in the Community Commercial zoning district, it is permitted for architectural
projections to extend above the required height limit, within certain parameters, as
part of a Site Development Permit review. This redesign is consistent with the
parameters of the Zoning Code relative to the excess height proposed.
The proposed revisions do not affect any provisions of the site plan, building area,
landscaping or footprint location as currently approved. The proposed amendment
pertains solely to the building height and its effect on the architecture. Exhibits in
the packet show the current approved elevations and the proposed revisions.
The change in height necessitates some architectural revision to the areas at and
above the second floor ceiling line. These changes are relatively minor
architecturally and do not detract from the original building design. The most
significant changes are with the upper floor window treatments, where they have
been squeezed together, and recessed panels have been added above them to fill in
the added facade areas. The east elevation has added arched recesses above the
two central upper facade windows. Staff has included reduced copies of the
complete amendment exhibits, but has provided approved and proposed large-scale
exhibits of landscape and elevation plans for Planning Commission review.
While the elevations are considered consistent with the previous approval, staff
would point out that this is a revised Site Development Permit (SDP), and any
additional issues or concerns on any aspect of the project can be addressed at this
time.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\SDP 814 A1\perptsdp814a1.doc
Staff has included the current landscape plan approval with the plan check version,
which is included as part of the package for the SDP amendment. The landscape
plan has several modifications from the approved plan, but these changes are
common relative to the progression from conceptual planning approval through to
final landscape construction plan preparation. However, because this is an
amendment to the SDP, this latest landscape plan is presented for review.
The original material and color board, along with a full-size color illustration of the
architecture revision, will be provided at the meeting.
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) Action - On May 4, 2005,
the ALRC reviewed the project landscaping and building architecture (Attachment
#4, ALRC minutes). The ALRC did recommend that the following measures be
included with approval of the project:
1. Incorporate a requirement for a tri-color tile roof.
2. Extend landscaping along the Washington Street frontage to provide a low
screening of the parking area from views.
3. Ensure that appropriate screening for parking and other site areas is provided.
The ALRC also looked at this building relative to solar protection on the east, south
and west building faces. Based on the applicant's testimony (Attachment 4), it
was determined that the building as designed will allow for adequate solar
protection. Staff has added conditions where appropriate to address the ALRC
concerns with the amendment, while maintaining any unchanged original
conditions.
On a 3-0 vote, the ALRC adopted Minute Motion 2005-025, recommending
approval of the proposed project subject to the above provisions.
Public Notice
This ease was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 15, 2005. All
property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice as required. No comments have been received. Any correspondence
received before the meeting will be transmitted to the Planning Commission.
Public Agency Review
Staff transmitted the applicant's request to all responsible and concerned public
agencies. All comments received are on file at the Community Development
Department, and have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval,
as appropriate.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\SDP 814 Al\perptsdp814a1.doc
ANALYSIS:
Reciprocal Access - Staff had considered a requirement for reciprocal access to the
south property as part of this amendment. The applicant was consulted on this
issue and was not favorable to the inclusion of this requirement, providing several
statements to support his position (Attachment 5). Based on the information
presented, and current property configurations, staff is not recommending such a
requirement be placed on this amendment request.
Office Use - In the applicant's letter referred to above, there is a statement that
there are medical office leases contemplated for this project. Based on the current
conditions of approval, the building is limited to general office use only, as it
provides parking at the general office ratio. Although the letter states that 80
spaces are required, the Zoning Code requires 95 spaces for the 23,760 s.f. of
floor area, with 99 provided, as general office. This building would require 135
spaces at the medical office ratio. As the applicant has not proposed a reduction in
building floor area or provided additional parking, the current condition will be
retained.
Building Height - The revised building design will necessitate increases to areas
above the second floor line that vary between six and seven feet, depending on the
building element. The highest point, at the main tower element of the north
elevation, is at 45 feet, 6 inches while the remaining building areas are within the
height limit of 40 feet in the Community Commercial zoning district. Under Section
9.90.020.B. of the Zoning Code, it is permitted for architectural projections to
extend up to 15 feet above the required height limit, as part of a Site Development
Permil review. In order to qualify, the aggregate footprint of the projection may not
exceed 10% of the building's ground floor area. In this case, the footprint of the
tower feature occupies about 4.4% of the ground floor area, and is acceptable
under the code stipulation.
CONCLUSIONS:
Based on the staff review of this amended Site Development Permit, the following
conditions were deemed applicable:
1. A condition pertaining to the landscaping -related concerns of the ALRC for
screening of the parking area and views into it from Washington Street.
2. Condition 75 of the original SDP approval was deleted as it is repetitive of a
requirement under another existing condition.
3. Added a condition to include the ALRC requirement for a tri-color blend for
the roof tile.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\SDP 814 A1\perptsdp814a1.doc
MANDATORY FINDINGS:
As required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning Code,
and based on the provisions of the General Plan and Zoning Code, findings
necessary to approve this proposal can be made as noted in the attached draft
Resolution to be adopted for this case.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- _, approving Site Development
Permit 2004-814, Amendment #1, subject to findings and conditions.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Approved Site Plan
3. Applicant amendment request letter, dated 7/1 /05
4. ALRC Minutes of July 6, 2005 (2 pgs.)
5. Applicant amendment request letter, dated 7/1/05
6. Large Exhibits (Planning Commission only)
Prepared by:
Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\SDP 814 A1\perptsdp814a1.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN
AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A
±23,760 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL OFFICE
BUILDING, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-814, AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: ENTIN FAMILY TRUST
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 26`" day of July, 2005, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider a request to approve Site Development Permit 2004-814, Amendment #1,
an Amendment to development plans for a ±23,760 square -foot commercial office
building on a 1.82 acre site, located on the east side of Washington Street, ±960
feet north of Fred Waring Drive, more particularly described as:
BEING A PORTION OF PARCELS 25 & 26 OF RS 015/032
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, on the
61h day of July, 2004, at a regular meeting, recommended approval of the Site
Development Permit Amendment by adoption of Minute Motion 2005-025 on a 3-0
vote; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 91" day of November, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing
to consider a request to approve Site Development Permit 2004-814, and did
approve said Permit by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 2004-084;
and,
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit Amendment has complied
with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the Community
Development Department completed Environmental Assessment 2004-525, which
was certified by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 2004-083. Based on
the proposed Amendment, none of the circumstances set forth in Public Resources
Code 21166 have been shown to exist and, accordingly, no further environmental
review is warranted; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit Amendment pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the
Zoning Code:
P:\Reports . PC\2005\7-26-05\SDP 814 Al \resopcsdp814a1.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2004-814, Amendment #1
Entin Family Trust
July 26, 2005
1. Consistency with General Plan. The proposed Site Development Permit
Amendment does not significantly change the original approval beyond
architectural changes. The proposed 23,760 sq. ft. office building is in a
Community Commercial designated area that encourages retail and office
uses in close proximity to arterial thoroughfares and residential
neighborhoods. This office use, as designed, complies with the overall
development concepts of the City's General Plan Land Use guidelines.
2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The proposed Site Development Permit
Amendment is consistent with the development standards of the Community
Commercial Zoning District with regard to setbacks, building height, and
parking requirements based on the proposed Conditions of Approval. The
building incorporates a main entry tower element which extends to 45 feet,
6 inches, exceeding the 40 foot maximum height allowed under the
Community Commercial Zoning District. This height of this tower element is
in compliance with Section 9.90.020.13, as the footprint of the tower feature
occupies about 4.4% of the ground floor area, where a maximum of 10% is
allowed under the said Section.
3. Architectural Design. The proposed amended architectural design of the two-
story building incorporates design elements consistent with the prior approval
under Site Development Permit 2004-814, and with past approvals for
similar types of commercial structures and uses.
4. Site Design. As conditioned, the proposed Site Development Permit
Amendment will not be contrary to the existing design policies or standards
established by the city of La Quinta. Under Section 9.90.020.E of the Zoning
Code, it is permitted for architectural projections to extend up to 15 feet
above the required height limit, as part of a Site Development Permit review
5. Landscape Design. The project landscaping designed for the proposed Site
Development Permit will provide an exemplary basis from which to extend a
visual continuity of the proposed project into future surrounding
developments. Additional landscaping and screening included in the approval
conditions for the proposed Site Development Permit Amendment will further
enhance the project.
6. Infrastructure. There are adequate existing provisions for water, sanitation,
and public utilities to ensure that the proposed building will not be
detrimental to public health and safety.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7.26-05\SDP 814 Al \resopcsdp814a1 .doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2004-814, Amendment #1
Entin Family Trust
July 26, 2005
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 constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That the Conditions of Approval for Site Development Permit 2004-814, as
adopted by Planning Commission Resolution 2004-084, are hereby
incorporated by reference and shall remain applicable in conjunction with the
Conditions for Site Development Permit 2004-814, Amendment#1, as
contained herein.
3. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2004-814,
Amendment #1, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the
Conditions attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 26' day of July, 2005, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES„
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-26-05\SDP 814 A1\resopcsdp814a1.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005- EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-814, AMENDMENT #1
ENTIN FAMILY TRUST
JULY 26, 2005
1. All conditions of approval pertaining to Site Development Permit 2004-814, as
approved by adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 2004-084 on
November 9, 2004, are hereby retained and incorporated under this
amendment approval, except as modified herein.
2. The applicant shall provide a wall and planting plan for the trash enclosure,
perimeter parking lot, and other areas as required under 9.100.050.0 and D,
L.QMC. The plan shall include provisions for screening of views into the
parking area from Washington Street and surrounding properties as applicable
under these code sections.
3. The roof tile material used shall employ a tri-color blend.
4. Condition #75 of Planning Commission Resolution 2004-084 shall be deleted.
PAReports - P0\2005\7-26-05\SDP 814 A1\coapcsdp814a1.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-084
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A ±23,760 SQUARE FOOT
COMMERCIAL OFFICE BUILDING, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-814
APPLICANT: ENTIN FAMILY TRUST
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 9" day of November, 2004, hold a duly noticed Public
Hearing to consider a request to approve Site Development Permit 2004-814,
development plans for a ±23,760 square -foot commercial/office building on a 1.82
acre site, located on the east side of Washington Street, ±960 feet north of Fred
Waring Drive, more particularly described as:
BEING A PORTION OF PARCELS 25 & 26 OF RS 015/032
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, did on
the 61" day of October, 2004 at a regular meeting, recommended approval of the
architectural plans by adoption of Minute Motion 2004-029 on a 3-0 vote; and,
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the Community Development
Department has prepared Environmental Assessment 2004-525, and has
determined that there are no significant impacts that cannot be mitigated that will
result from the approval and development of this project; therefore a Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been prepared, per the Guidelines for Implementation of
CEQA; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code:
1. Consistency with General Plan. The proposed 23,760 sq. ft. office building
is in a Community Commercial designated area that encourages retail and
office uses in close proximity to arterial thoroughfares and residential
neighborhoods. This office use, as designed, complies with the overall
development concepts of the City's General Plan Land Use guidelines.
P:\Reports - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\resopcsdp814.doc
0
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-084
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The proposed office building is consistent
with the development standards of the Community Commercial Zoning
District with regard to setbacks, building height, and parking requirements
based on the proposed Conditions of Approval.
3. Architectural Design. The proposed architectural design of the two-story
building incorporates design elements consistent with past approvals for
similar types of commercial structures and uses.
4. Site Design. As conditioned, the proposed project will not be contrary to the
existing design policies or standards established by the city of La Quinta.
5. Landscape Design. The project landscaping designed for the proposed Site
Development Permit will provide an exemplary basis from which to extend a
visual continuity of the proposed project into future surrounding
developments.
7. Infrastructure. There are adequate existing provisions for water, sanitation,
and public utilities to ensure that the proposed building will not be
detrimental to public health and safety.
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 constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case;
2. 'That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2004-814 for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions attached
hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 91" day of November, 2004, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Daniels, Krieger, Ladner, and Vice Chairman Quill
NOES: None
P:\Reports - PC�11.9-2004\SDP 814\resopcsdp814.doc
V1
Planning Commission Resolution 2004-084
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN
Chairman Kirk
None
PAUL QUILL,�Vice Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
OSCAR W. ORCI, Interim
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PAReports - PCIt 1-9-2004\SDP 814\resopcsdp814.d0C
L
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2004-084 EXHIBIT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - FINAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-814
ENTIN FAMILY TRUST
NOVEMBER 9, 2004
GENERAL
1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La
Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or
proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site
Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its
defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or
proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the
City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from
the following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Building and Safety Department
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD)
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• Sunline Transit Agency
• South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or
clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include
approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such
approvals when submitting those improvement plans for City approval.
3. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater
Management and Discharge Controls) and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean
Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water
Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ.
PAReports - PC\71-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 2
A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of
land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less
than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project
that encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall
be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan
("SWPPP").
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to
any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this project.
C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for
inspection at the project site at all times through and including
acceptance of all improvements by the City.
D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following
Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC):
1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2) Temporary Sediment Control.
3) Wind Erosion Control.
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
4. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be
approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading, pursuant
to this project.
A. The approved SWPPP and BMP's shall remain in effect for the entire
duration of project construction until all improvements are completed
and accepted by the City.
PARepoits - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 3
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer
easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper
functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include
irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for
emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of
essential improvements.
6. The applicant shall offer for dedication public street right-of-ways in
conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable
specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer.
7. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this
development include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
11 Washington Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) — The standard
60 feet from the centerline of Washington Street for a total
120-foot ultimate developed right of way except for an
additional variable right of way dedication at the proposed entry
measured seventy two feet (72') east of the centerline of
Washington Street and length to be determined by a traffic
study prepared for the applicant by a licensed traffic engineer
per Engineering Bulletin #i 03-08. As a minimum, the required
right of way shall be for a length of 100 feet plus a variable
dedication of an additional 50 feet to accommodate
improvements conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC
IMPROVEMENTS.
8. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right
and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the
approved construction plans.
9. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public
right-of-ways as follows:
PAReports -PC 01-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814final.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 4
A. Washington Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) - 20-foot from the R/W-
P/L as conditioned under this Site Development Permit especially 8A
above.
'The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not
limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned
:setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those
purposes.
10. 'The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the
placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins,
mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas.
11. Direct vehicular access to Washington Street is restricted, except for the
access point identified on the approved Site Development Permit, or as
otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval.
12. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as
appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading,
retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will
occur.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as
"engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refers to persons currently certified or
licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California.
13. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with
the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC.
14. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review
and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for
each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the
minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in
P:\Reports - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\c0apcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 5
writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan
clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other
improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by
other agencies and utility purveyors:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
On -Site Commercial Precise Grading Plan
PM10 Plan
SWPPP
Storm Drain Plans
Off -Site Street Plan
Vertical
Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan
1 " = 20' Horizontal
1 " = 40' Horizontal
1" = 40' Horizontal
1 " = 40' Horizontal
1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4'
1 " = 40' Horizontal
The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan
sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk,
mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and
landscape setback area.
Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not
listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior
to commencing plan preparation.
All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans shall show all existing improvements
for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance
sufficient to show any required design transitions.
"Precise Grading" plans shall normally include all on -site surface
improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs
& gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA
requirements, retaining and perimeter walls, etc. ADA accessibility to public
streets and handicap parking shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans at
a scale to be determined by the Public Works Department.
P:\Reports - PC\7 1.9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 6
15. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes
for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the
applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or
construction notes from the City.
16. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all
approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City
Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may
be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program.
At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the
improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in
order to reflect the as -built conditions.
Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD
format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the
City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
17. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development,
or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the
City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final
building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of
the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements
GRADING
18. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050
(Grading Improvements), LQMC.
19. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other
purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City
Engineer.
20. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain
approval of all of the following:
P:\Reports - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 7
A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect,
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified
engineer,
C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter
6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC, and
D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with
Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge
permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls), LQMC.
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the
Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils
engineer, or by an engineering geologist.
The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in
an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive
Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading
permit.
21. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and
water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or
provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community
Development and Public Works Departments.
22. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have
undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section
9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement.
The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback
area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape
lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The
maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed
4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the curb,
otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1.
All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and
one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb.
P;\Aepor's - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 8
23. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of
the site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the
elevations shown on the Preliminary Grading Plan submitted with this Site
Development Permit, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading
changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review.
24. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant
shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified
engineer or surveyor.
DRAINAGE
25. The applicant's proposed underground stormwater field shall comply with the
provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No.
97.03. The City Engineer shall approve the design of the proposed
underground stormwater field. More specifically, stormwater falling on site
during the 100-year storm shall be retained within the development, unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Additionally, the 100-year
stormwater shall be retained within the interior street right of way. The
tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public
streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour
event producing the greatest total run off.
26. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water
(through retention facilities approved by the City Engineer) from any on -site
or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority
as a requirement for development of this property.
27. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two
inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the
applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise.
28. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped
setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls
onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback
areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way
shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section
9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC.
PAReports - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814final.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 9
29. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood
boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
30. Stormwater from building roof drains shall not be directed to flow over
walkways or planter areas but be directed to parking lot or drainage facilities
via a drainage system.
UTILITIES
31. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location
of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility
structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults,
water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for
practical and aesthetic purposes.
32. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed
development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground.
33. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles
are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground.
34. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For
installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall
comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench
compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
35. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street
Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access
For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and
Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets
are proposed.
36. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform
with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses.
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
P:\Repon.s - PC\71-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004.814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 10
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial — 120' R/W):
No widening of the east side of the street along all frontage
adjacent to the Site Development Permit is required for its
ultimate width as specified in the General Plan and the
requirements of these conditions except at locations where
additional street width is needed to accommodate:
a) A deceleration/right turn only lane on Washington Street
at the entry drive. The east curb face shall be located
sixty (60') east of the centerline of Washington Street
and length to be determined by a traffic study prepared
for the applicant by a licensed traffic engineer per
Engineering Bulletin #/ 03-08. The required right of way
shall be for a length of 100 feet plus and additional
length required by the above mentioned traffic study and
a variable dedication of an additional 50 feet to
accommodate improvements conditioned.
Other required improvements in the right or way and/or adjacent
landscape setback area include:
b) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to:
curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs.
c) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering
sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that
utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the
curb line that either touches the back of curb or
approaches within five feet of the curb at intervals not to
exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should
vary between 50 and 300 feet, and at each point of
reverse curvature, the radius should change to assist in
creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall
meander into the landscape setback lot and approach
within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to
exceed 250 feet.
37. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design
R\Reports - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 11
procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil
strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic).
Minimum structural sections shall be as follows:
Parking Lots and accessways 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b.
Major Arterial 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
38. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at
the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement
concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in
the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal
shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction)
aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be
achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction
operations until mix designs are approved.
39. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
Primary Entry (Washington Street): Right turn movements in and out are
allowed. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited.
40. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs,
markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs
and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
41. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as
approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates
and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
PARKING LOT AND ACCESSWAYS
42. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150;
especially the parking stall and aisle widths and the parking stall striping
design.
P:\Repors - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 12
A. Wheel stops shall be provided where parking stall areas are double
stacked.
B. Parking stall striping shall be the City of La Quinta double -striped
hairpin design (Section 9.150.080.B.7).
C. All entry doorways shall be ADA accessible and shall be approved in
the precise grading plan process.
D. The location of carport support posts shall comply with Section
9.150.080(B5) of the Zoning Code. Light fixtures, meeting the
requirements of Section 9.100.150 (Outdoor Lighting) may be
mounted to the underside of the carport roofing for nighttime security
needs. Weather resistant materials shall be used to construct carport
structures (e.g., metal, glu-lams or para-lams, etc.).
43. All right -turn -out only driveways shall have a splitter median island located in
the driveway throat that adequately channels the exiting right -turn vehicles
turning onto the arterial street to eliminate illegal left turns. The splitter
island shall be designed in conformance with design concepts approved by
the City Engineer.
CONSTRUCTION
44. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the
buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -
maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control
devices, pavement markings and street name signs.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
45. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced no more than every 330 feet
and shall be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any
portion of the buildings as measured along outside travel ways.
46. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to
the side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations.
47. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 2500
P:\Reports - PC1,11.9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 13
GPM and the actual fire flow from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 1500
GPM for a 3-hour duration at 20-PSI residual operating pressure.
48. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or
larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be
submitted to the Fire Department.
49. Fire Department connections (FDC) shall be not less than 25 feet nor more
than 50 feet from a fire hydrant, and shall be located on the front street side
of the building. FDC's and PIV's may not be located at the rear of buildings.
Note also that FDC's must be at least 25 feet from the building and may not
be blocked by landscaping, parking stalls or anything that may restrict
immediate access.
50. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to
run concurrent with the City plan check.
51. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building
permit.
52. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
material being placed on an individual lot.
53. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of
the 1" floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. Minimum road width is
20 feet clear and unobstructed with a vertical clearance of 13.5 feet clear.
Turning radii shall be no less than 38 feet.
54. The applicant or developer shall prepare and submit to the Fire Department
for approval, a site plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane
painting and/or signs. Roads shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height
of 13"6" clear and unobstructed.
55. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial building and/or suite (Contact
the Fire Department for an application).
PAReports - PC\11-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814Lna1.d0c
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 14-
56. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code.
57. Any submissions to the Fire Department are the responsibility of the
applicant.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
58. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that
meet with the approval of the City Engineer.
59. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and
such other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise
with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide
adequate construction supervision.
60. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements,
sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection
program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the
construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans,
specifications and other applicable regulations.
61. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with
reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved
by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -
Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer
or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings.
The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously
submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions.
MAINTENANCE
62. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of
all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and
sidewalks. The applicant shall maintain required public improvements until
expressly released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency.
63. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance), LQMC.
P:\Reports - PC111.9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
11
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 15
PUBLIC SERVICES
64. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as may required by
SunLine Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer.
LANDSCAPING
65. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks)
& 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
66. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, common lots,
and park areas. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and
setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped
by a licensed landscape architect.
The applicant shall submit plans for approval by the Community
Development Department prior to plan checking by the Public Works
Department. Landscape and irrigation plans (three copies) shall be signed and
stamped by a licensed landscape architect, or professional landscape
designer, subject to the rules and regulations of Chapter 8.13 of the
Municipal Code. When plan checking is complete, the applicant shall obtain
the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner
prior to submitting for signature by the City Engineer. Plans are not approved
for construction until signed by the City Engineer.
67. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with
no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along
public streets. The Chilean Mesquite trees shall be replaced with a more
durable tree type.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
68. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees
and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by
the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee
P:\Reports - PC\71-9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
r
l
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 16
amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for
plan check and permits.
69. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at
the time of issuance of building permit(s).
70. The applicant/developer shall pay the required mitigation fees for the
Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard, as in effect at the time of issuance of
any grading or other land disturbance permit.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
71. The building area as approved under Site Development Permit 2004-814
shall be limited to general commercial office uses in order to maintain
adequate parking.
72. The location of trash enclosures and recycling plan shall be approved by
Waste Management of the Desert, subject to the provisions of Section
9.100.200 of the Zoning Code. The recycling plan shall include a description
of the anticipated materials and volumes to be recycled and a description of
the facilities to be provided for collecting general refuse and recyclable
materials. Written proof shall be provided to the Community Development
Department during plan check consideration.
73. A qualified archaeological monitor shall be on site during all excavation, earth
moving and grading activities on the site. The monitor shall be empowered to
stop or redirect activities should resources be identified. The archaeologist
shall also be required to submit to the Community Development Department,
for review and approval, a written report on all activities on the site within
130 days of completion of grading activities. Applicant shall submit a copy of
the executed monitoring contract prior to any final authorization for a grading
permit.
74. A master sign program (10 copies) shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for review and approval by the Planning
Commission pursuant to Section 9.160.09O(D) of the Zoning Code. The
sign program shall be submitted during, or before, review of the final
construction plans.
P:\Reports . PC\11.9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
0 r
Planning Commission 2004-084
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Site Development Permit 2004-814
Entin Family Trust
November 9, 2004
Page 17'
75. The final exterior lighting plan shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for approval, to include specific details of the
fixtures for all landscape, parking and exterior security lighting, including
photometric drawings pursuant to Section 9.150.080(K) of the Zoning Code.
Pole -mounted parking lot lighting, no higher than 18 feet, shall be adequately
shielded to prevent glare from being cast onto adjacent properties and placed
so that tree growth does not interfere with the lighting needs of the site.
76. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items shall be submitted
or shown on the appropriate plan:
A. The final exterior lighting plan shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for approval that includes specific details of
the fixtures for the landscape lighting and exterior security lighting,
including photometric drawings pursuant to Section 9.150.080(K) of the
Zoning Code. Pole -mounted parking lot lighting, no higher than 18 feet,
shall be adequately shielded to prevent glare from being cast onto
adjacent properties and placed so that tree growth does not interfere
with the lighting needs of the site.
B. Roof structure and/or parapets shall screen all roof mounted mechanical
equipment so that they cannot be viewed from adjacent properties. Prior
to occupancy of the proposed building complex, a visual inspection shall
be made by the Community Development Department from all sides of
the building from a distance of 800 feet to confirm that the parapets
conceal any roof mounted equipment.
P:\Reports - M11.9-2004\SDP 814\coapcsdp814fina1.doc
go US -REP, YAS.PRM f01 ASSC3IN PIg605Ei plT. MO tIA01tIR'
SSF C PLY IY[ Sr J IIQ OMA OL011. E5SOR'S
PAo
OF tamtr m tau tY -snlr aR e�uOiYc snE aoiwlYtBs.
• i t
t'
ATTACHMENT 1
's33NVN1o1IO.bNR9EAA8 rSo Nradfisivoo-
lou,kVW S1301JVd-NM0HSCVMkAF91IV6Aovmn0O1i/
A1111SVI'l ON'KINO S3sodiind 30N5213e1311 MOd a3sn
.f
05
28
O
Q1
6 M9T
' 1 1W.ma
M.
Mal
ilE 7l/`
1
1 , 1
ASSESSOR"s YAP BY601 P0.07
Rirersile'oawll. Coll I. �WJ
09S®7�
A
aTSIrf11YdFil
axi
®�
�D1S®mmmm_
POW .e 1M 1AR
RS.15/32 RE
PY 184/81-S
•0.....:.: .+..... u.v 'rvS.SS'iiz" ..,�`:'aV'via`.nNA'a.aLSLIJ. eus Y
ATTACHMENT 2
WASHINGTON STREET
91Ra , 0 0 ^ ` '" BOB BB BBB BBB BBBBBBBB
2 I] ^� : i �� r .fug it l ��I u'l ���� li 1
�pUfI:�il�;l�p1� fll"�I f;l1f (If f I;;
�iir6p��!;!;��jif sir Ill11ff his
Its;
��ilNi �, �f f�lflf �If3ij f
I i 9 ;fllips
=ii�l.
u OUINiA 13 INESB CENTRE
Emne rmusr 11;YARE MALCC--..,
Ore WMOWWraN III _
ua�nwauanM :r
01 200:5 10:57 AM FR WARE MALCOMB
949 863 1581 TO 17607771233 P.
cture
ng
WARE MALCOMB
Leading Design for Commercial Real Estate
i'
July 1, 2005
i
Mr. Wallace Nesbit
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
1
ATTACHMENT 3
RE: EXPLANATION LETTER REGARDING BUILDING HEIGHT AMENDMEN
Dear Wally,
This letter is for your use and coordination to help explain and justify our request fc
amendment to the approved building height for the above referenced project. As yot
660.9128 aware, the main roof line was approved at 30'-8" above the finish grade and the ce
863.1581 tower feature was approved at 38'-6" above finish grade. In developing our construe
documents and complying with code, we were unable to properly screening the
ion kemlan mounted mechanical units within the roof well with the approved roof height
ro mentioned. In order to properly screen the roof mounted mechanical units the follot
alifomia items were revised:
1. The main roof ridge line has been revised to a height of 36'-10" above finish fl
eomhrom This will properly screen the equipment with approximately 12" for any unknl
field adjustments, which may be required during constriction.
tiess
2. The center tower element at the front elevation has been revised to a height of
45'-6" above finish floor. This modification is required to maintain the architect
Intoo i ra esthetics and scale between the center tower and the main roof.
w 3. Exterior wall enhancements were made to all four exterior elevations to offset
additional wall area per the building height increase by adding an 2-foot tall x
deep recess bans above the windows and a 5-inch wide decorative pre -cast
ey below the roof eaves.
4. The arch at the entry window/ door system at the front of the building has t
revised by lowering the window arch to accommodate additional room for
stone veneer between the second floor windows.
F� E*0110=, I 1 CPC
101 CUU:J I U ; Z)( Hrl rK WHKt I'IHL I, V I'I LS Z:i4Z� 0tDJ 1Ot31 IV 1(blb(((1 LJJ I'.
5. Additionally, the pre -cast medallions at the exterior stair walls were revised
appropriate scale (smaller).
It is our understanding that the building location in regards to the proximity o
property lines and per the zoning codes, the roof height modification as mention
within compliance. If there is any :further information or documents required for appr
please feel free to contact me at your convenience.
Sincerely,
WARE MALCOMS
kpE�tµamuro•,axw�Y0�490:IYa,-09E�B�Sllnlll8fiillem0i We
** TOTAL PAGE.
ATTACHMENT
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
July 6, 2005
b. Actual metal sample of the finish piece of corrugated
metal be p ided to the Planning Commission.
Unanim ly approved.
C. Site Development Permit 2005-814, Amendment #1; a request of the
Entin Family Trust for consideration of a modification to architectural
plans for a 23,760 square foot two-story general office building for
the property located 43-576 Washington Street, approximately 950
feet north of Fred Waring Drive.
1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesibt presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department. Staff introduced Albert
Barcelo, the architect, who gave a presentation on the project.
2. Committee Member Thorns asked how the first floor related to
the curb on Washington Street. Staff stated there is a slight
elevation. Mr. Barcelo stated the finish floor is at 151 feet
above sea level and the sidewalk on Washington is 146. It is
not a dominant building sitting on Washington Street. It is
recessed back from the street.
3. Committee Member Christopher asked if the solar concerns
raised by staff were addressed. Mr. Barcelo explained the
changes. Committee Member Christopher stated the banding
on the windows gives a more institutional look. He suggested
an eyebrow arch over the center upper windows. Mr. Barcelo
stated they considered it when they realized the extra space.
They did break it up on the first floor and rear of the building.
By adding the extra arches they thought this may be too much.
They were looking to have a balanced look on the entire
building.
4. Committee Member Thoms asked about the landscape plan. He
noted the changes as being an improvement. Along
Washington Street there needs to be more screening of the
parking lot. It is almost all decomposed granite (DG) with one
and two gallon plants. There needs to be more screening. He
asked what happens along the north and south side. Staff
stated they would need to have a reciprocal access agreement.
The adjoining properties are commercially zoned.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\7 6-05 ALRC.doc 6
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
July 6, 2005
5. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Thoms to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-025 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2005-814, Amendment #1, as
recommended and as follows:
a. Tri-colored tile shall be used on the roof.
b. More plant material shall be added along Washington
Street to provide more screening for the parking lot.
C. Screening of property line walls shall be required.
Unanimously Approved.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None
Vill. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Bobbit Thoms to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and
Landscaping Revi w Committee to a meeting to be held on August 3, 2005. This
meeting was adjou ned at 11:47 p.m. on July 6, 2005.
Respectfully
BETTY J. SAWYER
Executive Secretary
G:\WPD0CS\ALRC\7-6-05 ALRC.doc 7
14 Zb05 4:47 PM FR WARE MALCOMB 949 863 1581 TO 17607771233 P
nning
trims /
i
WARE MALCOMB ATTACHMENT 5
� Leading Design for Commercial Reel Estate
July 14, 2005
Mr. Wallace Nesbit
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calls Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADDITIONAL SOLAR SHADE AND
RECIPROCAL ACCESS
Dear Wally,
This letter is in response to our conversation on July 1, 2005 regarding the informal t g660.9128 from the Community Development Department for recommendations to require Mr.
9.eea1581 to provide additional solar Protection to the exterior windows and to impose a Reci;
Access onto the Property to allow the adjacent property access across the property, sc
von kannan the adjacent property to the south side of Mr. Entin's property can eliminate any 6
;Do drive way entrances from Washington Street The following comments are for your re
caMomia and consideration.
Additional Solar Protection: The design and materials identified on our constru
wtceah.com drawings callout a 1/4' thick medium performance bronze reflective glazing whit
recessed back into the concrete panel openings approximately 6-inches. In addition
roof eaves at all four sides of the proposed building cantilever approximately 2-feet
eies inches providing additional shading from the sun. We believe that the addition of any t
e caatanie protection such as canopies or other shading components will adversely affect the c
architectural design as well as add additional design and construction costs that are
into required.
P
Reciprocal Access: After several discussions and careful consideration, we offer
following comments regarding the recommendation for the Community Devel
et Department not ops
to Pursue recommendations to the Planning Commission to impose
Reciprocal Access onto Mr. Entin's property.
1. The Reciprocal Access prohibits Mr. Entin to properly develop his property to the
extent and to his best interest.
naeaawx tsarwt¢zoo. � aiauua,etao;�mnm� torsi �razax
00 4-qf rn rK WHKt MHLt VUMB li4ki bb3 1561 TO 17607771233 P.03/04
2. Requiring the adjacent property owner to transverse across Mr. Entin's property brings
a tremendous amount of liability onto Mr. Entin, which provides no benefit as a
Property owner/developer.
3- The Reciprocal Access will require eliminating approximately 22 valuable parking
spaces to allow access to the adjacent property, which will require a wider driveway as
well as increase the width to the drive aisle for the additional traffic to transverse across
the property.
4. The traffic study previously prepared would have to be revised to accommodate a
longer deceleration lane for the additional traffic entering onto the property. Currently,
the approved Site plan requires So parking spaces with a surplus of 19 parking spaces.
One of the marketable amenities to Mr. Entin's development is that there is a surplus of
Parking spaces. Eliminating any surplus paces reduces the potential marketability of
the development. Currently there are medical professional's considering leasing space,
eliminated any parking will have an impact and will eliminate any leasing agreements
under consideration.
5. Additional costs incurred for redesigning and engineering the parking lot as well as
time lost for such modifications will negatively impact Mr. Entin's ability to proceed
with his Project.
6. With the increases of traffic vehicles and pedestrians transversing across the property,
securing the parking lot for the tenant's cannot be achieved successfully as it is
currently designed.
7. To our knowledge, there are no Proposed plans at this time to develop the adjacent
property. When the development for the adjacent property beings, there will be a large
mo
unt of construction equipment and traffic accessing the same entrance and
damage to the parking lot will
transvexsing across the same drive aisle. Debris, large construction equipment and
impose it tremendous amount of inconvenience and
costs for Mr. Entin and his tenants as well as the tenants' businesses. Not to mention
the additional costs to maintain the parking lot and the adjacent landscape areas as will.
8. In addition, both the Fire Department and Public Works Department may impose
additional comments and requirements, which may add additional costs and delays.
'�'w«cmnmeoo-aoa�x,�raemgq�o�a reeam�me
cnuo . is V rYt rK WHKC MHLCVMLJ `J4`J bb3 1561 TO 17607771200 P.04/i
The mentioned recommendation by the Community Development Department to impost
the Redprocal Access across the property negatively affects Mr. Entin's ability to deveool
his property with immense Iiabilities as well as costly implications. The Communit3
Development Department's efforts to help reduce additional driveway entrances frorr
Washington Street are recognized and appreciated. However, by imposing the Reciprocal
Access onto W. Entin's property, Mr. Entin will have to abandon the development entirely
at a great financial cost. We hope the Community Development Department can appreciate
Mr. Entin's comments and concerns and would not make the recommendations to the
Planning Commission and allow W. Entin the opportunity to develop his project for the
city of La Quinta and its community. If you have any comments or questions, feel free to
contact Mr. Entin or myself at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
WARE MALCOMB
f.., wit -.t ALI
a..- •
CC Doug Allan
Community Development
** TOTAL PAGE.04 **
Wise -Latta
Barrlind@aol.com
Tuesday, July 19, 2005 7:46 AM
Wanda Wise-=atta
IID problems and city planning
lorning. Having just completed my reading of this morning's Desert Sun feature article about the
ieing put on our power situation, I feel the need to give my input.
ensure that the Planning Commission, Council, and any other appropriate City agencies take the
situation as an extreme priority, as new developments are considered.
sally have two aged parents who, by "spit and glue" are still able to occupy their own home here
ita. Uprooting them for rolling blackouts or general power failures would be burdensome, to say t
he fact that our area now approaches Third World status in this department, your constituents
ssurances that new development will not take place until the proper infrastructure is in
ook
%ve. Montezuma