2005 10 25 PCy OF TKF'
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
OCTOBER 25, 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 2005-050
Beginning Minute Motion 2005-015
1. 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 October 11, 2005.
GdWPDOCS\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 ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-780, EXTENSION
NO. 1 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-781,
EXTENSION NO. 1
Applicant ......... Kleine Building and Development, Inc.
Location .......... 79-215 Corporate Centre Drive and 79-245 Corporate
Centre Drive; southeast corner of Corporate Centre Drive
and Commerce Court within the La Quinta Corporate
Centre Specific Plan
Request ........... Consideration of a one year extension of time for
construction of two office buildings
Action ............. Resolution 2005- and Resolution 2005
B. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-843
Applicant ......... East of Madison, LLC
Location .......... Northwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 54,
within the Madison Club
Request ........... Consideration of architectural plans and landscaping plans
for a maintenance complex
Action ............. Resolution 2005-
C. Item ................ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-537 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33085
Applicant ......... Core Homes, LLC
Location .......... Southwest corner of Madison Street and Beth Circle,
north of Avenue 52.
Request ........... Consideration of: (1) certification of a Mitigated Negative
Declaration of environmental impact; and (2) the
subdivision of 4.3 acres into seven single-family lots.
Action ............. Resolution 2005-, Resolution 2005-
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc
D. Item ................ SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT NO. 1 AND
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
Applicant ......... Regency Marinita-La Quinta, LLC
Location .......... The southwest corner of Jefferson Street and Fred
Warding Drive
Request ........... Consideration of amendments to the Specific Plan for a
neighborhood shopping center to include a supermarket,
drug store, and additional retail with a maximum building
height of 35 feet. The amendments are sought to change
the site plan to relocate the drug store site and amend
certain design standards, including reducing certain
landscape setbacks from 15 to 5 feet adjacent to
Monticello Park, and to subdivide the 10.6 acre site into 7
commercial parcels.
Action ............. Resolution 2005- and Resolution 2005-
VI. BUSINESS ITEM: None.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Review of City Council meeting of October 18, 2005.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular
Meeting to be held on November 8, 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, October 25, 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 1 1 1, on Friday,
October 21, 2005.
DATED: October 21, 2005
�
BET Y ",/' WYER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc
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
October 11, 2005 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Ladner to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Richard Daniels, Kay Ladner, Paul
Quill and Chairman Kirk.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Assistant
City Attorney Michael Houston, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer,
Planning Manager Les Johnson, Associate Engineer Paul Goble, Principal
Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, and Executive
Secretary Betty Sawyer
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
Ill. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
A. Community Development Director Doug Evans asked that the Agenda be
amended to add a consent item clarifying of the Planning Commission
minutes of July 26, 2005.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Community Development Director Doug Evans requested the Minutes of
July 26, 2005, be added to the Agenda for clarification.
B. Community Development Director Doug Evans asked for clarification of
the Minutes of July 26, 2005, regarding Condition No. 60. It was moved
and seconded by Commissioners Ladner/Quill to correct the Minutes of
July 26, 2006 to state that Condition No. 60. was to be deleted from the
Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan 97-027, Amendment No. 4, and
not Condition No. 38.A.2.a. Unanimously approved.
P:\BETM10-11-05.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
B. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
September 27, 2005. Commissioner Alderson asked that Page 4, Item
#1 be amended to note that he had a potential conflict due to the
location of the project in relation to a project his firm is developing.
There being no other changes to the minutes, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Ladner/Alderson to approve the minutes as
corrected.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Continued - Sign Application 2003-727, Amendment #1; a request of
Paragon Signs, Inc. for Dr. Matthew Werner for consideration of a
revised Sign Program for the Lake La Quinta Plaza, for the property
located at 47-250 and 47-350 Washington Street, the east side of
Washington Street, just north of Omri and Boni Restaurant.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if this Amendment was replacing the entire
sign program. Staff stated yes, and confirmed that the monument
sign was also being brought back to the Commission.
3. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Dr. Werner stated he had no questions.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, the public participation portion of the hearing
was closed and open for Commission discussion.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Ladner/Quill to adopt Minute Motion 2005-013,
approving Sign Application 2003-727, Amendment #1, as
recommended. Unanimously approved.
B. Site Development Permit 2005-842; a request of KB Home Coastal, Inc.
for consideration of architectural plans for six prototypical residential plan
types for use in Tract 31732 for the property located at the southeast
corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60.
PABETTY\ 10-11-05.doc 2
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which was on file in the
Community Development Department
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Quill asked staff to identify the location of each
unit's rear yard walls. Staff indicated the location on the site plan.
Community Development Director Doug Evans stated this exhibit
was just submitted and staff does have concerns with the location
of the walls on an alley.
3. Commissioner Alderson asked if the applicant was allowed to use
wood trim. Staff stated they were recommending a composite -
type wood material as wood does not hold up in the desert heat.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Ty Mangrum, representing the KB Homes, and
Cecil Hernandez, architect, gave a presentation on the project.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if they could explain the wall. Mr. Mangrum
stated the wall was being designed by the landscape architect and
will not go to the rear yard property line. It is a design element
that has not been finalized. Mr. Hernandez gave a presentation on
the architecture of the project.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Alderson stated the single story units do not appeal
to him, but the two story units are attractive. He questioned the
Tuscan design as appearing to be cut off on the right elevation.
He also would like to see some variation in the roof tiles. Mr.
Hernandez stated there will be a blend of colors used on the tiles.
In regard to the Tuscan plan, they would review the drawings and
see what could be done. Commissioner Alderson noted that on
the Italian 2217 Plan, the kitchen is in the rear of the house and a
person would have to walk all the way through the house to get to
the kitchen from the garage which to him is not a good design
feature.
P:\BETTY\10-1 1-05.doc 3
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
7. Commissioner Ladner stated she too asked if the roof overhang
could be extended out on the Tuscan Plan to give some relief. Mr.
Hernandez stated it is a gable end and explained how the stone
was used to replicate the mountains to add detail to the house
plan.
8. Chairman Kirk stated he too had a problem with the Tuscan plan.
He does believe the stone work mitigates a lot of his concerns.
On the Viento Plan he asked if there were any concerns with the
large windows on the second story looking into the neighbors'
yard. Mr. Mangrum stated the windows are staggered so not to
line up with the neighbors' windows. Chairman Kirk asked for
clarification as to whether or not the Commission would review
the landscaping and wall plans. Staff stated the Commission
would be reviewing them as a Business Item. Chairman Kirk asked
the width of the alley. Mr. Mangrum stated 20 feet and the
garage is to be set back six feet from the alley. Chairman Kirk
asked if there was any flexibility on the alleys to diminish the
amount of concrete and wall. Mr. Mangrum stated there will be
five feet of setback that will have plantings. Chairman Kirk asked
what material would be used for the tile roof. Mr. Mangrum
stated they would consider clay tile, but it would depend on costs.
They would be using smooth stucco on the side elevations.
There will be the snap -in mullions.
9. Chairman Kirk asked if anyone else would like to address the
Commissioner. There being none, Chairman Kirk closed the public
hearing.
10. Commissioner Ladner stated she had no major concerns that had
not been resolved.
11. Commissioner Quill agreed. In regard to the roof tile, he is
concerned what the costs and availability would be.
12. Commissioner Alderson stated he would still like to see some
design changes made to the Tuscan design.
13. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Ladner/Alderson to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-014 approving Site Development
Permit 2005-842, as amended.
P:\BETTY\ 10-1 1-05.doc 4
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
a. Condition added: The two story unit plans shall be mixed
so that matching second story windows do not align
directly across from each other.
b. Condition added: The one story Tuscan plan elevations
shall be re -studied to improve appearance prior to
preparation of the final drawings and submitted to the
Community Development Department for approval.
C. Condition added: Clay roof tile shall be provided on a
minimum of 30% of the units.
Unanimously approved.
C. Environmental Assessment 2005-551, General Plan Amendment 2005-
105 Zone Change 2005-125 Specific Plan 2001-055 Amendment #2,
and Development Agreement 2003-006 Amendment #2; a request of CP
Development La Quinta, LLC for consideration of (1) an Addendum to a
certified Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; (2)
General Plan Amendment; (3) Zone Change; (4) Specific Plan
Amendment; and (5) an Amendment to existing Development Agreement
to allow: A) Changing the General Plan designation and zoning for the
2+ acre residential site at the future southwest corner of Seeley Drive
and Miles Avenue to Tourist Commercial to allow an additional 32 one
and two story casitas; B) Changing the General Plan designation and
zoning for the 4.8 + acre tourist commercial zoned boutique hotel site at
the southeast corner of the project area to the office commercial zone to
allow expansion of the approved medical office complex site; and, C) An
Amendment of the Development Agreement to reflect the revised project
as described above, for the property located southeast of the intersection
of Washington Street and Miles Avenue within the Centre Pointe project.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which was on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked if Seeley Drive extension would be
signalized at Washington Street. Staff stated no that it would be
a right-in/right-out.
P:\BETTY\10-1 1-05.doc 5
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
3. Commissioner Ladner asked what would be constructed in the
tourist commercial area. Staff stated 32 additional casitas units.
4. Commissioner Quill asked if the casitas units pay Transient
Occupancy Tax. Staff stated yes. Commissioner Quill asked how
many hotel units were being lost and how many casitas units were
being increased. Staff clarified 26 boutique hotel units were being
deleted and an additional 32 casitas units, with the remaining
residential units being increased to 60 units.
5. Community Development Director Doug Evans asked that the
applicant clarify the site cross section to the medical office
building as it does not agree with Page 10 of the Specific Plan. As
it is written in the Specific Plan on page 10, within the first 200
feet of the east property line, the medical office buildings are
limited to 33 feet. Then, under setbacks in the Specific Plan, the
minimum perimeter setback from residential is 50 feet. The cross
section shows the setback at 279 feet. This needs to be clarified
by the applicant as to whether or not they can build a 33 foot
building 50 feet from the property line, or live with a setback that
is more equivalent to the cross sections that staff has done most
of their analysis on.
6. Commissioner Quill asked if the site plan shows the actual location
of the houses and the building. Community Development Director
Doug Evans stated that is what staff is requesting the applicant
explain.
7. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Dick Oliphant and staff gave a presentation on
the project. Mr. Michael Andes, President of the Foundation, and
Mr. Ali Tourkilman for Eisenhower Medical Center gave a
presentation on the medical complex. Mr. Tim Lowry, Lennar
Homes, gave a presentation on the casitas units. A presentation
was also provided on the hotel construction.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Quill asked if any community meetings had been
held. Mr. Oliphant stated they had held two meetings and the
feedback was positive.
PABETTY\ 10-1 1-05.doc 6
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
9. Commissioner Alderson asked if there was flexibility in relocating
the well site. Mr. Oliphant stated no; a well site cannot be closer
than 1,000 feet from another site and this is the only location that
met CVWD criteria.
10. Chairman Kirk asked why the boutique hotel did not meet the plan
objectives. Mr. Oliphant stated they had never tried to find a
tenant. They have been focusing on the hotel, casita units, and
medical facilities. Bringing the Eisenhower Medical Center to the
site created a much better plan. Chairman Kirk asked if the
mitigation fee applied to all the casitas units or just the new units.
Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston stated all casitas units.
Chairman Kirk asked if this type of mitigation fee had been tested
and will meet a challenge. Houston stated development fees are
seldom challenged when they are proposed for purposes of
development. They are a cost of doing business. He believes it
will meet legal challenges.
11. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment. Mr.
Jim Sherman, 78-825 Nolan Circle, stated he opposed the
Amendment as it is not the same project as what was presented
to them originally. He believes this will decrease his property
values. Traffic on Miles Avenue will increase as well as ambient
light. Traffic within their tract will be increased by those looking
for a way to avoid the traffic on Washington Street. He believes
the City should allow the residents to raise the height of their
walls to create a sound wall or add a traffic gate to the Acacia and
Highlands projects so their streets cannot be used as a
thoroughfare.
12. Chairman Kirk asked staff to address the two issues raised by Mr.
Sherman. Community Development Director Doug Evans stated as
to increasing the height of an existing wall, you can not add to a
wall, you will have to demolish and rebuild. Assistant City
Engineer Steve Speer stated that gating a public street after it is
built is impossible because you cannot get all the residents into
the HOA to agree to pay for the maintenance.
13. There being no other public participation portion of the hearing
was closed and open for Commission discussion.
14. Commissioner Alderson stated he had spent time with staff trying
PABETM10-11-05.doc 7
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
to understand why the changes were important. The change to
the medical facility as well as the financial aspect of the changes
to the project are both a benefit to the City. He does believe there
may be some traffic concerns.
15. Commissioner Quill stated it is the metamorphosis of any project
that as the users are identified, the project will change. In regard
to the height and setback issue he would like to limit the distance
of the medical building from the residences yet give some
flexibility in the height of the building.
16. Commissioner Ladner stated she agrees with Commissioner Quill.
She also has concerns with the height and distance of the
building.
17. Chairman Kirk stated he too is concerned with the height issues,
but still five feet height difference 200 feet away does not seem
to be an issue. He would be more concerned with glare from night
time users and automobiles. He does not see the need to add a
condition restricting the height, but would rather require the
applicant to abide by the cross sections provided. He did have a
concern with the loss of the boutique hotel, and does not like
collecting TOT from a HOA, but understands why it is being done.
18. It was moved by Commissioners Alderson/Ladner to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-045, recommending
certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental
impact for Environmental Assessment 2005-551, as
recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Ladner, Quill, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Daniels. ABSTAIN:
None.
19. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Alderson to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-046, recommending
approval of General Plan Amendment 2005-105, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Ladner, Quill, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Daniels. ABSTAIN:
None.
PABETTY\10-11-05.doc 8
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
20. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Alderson to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-047, recommending
approval of Zone Change 2005-125, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Ladner, Quill, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Daniels. ABSTAIN:
None.
21. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Alderson to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-048, recommending
approval of Specific Plan 2001-055, Amendment #2, as amended:
a. Condition added: Building envelope or site line studies
presented tonight will be maintained.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Ladner, Quill, and Chairman
Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Daniels.
ABSTAIN: None.
22. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Quill to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-049, recommending
approval of Development Agreement 2003-006, Amendment #2,
as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Ladner, Quill, and Chairman Kirk.
NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Daniels. ABSTAIN:
None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None.
Vill. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Community Development Director Doug Evans asked if the
Commissioners had any items to place on the agenda for the October 25,
2005, joint meeting with the City Council
1. Chairman Kirk asked that design standards for commercial
buildings. He would like to have an update on this. Second, the
direction on annexations.
2. Commissioner Alderson stated he would like to see the
PABETTY\ 10-11-05.doc 9
Planning Commission Minutes
October 11, 2005
redundancy of Title 24 submittals reviewed. They currently are
required for a building shell as well as tenant improvements later.
B. Review of City Council meeting of October 4, 2005.
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Ladner/Quill to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on October 25, 2005, at 7:00 p.m.
This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:51 p.m. on October 11,
2005.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
R\BETTY110-11-05.doc 10
PH #A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: OCTOBER 25, 2005
CASE NUMBERS: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-780 EXTENSION 1, AND
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-781 EXTENSION 1
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY
OWNER: KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
ENGINEER: MAINIERO SMITH & ASSOCIATES
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR
CONSTRUCTION OF TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS: 1) 8,050 SQ.
FT. ON A 0.68 ACRE SITE AND, 2) 5,882 SQ. FT. ON A 0.45
ACRE SITE
LOCATION: 79-215 CORPORATE CENTRE DRIVE AND 79-245 CORPORATE
CENTRE DRIVE; SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CORPORATE
CENTRE DRIVE AND COMMERCE COURT WITHIN THE LA
QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE SPECIFIC PLAN PROJECT AREA
(ATTACHMENT 1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER
RESOLUTION 99-110 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 99-036 (LA QUINTA
CORPORATE CENTER) OF WHICH THESE PROPERTIES ARE A
PART OF. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS
ARE PROPOSED, NOR ANY NEW INFORMATION SUBMITTED,
WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO
PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE 2116.
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATION: COMMERCIAL PARK (CP)/COMMERICAL PARK (CP)
BACKGROUND:
These projects were originally considered by the Planning Commission on
September 9, 2003. At that meeting, the Planning Commission adopted
Resolutions 2003-071 and 2003-072, approving two Site Development Permits
allowing the construction of two commercial buildings within the La Quinta
Corporate Center Specific Plan area (Attachment 2). The Specific Plan, SP 99-036,
was approved in 1999 by the City Council under Resolution 99-111. It consists of
±36 acres of non-contiguous property located north of Highway 111, between
Adams Street and Dune Palms Road.
The applicant was allowed two years from the date of approval to use the Site
Development Permits. A one-year extension is allowed if the applicant applies prior
to the date of expiration. The expiration date for these applications was September
9, 2005, and the applicant applied for an extension on August 10, 2005.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The applicant is requesting approval of a one-year time extension for each Site
Development Permit to construct the projects. One building is proposed to be
8,050 square feet while the other building is proposed at 5,882 square feet
(Attachment 3).
The project sites, which are currently vacant, are bounded by Corporate Center
Drive on the north, vacant land on the east, World Gym on the south, and
Commerce Court on the west. On the north side of Corporate Center Drive,
towards the northwest, there is an existing self -storage facility. On the west side
of Commerce Court, there is an existing post office.
The proposed buildings architecture is a modern contemporary theme with a
combination of flat and concrete tile roofs. Other features include a painted exterior
stucco finish, columns supporting a covered walkway, and stained glass
storefronts with dark brown anodized aluminum frames. The proposed buildings are
to be approximately 22 to 24 feet high with tower at 31 feet.
There are no proposals for signs at this time. Per the Conditions of Approval of the
Specific Plan, any signs proposed for multi -tenant buildings will require a Planned
Sign Program application for review and approval by the Planning Commission. A
Planned Sign Program will be brought back before the Planning Commission at a
future date.
Proposed vehicular access for both Building 1 and Building 2 is to Corporate Centre
Drive. Each parcel will have its own two-way access driveway. The lots share a
common two-way drive aisle within the parking lot between the two buildings. The
applicant is proposing to provide 36 parking spaces for Building 1 and 20 spaces
for Building 2. The applicant is also providing covered parking in the area between
the two buildings.
n^
Public Notice
The time extension for this project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on
October 14, 2005, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. To
date, no comments have been received from adjacent property owners. Any
written comments received will be handed out at the meeting.
Public Agency Review
A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City
Departments on August 23, 2005. All written comments received are on file with
the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received from the
Public Works Department have been included as revisions to Conditions 5, 6, 20,
and 24 in the recommended Conditions of Approval.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached
Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-_, approving a one-year time
extension for Site Development Permit 2003-780, subject to findings and
conditions.
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-, approving a one-year time
extension for Site Development Permit 2003-781, subject to findings and
conditions.
Prepared by:
JAY WUU
Assistant Planner
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of September 9, 2003
3. Development Plans
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF
TIME FOR A SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO DEVELOP A ±8,050
SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON A 0.68 ACRE SITE
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-780, EXTENSION #1
APPLICANT: KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 251h day of October, 2005 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing
to consider a request by Kleine Building & Development, Inc., for approval of a one-
year extension of time for development of an ±8,050 square foot commercial
building on a 0.68 acre site, located at the southeast corner of Corporate Centre
Drive and Commerce Court, more particularly described as follows:
APN: 649-020-060,
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit time extension application
has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and certified
by the City Council under Resolution No. 99-111 for Specific Plan 99-036. 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.
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to
Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code to approve a time extension of said Site
Development Permit:
Finding A - Consistency with the General Plan:
The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in
that the use is allowed in the Commercial Park Land Use designation.
Finding B - Consistency with the Zoning Code and Specific Plan:
The proposed project is consistent with the development standards of the
Commercial Park Zoning District and Specific Plan including, but not limited to,
setbacks, building heights, building mass, exterior materials, parking, circulation,
open space and landscaping.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2003-780
Kleine Building & Development
October 25, 2005
Finding C - Architectural Design:
The architectural design of the proposed building, including but not limited to,
architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof
style, and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding
developments in the immediate area in that other buildings have similar architectural
treatments. The proposed building is adequately set back so as to minimize the
appearance of a large structural mass.
Finding D - Site Design:
The site design of the proposed project, including but not limited to, project entries,
vehicular and pedestrian circulation, screening of equipment, trash enclosures, and
other site design elements such as scale, mass, appearance, and amount of
landscaping are compatible with surrounding developments and the quality of
design prevalent in the City in that the proposed project is consistent with the
overall Specific Plan for the area and meets the development standards of the
City's Zoning Code.
Finding E - Landscape Design:
The landscaping plan for the proposed project including, but not limited to, the
location, type, size, and coverage of plant materials, has been designed to provide
visual relief, complement the building, screen undesirable views and provide an
overall unifying influence to enhance the visual appearance of the project. The
proposed landscaping is compatible with the surrounding area in that the variety of
trees, shrubs and ground covers are drought tolerant and provide an aesthetically
pleasing and well functioning use of landscaping space.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Site Development Permit time extension;
2. That it does hereby approve a one-year time extension for Site Development
Permit 2003-780 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and 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 25`h day of October, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
n^-
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2003-780
Kleine Building & Development
October 25, 2005
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
3FNFRAI
The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in
Site Development Permit 2003-780, unless otherwise amended by the following
conditions.
2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking processes.
3. These approved Site Development Permits shall be "used" within two years of
approval, otherwise, they shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
"Used" means the issuance of a building permit. A time extension may be
requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080 (D).
�. 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 Site
Development Permit. 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.
i. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant
shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works
Clearance) for Building Permits, Driveway Approach Permit Application,
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
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, Coachella Valley
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 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.
S. 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 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):
a. Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
b. Temporary Sediment Control.
c. Wind Erosion Control.
d. Tracking Control.
e. Non -Storm Water Management.
f. Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
A. 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.
B. 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.
7. 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
3. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements
and other property rights necessary for 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.
3. The applicant shall dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and
utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code,
applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer.
10. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
1) Corporate Centre Drive (Collector, 64-foot ROW) - No additional
right of way dedication is required.
2) Commerce Court (Cul-de-sac, 64-foot ROW) - No additional right of
way dedication is required.
11. 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.
12. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of-
ways as follows:
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
iITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
,LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
.ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
A. Corporate Centre Drive (Collector) - 10-foot from the ROW-P/L.
B. Commerce Court (Cul De Sac) - 10-foot from the ROW-P/L.
The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall
design is approved.
The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to,
remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
MPROVEMENT 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. "Site Development Plans" shall normally include all surface improvements,
including but not limited to: parking lot improvements, finish grades, curbs &
gutters, ADA requirements, retaining and perimeter walls, etc.
Site Development Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
14. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee established by City Resolution, the applicant
may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City.
15. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the
City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be
fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction
and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files
to reflect as -constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be
converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the
plans.
IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
16. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
317E DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
'LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
City, the applicant shall, at the time of approval of the development or building
permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements.
;RAnING
17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant
shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in
accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a
form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with
the provisions of the permit.
18. 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.
19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. The
certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference
between the two, if any, and pad compaction.
DRAINAGE
20. Stormwater handling shall conform to the approved hydrology and drainage report
for Parcel Map No. 29351 and be modified for this Site Development Permit.
Therefore, the applicant shall submit a modified Hydrology Report to the City of
La Quinta Department of Public Works for approval as part of the plan check
process for this Site Development Permit. The 100-year storm water HGL shall be
2 feet below the Project HGL.
21. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the
Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from
the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge
which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide
pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which
may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and
furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building
permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and
successors in interest in the land within this Site Development Permit excepting
therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The
form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such
r,
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
3ITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
CLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
4DOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in
the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations.
JTILITIES
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. 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.
'ARKING LOTS AND LIGHTING
24. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking).
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts,
dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features
shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths
and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer.
Pursuant these conditions, the applicant shall provide ADA accessibility routes
between the two buildings of this Site Development Permit.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Brian Ching at 760-777-
7044.
?5. The applicant shall maintain a reciprocal parking agreement for shared driveways
across property lines.
?6. The applicant will be required to meet the City's "Dark Sky" Ordinance and
prevent light glare from projecting onto adjacent properties and the public right-of-
way by shielding the lighting fixtures.
?7. 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
n.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
(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.
LANDSCAPING
28. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, common lots, and
park areas. In addition, the applicant shall provide a low block wall, three feet in
height and additional landscaping along the site frontage to screen the parking lot
from public view.
29. 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. 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.
30. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn
or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets.
1UALITY ASSURANCE
31. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures, which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
32. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical
engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient
construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings.
33. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of 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 comply with plans,
specifications and applicable regulations.
r
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
iITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
'LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
;ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
\DOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
34. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each
sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed"
and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the
accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files
previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions.
y1AINTENANCE
35. 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.
=EES 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. 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).
-OACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
38. The site shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the district
for sanitation service.
39. Grading, landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Coachella
Valley Water District for review to ensure efficient water management techniques.
10. Appropriate fees shall be paid to the Coachella Valley Water District in accordance
with their current regulations for service to the site.
31VERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
41. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be located
not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as
measured along vehicular travel ways.
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
>ITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
,LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
;ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
Q. 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.
Q. Fire Department connections shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet
from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings.
�4. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run
concurrent with the City plan check.
45. 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.
46. 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 for approval.
47. 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.
48. 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.
49. Any commercial operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a
Hood/duct system for fire protection. (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.)
50. 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. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13"6"
clear and unobstructed.
51. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial suite. (Contact the Fire Department
for an application)
52. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code.
DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
53. The applicant will be required to pay a school mitigation fee at the time a building
permit is issued.
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
;ITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-780 EXT. 1
:LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
;ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
\DOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
:OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
54. The applicant shall submit a Planned Sign Program for any signs associated with
the buildings to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
55. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program in connection
to the certified Mitigated Negative Declaration for Specific Plan 99-036 (La Quinta
Corporate Centre).
56. The prefabricated metal structures for the covered parking areas shall be painted
to match the building colors.
57. The applicant shall have the option of choosing either of the two color
combinations proposed for the buildings, which are in the project file.
58. The applicant shall eliminate the cobblestone in the triangular landscaped areas
near the building frontages and replace them with additional decomposed granite
and landscaping.
59. The applicant shall coordinate with the Community Development Department on
the architectural accents of the building in order to provide relief of the structural
massing.
r,._
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A
ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO DEVELOP A ±5,880
SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON A 0.45
ACRE SITE
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-781, EXTENSION #1
APPLICANT: KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 25" day of October, 2005 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing
to consider a request by Kleine Building & Development, Inc., for approval of a one-
year extension of time for development of an ±5,880 square foot commercial
building on a 0.45 acre site, located at the southeast corner of Corporate Centre
Drive and Commerce Court, more particularly described as follows:
APN: 649-020-059,
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit time extension application
has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact was prepared and certified
by the City Council under Resolution No. 99-111 for Specific Plan 99-036. 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.
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to
Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code to approve a time extension of said Site
Development Permit:
Finding A - Consistency with the General Plan:
The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in
that the use is allowed in the Commercial Park Land Use designation.
Finding B - Consistency with the Zoning Code and Specific Plan:
The proposed project is consistent with the development standards of the
Commercial Park Zoning District and Specific Plan including, but not limited to,
setbacks, building heights, building mass, exterior materials, parking, circulation,
open space and landscaping.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-781
OCTOBER 25, 2005
Finding C - Architectural Design:
The architectural design of the proposed building including, but not limited to,
architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof
style, and other architectural elements are compatible with surrounding
developments in the immediate area in that other buildings have similar architectural
treatments. The proposed building is adequately set back so as to minimize the
appearance of a large structural mass.
Finding D - Site Design:
The site design of the proposed project, including but not limited to, project entries,
vehicular and pedestrian circulation, screening of equipment, trash enclosures, and
other site design elements such as scale, mass, appearance, and amount of
landscaping are compatible with surrounding developments and the quality of
design prevalent in the City in that the proposed project is consistent with the
overall Specific Plan for the area and meets the development standards of the
City's Zoning Code.
1. Landscape Design: The landscaping plan for the proposed project including,
but not limited to, the location, type, size, and coverage of plant materials,
has been designed to provide visual relief, complement the building, screen
undesirable views and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the
visual appearance of the project. The proposed landscaping is compatible
with the surrounding area in that the variety of trees, shrubs and ground
covers are drought tolerant and provide an aesthetically pleasing and well
functioning use of landscaping space.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Site Development Permit time extension;
2. That it does hereby approve a one-year time extension for Site Development
Permit 2003-781 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and 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 251" day of October, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 03-781, EXTENSION NO. 1
KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
GENERAL
1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits contained in
Site Development Permit 2003-781, unless otherwise amended by the following
conditions.
2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking processes.
3. These approved Site Development Permits shall be "used" within two years of
approval, otherwise, they shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever.
"Used" means the issuance of a building permit. A time extension may be
requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080 (D).
4. 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 Site
Development Permit. 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.
i. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant
shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works
Clearance) for Building Permits, Driveway Approach Permit Application,
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
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, Coachella Valley
The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances
from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
iDP 03-781 EXT. 1
,LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
'ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
kDOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City
approval of the plans.
i. 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 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):
a. Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
b. Temporary Sediment Control.
c. Wind Erosion Control.
d. Tracking Control.
e. Non -Storm Water Management.
f. Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SDP 03-781 EXT. 1
KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
A. 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.
B. 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.
7. 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
8. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements
and other property rights necessary for 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 dedicate or grant public and private street right of way and
utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code,
applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer.
10. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1) Corporate Centre Drive (Collector, 64-foot ROW) - No additional
right of way dedication is required.
2) Commerce Court (Cul-de-sac, 64-foot ROW) - No additional right of
way dedication is required.
11. 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.
12. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of-
ways as follows:
A. Corporate Centre Drive (Collector) - 10-foot from the ROW-P/L.
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
i13P 03-781 EXT. 1
'LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
'ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
B. Commerce Court (Cul De Sac) - 10-foot from the ROW-P/L.
The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall
design is approved.
The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to,
remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
MPROVEMENT PLANS
4s used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer,"
'surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice
:heir respective professions in the State of California.
13. "Site Development Plans" shall normally include all surface improvements,
including but not limited to: parking lot improvements, finish grades, curbs &
gutters, ADA requirements, retaining and perimeter walls, etc.
Site Development Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
14. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for
elements of construction. For a fee established by City Resolution, the applicant
may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City.
15. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the
City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be
fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction
and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files
to reflect as -constructed conditions.
If the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be
converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the
plans.
MPROVEMENT AGREEMENT
16. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the
City, the applicant shall, at the time of approval of the development or building
permit, reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements.
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
IDP 03-781 EXT. 1
:LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
kDOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
;RARING
17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant
shall submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in
accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a
form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with
the provisions of the permit.
18. 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.
19. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. The
certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference
between the two, if any, and pad compaction.
DRAINAGE
20. Stormwater handling shall conform to the approved hydrology and drainage report
for Parcel Map No. 29351 and be modified for this Site Development Permit.
Therefore, the applicant shall submit a modified Hydrology Report to the City of
La Quints, Department of Public Works for approval as part of the plan check
process for this Site Development Permit. The 100-year storm water HGL shall be
2 feet below the Project HGL.
21. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the
Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from
the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge
which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide
pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which
may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and
furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building
permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and
successors in interest in the land within this Site Development Permit excepting
therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The
form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such
discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in
the CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SDP 03-781 EXT. 1
KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
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. 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.
PARKING LOTS AND LIGHTING
24. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking).
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts,
dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features
shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths
and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer.
Pursuant these conditions, the applicant shall provide ADA accessibility routes
between the two buildings of this Site Development Permit.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact Brian Ching at 760-777-
7044.
25. The applicant shall maintain a reciprocal parking agreement for shared driveways
across property lines.
26. The applicant will be required to meet the City's "Dark Sky" Ordinance and
prevent light glare from projecting onto adjacent properties and the public right-of-
way by shielding the lighting fixtures.
27. 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
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
iDP 03-781 EXT. 1
,LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
;ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
kDOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
approved.
-ANDSCAPING
M The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, common lots, and
park areas. In addition, the applicant shall provide a low block wall, three feet in
height and additional landscaping along the site frontage to screen the parking lot
from public view.
29. 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. 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.
30. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn
or spray irrigation within 18 inches of curbs along public streets.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
31. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures, which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
32. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical
engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient
construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings.
33. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of 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 comply with plans,
specifications and applicable regulations.
34. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible
record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each
sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed"
and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the
I ` -
ILANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
3DP 03-781 EXT. 1
(LEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
:ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
4DOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files
previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions.
MAINTENANCE
35. 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.
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. 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).
COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
38. The site shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the district
for sanitation service.
39. Grading, landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Coachella
Valley Water District for review to ensure efficient water management techniques.
40. Appropriate fees shall be paid to the Coachella Valley Water District in accordance
with their current regulations for service to the site.
RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT
41. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be located
not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as
measured along vehicular travel ways.
42. 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.
43. Fire Department connections shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than 50 feet
from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the street side of the buildings.
r
'LANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
;DP 03-781 EXT. 1
1EINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
;ONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
1DOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
1.4. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run
concurrent with the City plan check.
t5. 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.
M City of La Ouinta 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 for approval.
17. 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.
18. 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.
49. Any commercial operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a
Hood/duct system for fire protection. (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.)
50. 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. Streets shall be a minimum 20 feet wide with a height of 13"6"
clear and unobstructed.
51. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial suite. (Contact the Fire Department
for an application)
52. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code.
DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT
53. The applicant will be required to pay a school mitigation fee at the time a building
permit is issued.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
54. The applicant shall submit a Planned Sign Program for any signs associated with
the buildings to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SDP 03-781 EXT. 1
KLEINE BUILDING & DEVELOPMENT, INC.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
55. The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Monitoring Program in connection
to the certified Mitigated Negative Declaration for Specific Plan 99-036 (La Quinta
Corporate Centre).
56. The prefabricated metal structures for the covered parking areas shall be painted
to match the building colors.
57. The applicant shall have the option of choosing either of the two color
combinations proposed for the buildings, which are in the project file.
58. The applicant shall eliminate the cobblestone in the triangular landscaped areas
near the building frontages and replace them with additional decomposed granite
and landscaping.
59. The applicant shall coordinate with the Community Development Department on
the architectural accents of the building in order to provide relief of the structural
massing.
ATTACHMEN
? IZOSECT .
W ) 4A Zy
LLI-Z�Ilkl
•
ATTACHMENT
ALL 6UPY
Planning Commission Minutes
September 9, 2003
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Quill to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2003-070, approving Conditional Use Permit 2003-079
and Site Development Permit 2003-784, as recommended by staff
and amended:
a. Condition #40: "if any" shall be deleted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk.
NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Abels and Daniels.
ABSTAIN: None
Site Development Permit 2003-780 and Site Development Permit 2003-
781; a request of Kleine Building and Development for consideration of
development plans for two office buildings on 1.13 acres located at the
southwest corner of Corporate Centre Drive and Commerce Way.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked why the ALRC wanted the cobblestones
removed. Staff explained and discussion followed regarding
colors.
3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Kirk asked if
the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Neil
Kleine, the applicant, stated he was available to answer any
questions. He would prefer the cobblestone and the colors as
proposed.
4. There being no questions of the applicant, and no other public
comment, the public participation portion of the hearing was
closed and open for Commission discussion.
5. Chairman Kirk stated he was concerned with the design of the
project and as such he could not support it.
GAWPDOCSTC Minutes%9-9-03WD.doc 18
Planning Commission Minutes
September 9, 2003
6. Commissioner Quill stated he had no objection to its location or
the type of use proposed. Discussion followed regarding potential
architectural changes.
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Quill to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2003-071, approving Site Development Permit 2003-
780 as recommended by staff and amended:
I
a. Conditions added: Staff shall work with applicant to add
architectural accents such as stone veneer on the columns.
b. Condition added: The applicant shall have flexibility in
regard to the color
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Quill, Tyler, and Chairman Kirk.
NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Abels and Daniels.
ABSTAIN: None
9. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Quill to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-072 approving Site
Development Permit 2003-781, as recommended by staff and
amended:
a. Conditions added: Staff shall work with applicant to add
architectural accents such as stone veneer on the columns.
b. Condition added: The applicant shall have flexibility in
regard to the color.
J. Conditional Use Permit 2003-080; a request of WalMart for consideration
of a request to allow 55 metal containers for temporary storage of
holiday merchandise from September 15, 2003 to January 15, 2004, on
the north and west sides of the existing 135,693 square foot store,
located at 78-950 Highway 111.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file
in the Community Development Department.
G:\WPDOCSIPC Minutes19-9-03WD.doc 19
0
FNd—m=
MVNlml3vd
A vpLlptlMY vl
YlYld IVNOISTil07�d 3MW1� 3LYMOdM00
14t�1
i
�5
!!
L
el16.
.
Hill
will
i
IINW11 tIJ 'IlFlrq Il
.��14 rrn.ry 1��1R nn�PM arlrr ri, ii7r W IYNiJ LIWMVJ 9r2-e[
M®� fV iYN3JJL1Mf InNJ
.awl •r1M,MCfl'1N/rII00t CMIOIIfIg\- IiY1 IIMIAJfJW AI/IJ> LIa'lMVJ
//71 11111 II 11111111
Q
0
'aNl 'tYYlraa'lYnYe•s axle'i1N
�r. stvi 'w xi+u urwwa> s.t-u
� wa w my v.wwm su-a i � i` 1•
qry vwtlsnwwsw�xn ur�wiw40i i 'i st {_
tl t 11 Joel II U1111tl1
SO
ew.u�wii ��. as:u .•u.
nxmnm 'nmm n
rn mv, m au,w vranaw> 9rC9[ i y
11. m,Il 'm AYNY LIpMJ 91CM,
nry mnlss�.nve wmv nruumJ �
S10 1111313 II It 11311i
qi�n • w Mw[. .)
IIWpJIM 'IWIN /l
'EMI 1MAAN0,01AAN0 • OMI01111s
,
111 90b1 'W 3uN3J LYs]YW 912-OI
YnL .MJI99JaW's>JyNJ>`isgwini �
9
'
i IE'.
n,
`Y
3
u d SUM LI sulu21
.IWtlII YJ '.IMIM Yt
p1MYjiNNp� ��Y�pn/-�a ��Yu
Itl OOY/ 'fV FI1N3J LY1pggJ 612-M
_
•OMI•INNNIOINANO Y• ONIOIIIIN
111 90YI YJ A[N3l 3[.WMNJ 91C-0[
Jt t ��-��ilia
1101
•aMl•an�naovnna/s anlonm�
nxwlm 'nmmn i i
�b 'AYI 'q btN]J it/tlOdYO) SIL-W
Ir NT Yi HIx3J 3J.WMNWYM-IUOJ R l
rsnN wxolcsnnw'wxJ) a.wwo> i JU
SWITA3U U MUM
❑ ❑
_ COVER D PARNI G
----7 --------- ------------
IN1
1-01
FmJ
_____i _-__-_-____.�
CDVER D R RRING
y I �
I
FIN
a ,
c
1 m
N m
��
_
❑
N
N
G
n O
O
Z1
2
T T
G7
O ti
m
n
III
JI
i
1
I
i
1
I
I
I
1
1
I
i
I
I
I
1
I
�I I
LA Lll L.
I
W
o
�
o.
eGG
�p
s
i
m
n
•
"
i 6
Q� Q 4
m
�
•
4 4
l
p y y j
x y 9
d i
�
0m
S5 9S
fill
■
-f
\�� * COMMERCE _ COU
I
I
S9 8
r
0
I COMMERCE COURT - m
p f
t
ME
m�-
��
F C
d r
C
e Z
a
0
0
T
'O
r
a
z
a
N
T
r
0
0
r
a
z
PON
pppppppmppmpwm
riii
� Im
0
Z
t,
PH #B
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 25, 2005
CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-843
APPLICANT: EAST OF MADISON, LLC
ARCHITECT: PAI (CRAIG PEARSON)
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: VITA PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE PLANS
FOR A MAINTENANCE COMPLEX
LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND AVENUE 54
WITHIN THE MADISON CLUB
BACKGROUND:
The Madison Club site is on the east side of Madison Street, between Avenue 52 and
Avenue 54. The Madison Club project design was approved by the City Council in
2004 as a Tentative Tract Map and Specific Plan Amendment (to The Hideaway), with
construction recently started.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
Proposed is a maintenance complex for the country club. This is the second request
for a building in the project, the first being the recently approved guard house. The
location of the proposed maintenance complex is behind (north and west of) a CVWD
well site that is on the northwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 54. The
complex is bordered by Gray Avenue on the west and Humboldt Boulevard on the
north. Across Humboldt Boulevard to the north will be single-family residences that
are part of the Madison Club.
The complex is made up of a one story 9,000 square foot building, material storage
bins, a fueling station, covered outdoor storage, wash down areas and a maintenance
worker parking lot.
The building will include office and shop areas and be a flat roof structure with a
double parapet around its top. Plant -on columns will be placed at the corners and
spaced out around the building. Small windows will be provided on the office areas of
PAREPORTS - PC\2005\10-25-05\SDP 2005-834 EAST OF MAD\SDP 2005-843 PC RPT MAINT.DOC
the north, south and west sides of the building. Over the south and west facing
windows will be decorative metal awnings. The flat roofed building will be 18'-1 "
high. Two overhead doors in the building will face the northwest and the southeast.
One overhead door will face the northeast. Two 13 foot high outdoor storage
canopies will be located in the northeast corner of the site and consist of metal
support poles with brown outdoor fabric covers. One of the canopies will be adjacent
to Monroe Street.
The site's finish grade will be several feet below the Monroe Street and Avenue 54
street surface. Cross section views showing the relationships, as well as visibility of
the facility from off -site locations, have been submitted (Attachment 2).
The block wall between the complex and public streets will be part of the perimeter
walls for the country club. A matching wall placed on a berm will be used on the
interior of the complex facing the homes.
Exterior building wall colors are medium brown plaster, with a slightly darker shade of
brown for the trim, awnings, columns, doors and miscellaneous ornamentation. Exact
colors and finishes are shown on the material and sample board that will be available
at the meeting.
Parking has been provided for a total of 40 cars, a number intended to accommodate
the employees of the facility. A decorative security gate for the vehicular entry at the
west end of the site will be provided. This driveway empties onto Gray Avenue. A
second sliding gate will be provided within the parking lot area.
Exterior lighting will consist of a combination of bollard lighting and perimeter wall
mounted lights. This will keep the lighting below the height of the walls.
Roof equipment is limited to several skylights. Air conditioning condensers and
evaporative cooler units are shown as being ground mounted.
The landscaping plan shows proposed planting around the outside of the complex. It
shows dense shrub screening against the perimeter walls with a variety of palm trees
(25' brown trunk, 20' or 40' overall) and canopy trees (36" to 48" box size)
surrounding the site. Shrubs are shown at five to 15 gallon size. Within the walls of
the complex, planting is shown on the west side of the building and adjacent to some
of the parking spaces. Picnic tables for the employees will be provided within the
planting area west of the building.
ANALYSIS:
The complex due to its lowered finish grade will not be readily visible to either the
public streets or residences in the project. Where visible, only the top few feet, which
have architectural treatment, will show. As noted, the top of the building will have a
double cornice parapet treatment supported by columns.
P:\REPORTS - PC\2005\10-25-05\SDP 2005-834 EAST OF MAD\SDP 2005-843 PC RPT MAINT.DOC
To ensure that noise generated by the complex does not impact the adjacent
homeowners to the north, the perimeter block wall on the north and west sides of the
site are recommended to be solid grouted.
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC);
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of October 5, 2005 and on a 2-0 vote
adopted Minute Motion 2005-034 recommending approval of the request, subject to
the staff recommended condition (Attachment 3).
FINDINGS -
The Findings as required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the
Zoning Code to approve this request can be made as noted in the attached Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Resolution 2005 , approving Site Development Permit 2005-843,
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1 . Architectural and landscaping plans
2. Cross section views
3. ALRC minutes for the meeting of October 5, 2005
Prepared by:
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
PAREPORTS - PC\2005\10-25-05\SDP 2005-834 EAST OF MAD\SDP 2005-843 PC RPT MAINT.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A MAINTENANCE COMPLEX
IN THE MADISON CLUB
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-843
APPLICANT: EAST OF MADISON, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 25TR day of October 2005, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
the request of East of Madison, LLC to approve the development plans for a
maintenance complex in the RL zone district, located within The Madison Club project
on the northwest corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 54, more particularly described
as:
A Portion of 767-210-038
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 La Quinta Community Development
Department has determined the Site Development Permit is within the area covered by
Specific Plan 99-035, Amendment #1 and is exempt from the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970, as amended, per Public Resources Code Section 65457 (a)• An
Environmental Impact Report (State Clearing house 83062922 and 90020727) was
certified on November 21, 2000, by the City Council for SP 99-035. No changed
circumstances or conditions exist which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent
Environmental Impact Report or environmental review pursuant to Public Resources
Code Section 21 166; and,
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee did on
the 5t" day of October, 2005, at a regular meeting, recommended approval of the
development plans, subject to conditions; 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:
1. The maintenance complex is consistent with the General Plan in that it is related
uses to golf courses and residential country clubs which are permitted on the
residentially designated property.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\10-25-05\SDP 2005-834 east of mad\sdp 2005-843 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-843
East of Madison, LLC
Adopted: October 25, 2005
2. The maintenance complex is designed to comply with City Zoning Code
requirements and is in compliance with Specific Plan 99-035, Amendment #1.
3. The architectural design of the maintenance complex including, but not limited
to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural
details, roof style, and other architectural elements is compatible with the
surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city.
The maintenance complex is well designed and will conform with the theme for
the project.
4. The site design of the project including, but not limited to project entries,
interior circulation, pedestrian amenities, screening of roof equipment, exterior
lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding
development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city.
5. Project landscaping including, but not limited to the location, type, size, color,
texture, and coverage of plant materials, with conditions, has been designed so
as to provide relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design
elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition
between adjacent land uses and between development and open space, and
provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual continuity of the
project.
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 2005-843 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 251h day of October, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
P:\Reports - PC\2005\10-25-05\SDP 2005-834 east of madlsdp 2005-843 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-843
East of Madison, LLC
Adopted: October 25, 2005
fe1*i:1,11111F
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\10-25-05\SDP 2005-834 east of mad\sdp 2005-843 pc res.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-843
ADOPTED: OCTOBER 25, 2005
;FNFRAI_
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 applicable clearances and/or permits from the following
agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works
Clearance) for Building Permits, 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
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, Coachella Valley
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.
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; the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-
DWQ and the approved SWPPP for Tentative Tract Map No. 33076.
Pursuant to the above, the applicant or his design professional shall recommend or
design BMPs to be implemented or constructed per Supplement A and the
Stormwater Management Plan for the Whitewater NPDES Permit.
':\Reports - PC\2005\10-25-05\SDP 2005-834 east of mad\sdp 2005-843 pc coa.doc
planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-843
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
4dopted: October 25, 2005
4. 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).
MPROVEMENT PLANS
4s used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer,"
"surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their
,espective professions in the State of California.
5. 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.
5. 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 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. Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal
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.
The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the
building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2001 California
Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment
must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A
copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department
in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking.
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.
r- r
':\stan\hideaway\sdp 2005-843 pc coa.doc
Nanning Commission Resolution 2005-
5ite Development Permit 2005-843
-onditions of Approval — Recommended
4dopted: October 25, 2005
?RECISE GRADING
7. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
B. 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.
9. 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 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.
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.
10. 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.
DRAINAGE
11. Stormwater handling shall conform with the applicable approved hydrology and
drainage report for Madison Club Development, Tentative Tract Map No. 33076 or as
modified for this Site Development Permit as approved by the City Engineer.
12. 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.
r
P:\stan\hideaway\sdp 2005-843 pc coa.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-843
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: October 25, 2005
13. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
14. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water from the
adjacent well site. The aforementioned purged and blowoff water shall be transported
and/or contained in the storm drain system adjacent to private streets and not
through any direct underground facility to the proposed lake retention facility.
UTILITIES
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for
approval by the City Engineer.
PARKING FACILITY
18. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking).
19. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, ADA accessibility route
to public streets and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may
require additional street widths and other improvements as may be determined by the
City Engineer. The applicant shall redesign Gray Avenue and the entry driveway to
the Maintenance Facility to accept trailer delivery vehicles and/or service vehicles
without interference to vehicular traffic to the development and as required by the
City Engineer.
Additionally, direct access to Golf Course golf cart paths from the maintenance
facility may be required in the plan check process.
20. 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:
':\stan\hideaway\sdp 2005-843 pc coa.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-843
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: October 25, 2005
Parking Areas (Parking and Low Traffic) 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b.
Parking Areas & Drive Aisles (High Traffic) 4.5" a.c./5.5" c.a.b.
Loading Dock and Trash Enclosure Service Area 6.0" p.c.c.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
21. 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.
ANDSCAPING
22. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
23. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots and park areas.
24. 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 the landscape plans for plan checking by the Public Works
Department. When plan checking has been completed by Community Development
Department, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside
County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City
Engineer and final approval by the Community Development Department.
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer.
25. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer and Community Development Department. Use of
lawn areas shall be minimized with no spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches
of curbs along public streets.
1UALITY ASSURANCE
26. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with
the approval of the City Engineer.
�Astan\hideaway\sdp 2005-843 pc coa.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-843
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: October 25, 2005
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. 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.
y1AINTENANCE
30. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance),
LQMC.
31. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of
all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and
sidewalks.
=EES AND DEPOSITS
32. 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.
;OMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
M. The top of the canopy adjacent to Monroe Street shall not exceed the perimeter wall
height.
W The complex perimeter wall facing north and west shall be solid grouted to attenuate
noise impacts to adjacent residential land uses in the country club.
':\stan\hideaway\sdp 2005-843 pc coa.doc r
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-843
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Adopted: October 25, 2005
35. The project shall consider the comments from the La Quinta Police Department, on
file in the Community Development Department, and implement them where possible.
36. The final working drawings, including architectural, landscaping, walls shall be
approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of applicable
permit.
':\stan\hideaway\sdp 2005-843 pc coa.doc �,
ATTACHMENT ;
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
October 5, 2005 10:00 a.m.
CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
was called to order at 10:10 a.m. by Community Development
Director Doug Evans.
B. Committee Members present: Frank Christopher and Tracy Smith. It
was moved and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Smith
to excuse Committee Member Bobbitt. Unanimously approved
C. Staff present: Planning Manager Les Johnson Principal Planner Stan
Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
IL PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: None
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Site Development Permit 2005-843; a request of East of Madison LLC
for consideration of architecture and landscaping plans for a
maintenance building for the property located on the north side of
Corporate Center Drive, east and west of Commerce Court.
1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department. Staff introduced Mr.
John Gamlin, representing the applicant, who stated he had no
comments nor do they have a problem with reducing the height
of the canopy.
3. Commissioner Smith asked what material was being used for
the brown outdoor color. Mr. Craig Pearson, architect, it is an
outdoor shade cloth.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\70 5-05 ALRC.doc
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
October 5, 2005
4. Commissioner Christopher stated he had no major issues. He
was interested in whether or not Lots 75 and 76 will be facing
away from the maintenance building. Mr. Gamlin stated they
face toward the golf course with dense screening to hide
facility.
5. Commissioner Smith stated the Phoenix canariensis, Strelitzia
nicolai will not hold up against the wind. Cats claw vines will
grow, but the wind will blow them down. Other than that it is
a good plant list. He asked what ground cover would be used.
Mr. Gamlin stated it would be decomposed granite (DG).
6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Smith to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-034 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2005-843, as recommended and as
follows:
a. Recommend Phoenix canariensis, Strelitzia nicolai and
cats claw be reviewed due to desert climate.
Vf, CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None
VIII. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Christopher/Smith to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and
Landscaping Review Committee to a meeting to be held on November 2, 2005.
This meeting was adjourned at 10:20 p.m. on October 5, 2005.
Respectfully submitted,
BETTY J. SAWYER
Executive Secretary
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\10-5-05 ALRC.doc 2
PH #C
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: OCTOBER 25, 2005
CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-537 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT 33085
APPLICANT: CORE HOMES, LLC
PROPERTY OWNER: CORE HOMES, LLC
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF:
1. CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (EA
2005-537), AND;
2. TENTATIVE TRACT 33085, A REQUEST FOR
APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION OF t4.3 ACRES
INTO SEVEN SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS
LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF MADISON STREET AND BETH
CIRCLE, NORTH OF AVENUE 52 (ATTACHMENT 1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 2005-537, FOR TT 33085. BASED ON
THIS ASSESSMENT, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT, WHILE THE
PROPOSED PROJECT COULD HAVE A SIGNIFICANT
IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT, THE POTENTIAL FOR
SUCH IMPACTS CAN BE MITIGATED THROUGH
MEASURES INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT
APPROVAL. ACCORDINGLY, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: VLDR (VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL - UP TO 2
UNITS PER ACRE)
ZONING: RVL/EOD (VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, WITH
EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY DISTRICT)
BACKGR0UND:
Site Background
The property is currently being farmed as a grapefruit grove and consists of
relatively level terrain with an elevation of approximately 15 feet above mean sea
level. There are no Williamson Act contracts on the property. Agricultural lands
occur on the north side of the site (grapefruit trees), and to the east, across
Madison Street into Indio; however, the north side parcel has an approved tentative
map, and has street improvements in place associated with that map. To the south
is a 4.5 acre parcel currently in active production as a date ranch. The only
development in the immediate vicinity of the site consists of large lot residential
home sites associated with the La Quinta Polo Estates area. The site is not located
in an area of sensitivity for any of the species of concern mapped in the General
Plan, but could conceivably support habitation by burrowing owls.
Project Background
The applicant is requesting approval of a single-family detached home subdivision
with seven lots, on approximately 4.3 acres (Attachment 2). The lots are generally
one-half acre in size, ranging in area from 20,227 to 21,780 square feet, averaging
21,337 square feet. This map and TT 30378, adjacent to the north, will share
common access via Beth Circle, which will serve as a gated entry for both tracts.
The street system within the subject tract consists of a street segment extending
south from Beth Circle, into an east -west segment that forms two cul-de-sacs. It is
proposed as a private street system, with a 40 foot right-of-way. The street profile
is based on a wedge curb design, which provides a travel width of 36 feet to allow
parking on both street sides. Madison Street will be improved to a 55-foot ROW
half -width. A small detention basin is shown in the southeast corner of the site,
between Lots 5 and 6.
Public Notice
This case was originally advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 3,
2005. All property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the
public hearing notice as required. One negative comment has been received
(Attachment 3)• Any additional correspondence received prior to 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,
where necessary and appropriate.
Historic Preservation Commission
On May 19, 2005, the City's Historic Preservation Commission (HPC) reviewed the
applicant's Phase I Archaeological and Paleontological Surveys, prepared by CRM
TECH, and accepted the reports' and findings, subject to conditions. The HPC
concurred with both report recommendations for monitoring of the site, and staff
has incorporated those measures as recommended by the HPC into the conditions
of approval.
ANALYSIS
Staff has reviewed this tentative map design against the current General Plan,
Zoning Code, Subdivision Regulations and related City ordinances and policies.
Circulation - The General Plan designates Madison Street as an Agrarian Image
Corridor, in addition to it's classification as a Primary Arterial. Development
standards in the Zoning Code require that structure heights be limited to one
story/22 feet for any buildings within 150 feet of a General Plan -designated image
corridor, and an appropriate condition has been incorporated. In addition, Madison
Street is designated to include a multi -purpose trail, which will be required along
the frontage of this development.
Noise - An acoustical study was completed for the proposed project, finding that
noise levels for lots within 80 feet of Madison Street centerline will exceed the
City's Community Noise Equivalent Levels (CNEL) exterior noise standards at
buildout. A six-foot block wall would reduce the CNEL noise levels by 6.5 dB(A),
bringing the development to 62.2 dB(A) CNEL, consistent with the La Quinta
General Plan threshold of 65 dB(A) CNEL for sensitive receptors (i.e. residential
use). Building heights on lots located along Madison Street (Lots 5 - 7) will be
limited to 22 feet/one story, which will further reduce potential for noise impacts,
as well as preserving the Image Corridor designations as previously discussed. No
interior noise levels in excess of the CNEL threshold of 45 dB(A) are anticipated.
Burrowing Owl - The presence of agricultural rows creates the potential for habitat
for the burrowing owl, a Species of Special Concern under State Department of
Fish and Game rules, and a protected migratory species under the international
Migratory Bird Treaty Act. In accordance with the policies contained in the General
Plan, the project proponent is required to complete a pre -construction survey of the
parcel prior to construction, in order to assure that impacts to this species will not
be significant. This requirement has been included in the recommended project
conditions.
With the above mitigations, the tentative map is consistent with the 2002 La
Quinta General Plan, and other current City policies and programs regulating
residential developments.
Land Use - Staff has received a letter from Mr. Robert Smith, owner of the 4.5
acres adjacent and to the south of the subject map (Attachment 4). Mr. Smith is
concerned that the proposed lot sizes for this development are out of character
with the surrounding area, and that 1 acre lots would be more appropriate. The
adopted City Land Use Plan allows up to two units per acre for this site, under the
Very Low Density Residential land use category. The density of this tract is 1.6
units per acre, within the limits of the designated land use. While the density of
the La Quinta Polo Estates is generally 0.5 units per acre, the extremely low
density of this existing area indicates that even a development at one unit per acre
might face significant challenges in maintaining rural densities such as those
established in the Polo Estates, let alone larger parcels such as the 4.5 acre ranch
Mr. Smith owns. The Polo Estates area, a unique development that existed prior to
the City's annexation of the area, is a restricted access development, and is
governed by established covenants that prevent any owner from creating 20,000
s.f. lots, which would otherwise be permissible under the City Zoning Code as
constituted.
Conversion of this property from a citrus orchard into a residential development of
approximately one-half acre parcels conforms with the City's land use plan. The
proposed project density represents an appropriate transitional land use within the
Very Low Density Residential category, in consideration of the varying residential
densities in the surrounding area, and how they interface at their boundaries. It also
serves a transitional purpose in relation to the separation of Madison Street from
lower density properties. Staff does recommend a condition to extend the one-
story, 22-foot height limit to all seven lots, to maintain a measure of the lower
density character consistent with the surrounding properties, and to be consistent
internally with the proposed development. A condition requiring retention of
existing citrus rows will also help maintain the rural appearance of the current
grove and provide some buffer to surrounding uses and streets.
Adjacent Tract 30378 - Tract 30378 is situated immediately north of the subject
property. It was approved on June 18, 2002, and subsequently initiated plan
checking which remains incomplete. There are existing street improvements
associated with Tract 30378 for which permits were not issued, improvement
plans have not been approved, and inspections have not been conducted. As this
tract takes access directly from these improvements, the applicant has been
advised that approvals associated with this tentative tract are dependant upon
proper completion of the improvements associated with Tract 30378.
Conceptual Landscaping - The applicant has submitted a rendered perspective and
plan view, showing generalized landscaping improvements, which will be presented
with the staff report. The perspective view is intended to illustrate a view of the
project once developed. It shows single story homes and reflects an over -use of
turf and other lush materials. This would likely be out of compliance with the City
and CVWD water allowance thresholds. Landscape plans are required to meet
those criteria, and plan -check landscaping will be reviewed against them, as well as
for overall use of drought -tolerant groundcovers and plant materials.
The plan view shows general landscape and wall improvements. Staff recommends
a condition to require the walls and landscaping along the perimeters to be less
uniform, provide more separation of the wall from the curb line, and set back and
offset the wall design at the tract entry to allow a landscaped setback along the
entry and Beth Circle. This will accommodate the retained citrus trees along the
street to avoid a stark wall abutting the curb.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings necessary to approve this proposal can be found in the attached
Resolution to be adopted for this case.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005 - , recommending to the
City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2005-537, subject to
findings, and;
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005 - , recommending to the
City Council approval of Tentative Tract 33085, subject to conditions as
recommended by staff.
Prepared by:
Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Proposed TT 33085
3. Letter from Mr. Robert Smith, adjacent property interest
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2005-537, FOR
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33085
CASE NO. EA 2005-537
APPLICANT: CORE HOMES, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 25" day of October, 2005, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider
adoption of a recommendation on Environmental Assessment 2005-537, prepared for
Tentative Tract 33085, a request to subdivide t4.3 acres into seven single-family
residential lots and several lettered lots, located on the southwest corner of Madison
Street and Beth Circle, more particularly described as:
BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF PM 16457,
MAP BOOK 100/48 OF MAPS
WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment complies with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" as amended, City Council Resolution 83-63, in that the Community
Development Director has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment
2005-537) and has determined that, although the proposed Tentative Tract 33085
could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect
in this case because mitigation measures incorporated into the project approval will
mitigate or reduce any potential impacts to a level of non -significance, and that a
Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact should be filed; 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 make the following findings to justify their recommendation
for certification of said Environmental Assessment:
1. The proposed Tentative Tract 33085 will not have the potential to degrade the
quality of the environment, as the project in question will not be developed in
any manner inconsistent with the General Plan and other current City standards
when considering the required mitigation measures to be imposed. The project
will not have the potential to substantially reduce or cause the habitat of a fish
or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate
a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Environmental Assessment 2005-537
October 25, 2005
endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major
periods of California history or prehistory. The site has been identified as having
the potential for cultural and paleontological resources. However, mitigation
measures have been incorporated which will reduce these potential impacts to a
less than significant level. In addition, the site may be suitable habitat for the
burrowing owl, and a pre -construction survey for the species has been required.
2. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed Tract 33085 will have
the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which
the wildlife depends. A pre -construction survey for the burrowing owl species
will be completed to determine if any members of that species exists on the
site, with appropriate mitigation to be identified and carried out prior to any
construction.
3. The proposed Tentative Tract 33085 will not have the potential to achieve short
term goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no
significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the
Environmental Assessment. The proposed project supports the long term goals
of the General Plan by providing a variety of housing opportunities for City
residents.
4. The proposed Tentative Tract 33085 will not have impacts which are
individually limited but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or
proposed development in the immediate vicinity, in that development activity in
the area has been previously analyzed as part of the project approval process.
Cumulative project impacts have been considered and mitigation measures
proposed in conjunction with approval of those projects, and development
patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project.
The construction of seven residential units will not have any significant
cumulative impact and is consistent with the General Plan.
5. The proposed Tentative Tract 33085 will not have environmental effects that
will adversely affect humans, either directly or indirectly, as the project
contemplates land uses that are substantially similar to those already assessed
under ultimate development of the La Quinta General Plan. No significant
impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or
public services.
6. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that Tentative Tract
33085 may have a significant effect on the environment.
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-
Environmental Assessment 2005-537
October 25, 2005
7. The Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2005-537
and determined that it reflects the independent judgment of the City.
8. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of
adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d).
9. The location and custodian of City records relating to this project is the
Community Development Department, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La
Quinta, California.
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; and
2. That is does hereby recommend certification of Environmental Assessment
2005-537 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the
Environmental Assessment Checklist, Addendum, and Mitigation Monitoring
Program, all attached hereto, and on file in the Community Development
Department.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta
Planning Commission held on this 25`h day of October, 2005, by the following vote to
wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-
Environmental Assessment 2005-537
October 25, 2005
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the
project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and
an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a 'Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the
following pages.
Aesthetics
Biological Resources
Hazards & Hazardous
Materials
Mineral Resources
Public Services
Utilities / Service
Agriculture Resources
Cultural Resources
Hydrology / Water
Quality
Noise
Recreation
Mandatory Findings of Significance
Air Quality
Geology /Soils
Land Use / Planning
Population / Housing
Transportation/Traffic
Systems
DETERMINATION: (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
X
I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one
effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable
standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are
imposed upon the prroposedd� project,, nothing further is required.
Signature
/o-Zr-o�
Date
-3-
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are
adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses
following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced
information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one
involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be
explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the
project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening
analysis).
2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on -
site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as
operational impacts.
3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the
checklist answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than
significant with mitigation, or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact' is
appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may be significant. If there are one or
more 'Potentially Significant Impact' entries when the determination is made, an EIR is
required.
4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where
the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from 'Potentially Significant
Impact' to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation
measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level
(mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be cross-referenced).
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration.
Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation
measures based on the earlier analysis.
c) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Measures Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or
refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific
conditions for the project.
6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information
sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a
previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the
page or pages where the statement is substantiated.
-a-
7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however,
lead agencies should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a
project's environmental effects in whatever format is selected.
9) The explanation of each issue should identify:
a) the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance
Us
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
I. AESTHETICS -- Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a
X
scenic vista? (La Quinta General Plan Exhibit
3.6 "Image Corridors")
b) Substantially damage scenic
X
resources, including, but not limited to,
trees, rock outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highway?
(Aerial photograph; Site Inspection)
c) Substantially degrade the existing
X
visual character or quality of the site and
its surroundings? (Application materials)
d) Create a new source of substantial
X
light or glare which would adversely
affect day or nighttime views in the area?
(Application materials)
I. a) Madison Street is an Agrarian Image Corridor. The City requires maximum building
height in an image corridor to be 22 feet within 150 feet of an image corridor road.
Because of the layout of the proposed development, the parcels that will be located
within the image corridor include Parcel 6 (rear and sides); the retention basin in the
southeast corner of the property; and the sides of parcels 5 and 7. The proposed project
will be required to include parkway landscaping consistent with the agrarian image
corridor, including citrus trees, which should be replanted from within the site.
The proposed development is located along an agrarian image corridor, but if treated
as discussed above, its adverse impacts upon this image corridor will be less than
significant.
b) Madison Street is not a state scenic highway, and the damage to scenic resources will
be less than significant if the above City standards are implemented.
c) The implementation of the City's standards for Agrarian Image Corridors will reduce
the potential impacts associated with degradation of the character of the area to less
than significant levels.
d) Light and glare are expected to emanate from the seven proposed dwellings in the
development. Likewise light and glare from vehicular traffic and future street lights
will occur.
IM
Standard design features included in the City's Municipal Code, such as low lighting
levels should be used to mitigate potential light impacts to acceptable levels. These
standards include features such as shielding and directing all outdoor lighting
downward to preserve the night sky. No illumination of land outside the development
perimeter and outside of any individual lot perimeters will be permitted.
Building practices should minimize the use of glass and other reflective surfaces.
Impacts associated with scenic resources are generally expected to be less than
significant with the implementation of City standards discussed above.
7-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES:
Would the roject:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique
X
Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide
Importance (Farmland), as shown on the
maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-
agricultural use? (General Plan EIR p. III-21
ff.)
X
b) Conflict with existing zoning for
agricultural use, or a Williamson Act
contract? (Zoning Map)
c) Involve other changes in the existing
X
environment which, due to their location
or nature, could result in conversion of
Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
(General Plan Land Use Map; Site Inspection)
II. a)-c) Maps from the California Department of Conservation's Farmland Mapping and
Monitoring Program indicate that the site under consideration is not prime farmland,
unique farmland, or farmland of statewide importance.
The proposed subdivision will not impact local agricultural resources as numerous
nearby farms continue in operation, including other grapefruit orchards, a date farts
immediately to the south, and numerous large, active farms within one mile of the site.
The La Quinta Comprehensive General Plan shows that the property has been set aside
for residential use, rather than for farmland. There are no Williamson Act contracts on
the land.
Residential development of this property will not cause any significant impacts to
agricultural resources.
-8-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
M1Hgatlon
Impact
III. AIR QUALITY: Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct
X
implementation of the applicable air
quality plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook)
b) Violate any air quality standard or
X
contribute substantially to an existing or
projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD
CEQA Handbook)
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable
X
net increase of any criteria pollutant for
which the project region is non -
attainment under an applicable federal or
state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook,
2002 PM10 Plan for the Coachella Valley)
d) Expose sensitive receptors to
X
substantial pollutant concentrations?
(Project Description, Aerial Photo, site
inspection)
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a
X
substantial number of people? (Project
Description, Aerial Photo, site inspection)
III. a), b) & c) It is expected that vehicle trips generated by the proposed project will be the most
significant generators of air pollutants. The proposed project will result in seven
single-family homes, which have the potential to generate up to 67 trips per day'.
Based on this traffic generation and an average trip length of 15 miles, the following
emissions can be expected to be generated from the project site.
"Trip Generation, Oh Edition," Institute of Transportation Engineers, category 210, Single Family Detached.
-9-
Moving Exhaust Emission Projections at Project Build -out
(pounds per day)
Ave. Trip Tota
Total No. Vehicle Trips/Day Length (miles) miles/dai
15 =
PM10 PM10 PM1
Pollutant
ROC
CO
NOX
Exhaust Tire Wear Brake Wea
Grams at 50 mph
90
2,341
480
10.0 10.(
Pounds at 50 mph
0.20
5.17
1.06
0.02 0.0:
SCAQMD Threshold
(lbs./day)
75
550
100
150
Assumes 1,132 ADT. Based on California
Air Resources Board's EMFAC7G Emissions Model. Assumes Year 2005
summertime running conditions at 75T light
duty
autos catalytic.
As demonstrated above, the proposed project will not exceed any of SCAQMD's
recommended daily thresholds for chemical emissions. The project's potential impacts
to air quality resulting from vehicular emissions are therefore expected to be less than
significant.
The City of La Quinta and the Coachella Valley are a severe non -attainment area for
PM10 (Particulates of 10 microns or less). The Valley's 2002 PM10 Plan adopted
much stricter measures for the control of dust both during the construction process and
during project operations. These include the following, to be included in conditions of
approval for the proposed project:
CONTROL
MEASURE TITLE & CONTROL METHOD
BCM-1 Further Control of Emissions from Construction Activities: Watering,
chemical stabilization, wind fencing, revegetation, track -out control
BCM-2 Disturbed Vacant Lands: Chemical stabilization, wind fencing, access
restriction, revegetation
BCM-3 Unpaved Roads and Unpaved Parking Lots: Paving, chemical
stabilization, access restriction, revegetation
BCM-4 Paved Road Dust: Minimal track -out, stabilization of unpaved road
shoulders, clean streets maintenance
The proposed project will generate 115.1 pounds of dust per day during construction.
This does not exceed the 150 pound per day SCAQMD threshold for PM 10. However,
the City of La Quinta requires compliance with PM10 plan preparation and
implementation through its own local ordinance (Chapter 6.16, LQMC), which this
project is subject to.
III. d) & e) Sensitive receptors near the proposed Core Homes development are other residential
developments. There are no schools or hospitals within a mile of the proposed seven
unit development.
-to-
The proposed subdivision is not expected to create objectionable odors affecting a
substantial number of people, nor will it expose residents to concentrations of
pollutants. Odors from grading, laying of asphalt, construction vehicles and other
sources are expected to be minimal and very short-lived. Overall, the air quality
impacts of this proposed development are expected to be less than significant with
mitigation.
-11-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES --
Would theproject:
ay Have a substantial adverse effect, either
X
directly or through habitat modifications,
on any species identified as a candidate,
sensitive, or special status species in local
or regional plans, policies, or regulations,
or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (General Plan MEA, p. 78 ff.)
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any
X
riparian habitat or other sensitive natural
community identified in local or regional
plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department of Fish and Game
or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (General
Plan MEA, p. 78 ff.)
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on
X
federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption,
or other means? (General Plan MEA, p. 78 ff.)
d) Interfere substantially with the
X
movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of
native wildlife nursery sites? (General Plan
MEA, p. 78 ff.)
e) Conflict with any local policies or
X
ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or
ordinance? (General Plan MEA, p. 73 ff.)
f) Conflict with the provisions of an
adopted Habitat Conservation Plan,
X
Natural Community Conservation Plan, or
other approved local, regional, or state
habitat conservationplan? (General Plan
-12-
MEA, p. 78 ff.)
IV. a) The property is currently being used as a grapefruit grove and consists of relatively
level terrain with an elevation of approximately 15 feet above mean sea level. In
addition to the grapefruit trees located in this densely planted orchard, vegetation
observed within the project area includes sunflowers, saltbushes, goat weed, and
various grasses
There were ten rows of grapefruit trees running east -west across the property and
terminating just west of Madison Avenue.
The site has been an operating orchard for some time, and as such does not contain
natural plant communities. The presence of agricultural rows creates the potential for
habitat for the burrowing owl, a species of concern. In accordance with the policies
contained in the General Plan, the project proponent is required to complete a pre -
construction survey of the parcel prior to construction, in order to assure that impacts
to this species will not be significant. Therefore, the following mitigation measure
shall be implemented.
1. Within 30 days of the initiation of any ground disturbing activity on the project
site, the project proponent shall cause a protocol -compliant burrowing owl
survey to be completed, submitted to the Community Development
Department, and approved. Should the species be identified on the site, the
biologist's recommendations for relocation shall be implemented prior to the
issuance of any ground disturbing permit.
b) Due to the long term use of the site in agriculture, the project is not expected to have a
substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community.
c) There are no wetlands on the site. The project is not expected to have a substantial
adverse effect on federally protected wetlands.
d) The project is not expected to interfere substantially with the movement of native
resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors,
e) There is no conflict with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy.
f) As the development site is already disturbed and has been used for agriculture, no
interference with a Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Conservation
Plan is expected.
Overall, impacts to biological resources from this proposed development are expected
to be less than significant.
5111
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impac
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES -- Would
theproject:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in
X
the significance of a historical resource as
defined in'15064.5? (Historical/
Archaeological Resources Survey ... TTM 33085
CRM Tech, January 2005)
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in
X
the significance of an archaeological
resource pursuant to'15064.5? (Historical/
Archaeological Resources Survey ... TTM 33085
CRM Tech, January 2005)
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
X
paleontological resource or site or unique
geologic feature? (Paleontologic Resources
Assessment TTM 33085... CRM Tech, January
2005)
d) Disturb any human remains, including
X
those interred outside of formal
cemeteries? (General Plan MEA p. 123 ff.)
V. a) A historical resources survey was performed by CRM TECH and after close
inspection of the 4.36 acre site, no evidence of any human activities dating to the
historic or prehistoric periods was found on the property. The nearby area has yielded
a number of significant historic resources, however, and the paleontologic resources
monitor for the project should also be aware of the possibility of finding such
resources'.
b) No archaeological resources have been found on the site and CRM TECH (cited
below) has recommended a finding of no impact with respect to this resource.
Nevertheless, archaeological resources have been found within a mile of the site, and a
qualified archaeological monitor will need to be present during all earth moving and
grading activities due to the general sensitivity of the area for subsurface cultural
deposits, to assure that potential impacts to archaeological resources are less than
significant.
1. An archaeological monitor shall be present during all earth moving activities.
The monitor shall be empowered to stop or redirect such activities if resources
are identified. The findings of the monitoring effort shall be documented in a
1 "Historical/ Archeological Resources Survey Report for Tentative Tract Map No. 33085", by CRM TECH
January 17, 2005; with Addenda April 14, 2005, and May 19, 2005.
-14-
report delivered to the Community Development Department no more than 30
days from the completion of monitoring activities.
c) Based on previous discoveries over a mile from the project area, the San Bernardino
County Museum has assigned the project area a high paleontological sensitivity, and
declared the proposed project to have a high potential to impact significant
nonrenewable fossil resources.
The on -foot field survey did find shell material mixed throughout the soil of the
project site. The material consisted mainly of shell fragments. The top layer of soil
has been disturbed by the agricultural use of the property. However, the study area's
ancient lakebeds have a moderate to high potential for invertebrate remains below the
disturbed top. Because of this, paleontological monitoring of earth -moving activities
is warranted once the undisturbed subsurface is reached.
Because of previous surface disturbance, no monitoring of tree removal, grubbing, or
surface grading is recommended. Monitoring should be restricted to undisturbed Lake
Cahuilla beds and any undisturbed subsurface older alluvium, which might be present
below the surface. Earth moving activities impacting the undisturbed subsurface soils
of the project area are likely to encounter paleontological resources within the
Holocene -age sediments present at the site.
In the entire proposed project area, beneath the quaternary dune sands, there may be
older Quaternary deposits, including deposits of lacustrinc and fluvial origin known as
the Lake Cahuilla beds, that may well contain significant terrestrial and freshwater
vertebrate fossils. These Lake Cahuilla beds occur at the surface immediately adjacent
to the southeastern portion of the proposed project area. The closest fossil vertebrate
localities are slightly higher in elevation, but in the same continuous Lake Cahuilla
beds, almost directly south of the proposed project area, and just east of the current
Lake Cahuilla on both sides of Madison Street north of 58`h Avenue. The following
mitigation measure shall be implemented for the site:
1. On -and off -site monitoring of earth -moving and grading for the entire site shall
be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor. Monitoring shall be
especially thorough in the southeastern portion of the site. The monitor shall
be equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction
delays and to remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the
remains of small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall be
empowered to temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of
abundant or large specimens. Proof that a monitor has been retained shall be
given to the City prior to issuance of the first earth -moving permit.
2. Recovered specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification and
permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small
invertebrates and vertebrates.
2 Letter from Samuel A. McLeod. Ph.D., of the Natural History Museum of Los Angeles County, dated December 15,
2004, to CRM TECH re: Paleontological Resources for Proposed Tract 22085 Core Homes.
-15-
d) The site does not occur in an area known to have previously been used for burial.
California law requires that anyone uncovering human remains during a construction
project notify the authorities. The project contractor will be required to conform to
these regulations, and will report any remains, should they be identified.
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant wl
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would
the project:
a) Expose people or structures to
potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury, or death
involving:
i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault,
X
as delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map
issued by the State Geologist for the area
or based on other substantial evidence of
a known fault? (MEA Exhibit 6.2)
ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA
X
Exhibit 6.2; October 2004 Geotechnical
Investigation by Sladden Engineering for
adjacent property, immediately north of the Core
Homes site.))
iii) Seismic -related ground failure,
X
including liquefaction? (MEA Exhibit 6.3)
iv) Landslides? (MEA Exhibit 6.4)
X
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or
X
the loss of topsoil? (MEA Exhibit 6.5)
c) Be located on expansive soil, as
X
defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform
Building Code (1994), creating
substantial risks to life or property (MEA
Exhibit 6.1)
d) Have soils incapable of adequately
X
supporting the use of septic tanks or
alternative waste water disposal systems
where sewers are not available for the
disposal of waste water? (General Plan
Exhibit 8.1)
lfG�
VI. a)
i) & ii) The site is not located in an Earthquake Fault Zone as designated by the State. Major
fault zones considered to be the most likely to create strong ground shaking are the
San Andreas Fault and the San Jacinto Fault, the former of which is 9.5 km (5.9 miles)
from the site and the later of which is 32.4 km (20.1 miles) from the project site. The
site is located within a seismically active area of Southern California and it is likely
that the proposed structures will experience strong ground shaking as a result of an
earthquake event during the life of the development. The City requires that structures
be designed based upon Uniform Building Code Seismic Zone 4 design criteria.
iii) The potential for liquefaction or other geologic/ seismic hazards occurring at the site is
considered to be quite negligible, as the applicable soil profile type is So, generally
described as stiff or dense soil I.
The geology of the site has been shown as recent alluvial -fan, flood -plain, lake, and
sand dune deposits. The soil is a mixture of sandy silt and clay.
iv) The project site is surrounded by other lands which are fairly level, and the site is not
subject to significant landslide hazards.
b) The project is located within the edge of a very severe wind erosion hazard area. To
prevent erosion and loss of topsoil, the PM 10 mitigation measures discussed in the Air
Quality section of this Initial Study will mitigate potential erosion. Retention of
significant grapefruit trees should also help mitigate erosion and topsoil loss.
c) The surface soils within the upper five feet consist primarily of silty sands. Expansion
testing indicates that the surface silty sands are generally non -expansive and are
classified as "very low" expansion category soils in accordance with Table 18-1B of
the 1997 Uniform Building Code.2
d) The City requires connection to the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) sewer
system, and the District has indicated in its April 11, 2005 letter to the La Quinta
Planning Commission that the proposed subdivision will be annexed into
Improvement District Numbers 55 and 82 for sanitary sewer service.
1 October 2004 Geotechnical Investigation by Sladden Engineering for adjacent property, immediately north of the Core
Homes site (page 4).
2 April 2002 Geotechnical Investigation by Sladden Engineering for adjacent property, immediately north of the Core
Homes site (page 2).
-17-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS --Would theproject:
a) Create a significant hazard to the
X
public or the environment through the
routine transport, use, or disposal of
hazardous materials? (Application materials)
b) Create a significant hazard to the
X
public or the environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident
conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the
environment? (General Plan MEA, p. 95 ff.)
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle
X
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials,
substances, or waste within one -quarter
mile of an existing or proposed school?
(Application materials)
d) Be located on a site which is included
X
on a list of hazardous materials sites
compiled pursuant to Government Code
Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it
create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment? (Application materials)
e) For a project located within an airport
X
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport, would
the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project
area? (General Plan land use map)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
X
private airstrip, would the project result
in a safety hazard for people residing or
working in the project area? (General Plan
land use map)
g) Impair implementation of or physically
X
interfere with an adopted emergency
response plan or emergency evacuation
plan? (General Plan MEA p. 95 ff)
-18-
h) Expose people or structures to a
X
significant risk of loss, injury or death
involving wildland fires, including where
wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas
or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands? (General Plan land use map)
VII. a)-h) The construction of seven homes on the subject site will not have an impact on
hazards and hazardous materials. The City implements Household Hazardous Waste
programs through its trash hauler, which are designed to provide for safe disposal of
hazardous substances generated in the home.
Development of the seven parcels needs to occur in accordance with all applicable fire
and safety codes and will not hinder or conflict with any adopted emergency response
or evacuation plan.
The project is not expected to result in the routine transport, use or disposal of
hazardous materials and is not expected to create a significant hazard to the public or
the environment. The subject property is not known to previously have been a
hazardous materials site, and therefore, the proposed development is not expected to
create a significant hazard to the public or the environment.
The Core Homes development is not located adjacent to wildlands, and is not expected
to pose any risks related to wildland fires. Impacts of the project related to hazards
and hazardous materials are considered to be negligible.
-19-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER
UALITY -- Would theproject:
a) Violate any water quality standards or
X
waste discharge requirements? (General Plan
EIR p. III-187 ff.)
b) Substantially deplete groundwater
X
supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there
would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or
a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-
existing nearby wells would drop to a level
which would not support existing land uses
or planned uses for which permits have
been granted)? General Plan EIR p. 11I-187 ff.)
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage
X
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, in a manner which would
result in substantial erosion or siltation on -
or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.)
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage
X
pattern of the site or area, including
through the alteration of the course of a
stream or river, or substantially increase
the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on -
or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.)
e) Create or contribute runoff water which
X
would exceed the capacity of existing or
planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff? (General Plan EIR p. III-187
ff.)
f) Place housing within a 100-year flood
X
hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood
Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation
-20-
map? (General Plan EIR p. III-187 ff.)
g) Place within a 100-year flood hazard
X
area structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental
Assessment Exhibit 6.6)
VIII. a) The proposed project is not expected to violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements.
b) The Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) has indicated that it wishes to review
plans for grading, landscaping, and irrigation to ensure efficient water management.
The project proponent will be required to implement the City's water efficient
landscaping and construction provisions, including requirements for water efficient
fixtures and appliances, which will ensure that the least amount of water is utilized
within the homes.
The proposed project is not expected to substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit
in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level. The applicant
will be required to comply with the City's NPDES standards, ensuring that potential
pollutants not be allowed to enter surface waters. These standards will assure that
impacts to water quality and quantity will be less than significant.
c) The development site is about 15 feet above sea level. The terrain is relatively level,
but slopes slightly to the east. The applicant is proposing to accommodate drainage in
the subdivision by way of a retention basin in the southeast comer of the property.
The 10,366 square foot retention basin would be located between proposed lots 5 and
6 in the development.
The project site includes Bureau of Reclamation Irrigation Lateral 119.2, an irrigation
water line. Prior to development of the site, the line must be relocated to assure that
these waters are not impacted by project development. In order to assure that the
irrigation water is not impacted by the proposed project, the following mitigation
measure shall be implemented:
1. Prior to issuance of grading permits, the project proponent shall relocate
Bureau of Reclamation Irrigation Lateral No. 119.2 to the satisfaction of the
Bureau of Reclamation and the Coachella Valley Water District.
d) The development is not expected to increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a
manner that would result in flooding on- or off -site. However, the capacity of the
retention basin must be reviewed to make certain of this, and the following mitigation
measure shall be implemented:
1. The project shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage),
LQMC, Engineering Bulletin #97.03, and the approved preliminary hydrology
plan dated 9/14/05.
-21 _
The City requires that all projects retain the 100-year storm on site. The City Engineer
will review final plans and hydrology analysis to assure that these basins are sufficient
to adequately retain water, prior to the issuance of grading permits.
Stormwater and project -generated urban runoff will be managed through the use of
catch basins, stormwater retention facilities, and other standards in accordance with
the California Storm Water Pollution Plan. A Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
(SWPPP) will be required of the project prior to grading.
e) The District has indicated that the development site is protected from regional
stormwater flows by the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and may be considered
safe from regional stormwater flows except in rare instances.
f & g) According to the Coachella Valley Water Districts, the property under consideration is
designated as being in Flood Zone X on Federal Flood insurance rate maps. Flood
zone X refers to areas that are outside the 500-year floodplain.
1 Letter to La Quinta Planning Commission from Mark L. Johnson, Director of Engineering, Coachella Valley Water
District, re: Tentative Tract 33085, Core Homes, LLC, dated April 11, 2005.
-22-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING -
Would the project:
a) Physically divide an established
X
community? (Aerial photo)
b) Conflict with any applicable land use
X
plan, policy, or regulation of an agency
with jurisdiction over the project
(including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal
program, or zoning ordinance) adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating
an environmental effect? (General Plan
Land Use Element; General Plan Exhibit 2.1
Land Use)
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat
X
conservation plan or natural community
conservation plan? (Master Environmental
Assessment p. 74 ff.)
IX. a)-c) Construction of the seven unit Core Homes residential development will not divide an
established community. The development does not conflict with habitat conservation
plans or natural community conservation plans.
Historically the 4.36 acre property has been a grapefruit orchard. There are no houses
or other buildings currently onsite.
Conversion of this property from a grapefruit orchard into a residential development of
one-half acre parcels conforms with the City's land use plan. The land use designation
for the property is Very Low Density Residential, allowing up to two dwellings per
acre. The permitted maximum project density is 8.6 units for the site, so the 7
proposed lots are below the density allowed and are consistent with the City's Land
Use Plan.
-23-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
X. MINERAL RESOURCES -- Would
the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a
X
known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of
the state? (Master Environmental Assessment
p. 71 ff.)
b) Result in the loss of availability of a
X
locally -important mineral resource
recovery site delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment
p. 71 ff.)
X. a) & b) The proposed project consists primarily of silty, fine-grained sands. The site is located
in an area of the City that is transitioning from agricultural to residential uses. It is in
Mineral Resource Zone MRZ-1. This refers to areas where adequate information
exists to support the conclusion that no significant mineral deposits are present, or
where it is judged that little likelihood exists for their presence.
-24-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
XI. NOISE Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation
X
of noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or
noise ordinance, or applicable standards
of other agencies? (General Plan MEA p. I I I
ff. Impact Sciences Noise Study for Tentative
Tract Map No. 33085, April 2005)
b) Exposure of persons to or generation
X
of excessive groundborne vibration or
groundborne noise levels? (General Plan
MEA p. I I I ff. Impact Sciences Noise Study for
Tentative Tract Map No. 33085, April 2005)
c) A substantial permanent increase in
X
ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the
project? (General Plan MEA p. I I I ff.)
d) A substantial temporary or periodic
X
increase in ambient noise levels in the
project vicinity above levels existing
without the project? (General Plan MEA p.
IIIff.)
e) For a project located within an airport
X
land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a
public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing
or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels? (General Plan land
use map)
f) For a project within the vicinity of a
X
private airstrip, would the project expose
people residing or working in the project
area to excessive noise levels? (General
Plan land use map)
XI. a)-d) Noise will be generated during project construction. There are no major sensitive
receptors located adjacent to the project site.
In general, increases in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity are expected to fall
-25-
into two categories, short-term and long-term. Short-term, temporary noise impacts
associated with the operation of heavy machinery are expected to occur during the
grading and construction process. This requires the following mitigation measure:
1. To minimize impacts during the grading and construction process, all
construction equipment shall be fitted with well -maintained mufflers.
2. Construction activities shall take place only during hours permitted by the
City's noise ordinance.
Exterior Noise
Based upon measurements from April 2005, noise levels at the site were
approximately 55 dB(A) and thus are at the upper range of normally acceptable levels,
per Table 8.1 of the City of La Quinta General Plan. Traffic on Madison Street and
Avenue 52 are both expected to increase dramatically by year 2020. Based upon
Avenue 52's greater distance from the site and the intervening orchards, noise from
Madison Street is the primary concern.
Up to 28,200 daily trips are expected on Madison Street in 2020, based upon the
City's General Plan traffic element, and CEQA requires long term noise levels to be at
acceptable levels. The CNEL (Community Noise Equivalent Level) that would be 80
feet from the centerline of Madison (where the closest residence would be located) is
68.7 dB(A) CNEL. This exceeds conditionally acceptable exterior noise levels — the
City considers 55 to 65 dB(A) to be conditionally acceptable.
A six foot block wall would reduce noise by 6.5 dB(A). This will bring the
development to 62.2 dB(A) CNEL — and this is within the range that is considered to
be conditionally acceptable according to the City's noise element. Based upon this,
the following measures are required for the mitigation of exterior noise levels, to allow
the proposed development to comply with interior and exterior noise level thresholds:
1. Construct a six-foot block wall that separates the entire eastern edge of the site
from Madison Street.
2. If Lots 5, 6, or 7 are proposed as two-story homes, any exterior balconies,
decks, or patios on the second stories for homes on these three lots must face
away from Madison Street.
Interior Noise
Interior noise should not be a problem as Title 24 of the Uniform Building Code calls
for insulated walls, glazed windows, and weather stripping on all doors and windows
opening to the exterior. Insulated stucco walls and double paned windows can reduce
exterior noise levels of 25.0 to 31.0 dB(A). As such, interior noise levels experienced
in the proposed residential units will remain below the 45.0 dB(A) CNEL threshold
required by Title 24.
e & O The Core Homes development site is over three miles from the Desert Resorts
Regional Airport, so noise impacts will be minimal. The proposed development site is
not within an airport land use plan.
-26-
With the implementation of mitigation measures, the noise impacts from the Core
Homes development are expected to be less than significant.
-27-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING —
Would the project:
a) Induce substantial population growth
X
in an area, either directly (for example,
by proposing new homes and businesses)
or indirectly (for example, through
extension of roads or other
infrastructure)? (General Plan, p. 9 ff.,
application materials)
b) Displace substantial numbers of
X
existing housing, necessitating the
construction of replacement housing
elsewhere? (General Plan, p. 9 ff., application
materials)
c) Displace substantial numbers of
X
people, necessitating the construction of
replacement housing elsewhere? (General
Plan, p. 9 ff., application materials)
XII. a)-c) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan designation for the project
site. The City's build -out population of 60,639 not including adjacent planning areas
or spheres of influence, will not be significantly challenged or impacted by growth
from the seven proposed dwellings.
No individuals will be displaced to create this development. No replacement housing
will need to be built elsewhere. The impacts of this development upon housing and
population will be insignificant.
Ml
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES
a) Would the project result in substantial
adverse physical impacts associated with
the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for
new or physically altered governmental
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental impacts,
in order to maintain acceptable service
ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any of the
public services:
Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57)
X
Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 57)
X
Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 52 ff.)
X
Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks
X
Master Plan)
Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA,
X
p. 46 ff.)
XIII. a) Build -out of the site will have a less than significant impact on public services. The
proposed project will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City
contract. Build -out of the proposed project will generate sales and property tax that
will offset the costs of added police and fire services, as well as the costs of general
government. The project will be required to pay the mandated school fees, fire
mitigation fees, and park in lieu fees at the time of issuance of building permits to
reduce the financial impacts to those services.
The Police Department has recommended that construction materials be kept in a
locked storage facility during the construction period for this project, and that the
homes to be constructed should incorporate wide -angled peepholes into all dwelling
front doors and all solid doors where visual scrutiny is compromised. The proposed
development site has been designated to provide for outdoor lighting and other
measures that will reduce the need for police protection. These requirements will be
included in the conditions of approval for the project.
Schools are managed by the Coachella Valley Unified School District, and the
developer will need to pay fees to the School District. The District has indicated that,
WO
due to overcrowding, students from the development may need to be transferred to a
school within the district that can accommodate them.
Parks and recreation areas are provided by both the City and the County, and the
impact of the development upon these parks is expected to be less than significant.
The property owner will be required to pay a parkland fee prior to recordation of the
final map.
-30-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
XIV. RECREATION --
a) Would the project increase the use of
X
existing neighborhood and regional parks
or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
(Application materials; General Plan Exhibit 5.1
Existing and Proposed Parks)
b) Does the project include recreational
X
facilities or require the construction or
expansion of recreational facilities which
might have an adverse physical effect on
the environment? (Application materials)
XIV. a) & b) The City's 2002 Comprehensive General Plan indicates that the closest existing or
planned parks in La Quinta are over two miles west of the proposed Core Homes
development. The City has numerous parks, and has set a standard of at least 3.0 acres
of parkland for every 1,000 residents. Due to the small size of the proposed
development, however, impact of the development on recreational resources will be
less than significant. Irregardless, the project will be required to pay Parkland
Dedication fees as required by Chapter 13.48 of the City Subdivision Ordinance.
-31-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC --
Would the project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic which is
X
substantial in relation to the existing
traffic load and capacity of the street
system (i.e., result in a substantial
increase in either the number of vehicle
trips, the volume to capacity ratio on
roads, or congestion at intersections)?
(General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.)
b) Exceed, either individually or
X
cumulatively, a level of service standard
established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads
or highways? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.)
c) Result in a change in air traffic
X
patterns, including either an increase in
traffic levels or a change in location that
results in substantial safety risks? (No air
traffic involved in project)
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a
X
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (TTM 33085)
e) Result in inadequate emergency
X
access? (TTM 33085)
0 Result in inadequate parking capacity?
X
(TTM 33085)
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans,
X
or programs supporting alternative
transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle
racks)? (Project description; MEA Exhibit 3.10
Trails)
XV. a) & b) The proposed project is not expected to cause any substantial increase in traffic in
relation to existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. Madison Street has a
right of way of 110 feet and is designated as a Primary Arterial. The proposed
development will not exceed the level of service standard established by the City for
Madison Street or other nearby roads such as Avenue 50 or Avenue 52.
-32-
c) The project will not result in a change in air traffic patterns. Likewise, rail and
waterbome traffic patterns will not be impacted.
d) The project does not substantially increase hazards due to any design features. In fact,
the choice of access from Beth Circle rather than from Madison Street adds a
significant safety -enhancing feature to the development. The City's Engineering
Department has already specified in a memorandum of April 8, 2005, that left turn
movements out of Beth Circle will not be permitted, and this adds an additional layer
of safety to the proposed project, as well as to motorists, pedestrians, and bicyclists
utilizing Madison Street.
e) The project is not expected to result in inadequate emergency access. The private
roads inside the development are "T" shaped and extend southward from the private
street called Old Orchard Lane. These private roads meet minimum standards for
safety including two dead ends, each of which meet the required minimum turning
radius of 38 feet.
f) With the proposed parcels each being one half acre, no shortage of parking capacity is
anticipated. In addition, no streets in the proposed development will be less than 36
feet wide at any point, and, therefore parking on both sides of the street is permissible.
g) The proposed development and division of land are not expected to conflict with any
adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. According
to the City's Trails Map, this section of Madison Street is a pedestrian/ hiking trail; an
on -road bicycle lane; and a multi -purpose trail. These improvements will be required
as part of the project approval conditions.
-33-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE
SYSTEMS. Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment
X
requirements of the applicable Regional
Water Quality Control Board? (General
Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
b) Require or result in the construction of
X
new water or wastewater treatment
facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
(General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
c) Require or result in the construction of
X
new storm water drainage facilities or
expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
(General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
d) Have sufficient water supplies
X
available to serve the project from
existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements
needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
e) Result in a determination by the
X
wastewater treatment provider that
serves or may serve the project that it has
adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the
provider's existing commitments?
(General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
I) Be served by a landfill with sufficient
X
permitted capacity to accommodate the
project's solid waste disposal needs?
(General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
g) Comply with federal, state, and local
X
statutes and regulations related to solid
waste? (General Plan MEA, p. 58 ff.)
5119
XVI. a) The Core Homes proposed subdivision will not exceed wastewater treatment
requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District, and CVWD has already indicated
the requirement to annex the seven proposed parcels into CVWD's Districts 55 and 82
for sanitation service.
b) The proposed project will ultimately lead to the creation of seven dwellings, therefore
it will not require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities, or
the expansion of existing facilities.
c) The area is protected from regional storm flows by the Coachella Valley Stormwater
Channel and may be considered safe from regional storm flows except in rare
instances.
d) The Coachella Valley Water District will famish domestic water and sanitation service
to this area in accordance with the current regulations of the District Sufficient water
supplies are available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources,
and CVWD has indicated that certain fees and charges will be paid by the subdivider
to obtain water service. CVWD has also indicated that additional domestic water
pipelines will have to be installed by the subdivider in order for the District to provide
service to all parcels.
Impacts to water supplies can be reduced by incorporating a variety of water -
conserving techniques which include the use of low -flow toilets and showerheads, and
the use of drought -tolerant plant materials in landscape and open space areas.
e) CVWD has indicated in its letter of April 11, 2005, that it has sufficient wastewater
treatment capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to its already
existing commitments.
f) Waste Management of the Desert serves residences within the City of La Quinta, and
no strains on landfill capacity are expected to result from the seven parcels in the Core
Homes development.
g) The project complies with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related
to solid waste, and future homes on site will participate in the City's recycling
program, that is coordinated through Waste Management of the Desert. On -site
recycling and solid waste source reduction programs must be implemented at project
build -out in accordance with local and state requirements.
-35-
Potentially
Less Than
Less Than
No
Significant
Significant w/
Significant
Impact
Impact
Mitigation
Impact
XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE --
a) Does the project have the potential to
X
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-
sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the
number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods
of California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have the potential to
X
achieve short -tern, to the disadvantage
of long-term environmental goals?
b) Does the project have impacts that are
X
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental
effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects of
other current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects)?
c) Does the project have environmental
X
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly?
XVII. a) The site has the potential to impact cultural and paleontologic resources. These
impacts will be mitigated to a less than significant level, as stated in Sections IV
(Cultural Resources) and V (Biological Resources).
XVII. b) The proposed project will augment the housing options offered to the City's residents,
a goal of the General Plan.
XVII. c) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan vision for this area, and
construction of the project will have no significant cumulative impacts.
-36-
XVII. d) The proposed project has the potential to adversely affect human beings, due to noise
impacts. Mitigation measures have been included to reduce the potential impacts
related to noise. These are outlined in Section XI.
XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA
process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative
declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following
on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for
review.
Not applicable.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were
within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis.
Not applicable.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project.
Not applicable.
-37-
§
c
(§
« §
\�
`
2
b
u
[
#
\
\
)
(2
i
k7
>
(�
/!
|i
ua
(
�
§/
|
\\�0
�
\/\
&)\
§
0
\�
�§
u
E§
\ `
§
2
/
f #
\
ƒ #
;
\ \
k§
»a
)
)\ )v
Jun ua
2zo,-
f
§n §k
\w
§
Cd
§)0)®
�)2
}\
/
\�
u
E/
\
2
{
§
f f
k
. ./
.
k \
)§
/
)o
/
2§
6
§
]
\m \
§
e
}(�\
\
E
�\
-
! '\
�)
)
�
§
�
|§
\
})k
z§\
} !®°
\){
) §G§)
42
\}\\
2
0
\
)§ƒ&
iA
Environmental Checklist Form
Project Title:
Lead agency name and address:
Tentative Tract Map 33085
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
3. Contact person and phone number: Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner
760-777-7125
4. Project location: Southwest comer of Madison Street and Beth Circle.
APN 772-270-013.
5. Project sponsor's name and address: Applicant: Core Homes, LLC
Attn: David Neale
470 S. Market Street
San Jose, CA 95113
6. General plan designation: Very Low Density 7. Zoning: Very Low Density Residential
Residential (up to 2 du/acre) (up to 2 du/acre), Equestrian Overlay
8. Description of project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later
phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its
implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.)
The project is a proposed residential development of seven detached single family dwellings
which will be built upon 4.36 gross acres, upon which an active grapefruit orchard is now
located. The project is located at the southwest corner of Beth Circle and Madison Street.
Madison Street is designated as a primary arterial, with a 110 foot ultimate right of way, and
is also an agrarian image corridor. Beth Circle is a private road.
Beth Circle, rather than Madison Street, is to provide access to the tract, and has street
improvements, although these were not installed in accordance with City -approved plans.
The improvements were associated with Tentative Tract 30378, which remains unrecorded
and which expired on June 18, 2004.
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings:
North: A grapefruit orchard is located immediately north of the subject property. It is in
transition from agriculture to residential. Some street improvements are in place including
paving and three foot wide culverts along both sides of Old Orchard Lane. The land use
designation for this property is VLDR (Very Low Density Residential of up to two dwellings
per acre.)
South: An active date farm is located immediately south of the proposed project. It has a
land use designation of VLDR (Very Low Density Residential of up to two dwellings per
acre.)
West: These lands have a land use designation of Very Low Density Residential, and are also
t-
transitioning from agricultural to residential usage.
East: The property's eastern boundary is Madison Street. Properties east of this section of
Madison Street are within the City of Indio, and these properties including the Empire Polo
Club, have a land use designation of Country Estates, indicating that very low density
residential usage is planned.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement.)
Coachella Valley Water District
Coachella Valley Unified School District
-2-
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE
CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT 33085,
DIVIDING t 4.3 ACRES INTO SEVEN SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS
CASE NO. TT 33085
APPLICANT: CORE HOMES, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 25" day of October, 2005, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider a
recommendation on Tentative Tract 33085, a request to subdivide t4.3 acres into
seven single-family residential lots and certain lettered lots, located on the southwest
corner of Madison Street and Beth Circle, more particularly described as:
BEING A PORTION OF PARCEL 3 OF PM 16457,
MAP BOOK 100/48 OF MAPS
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has
prepared Environmental Assessment 2005-537, and has determined that, although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a
significant effect in this case because mitigation measures incorporated into the
project approval will mitigate or reduce any potential impacts to a level of non -
significance; 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 make the following findings to justify their recommendation
on Tentative Tract 33085:
1. The proposed Tentative Tract Map 33085 is consistent with the City's General
Plan, with the implementation of Conditions of Approval. The project density of
1.6 units per acre is consistent with the adopted Very Low Density Residential
land use designation of up to 2 dwelling units per acre, as set forth in the
General Plan.
2. The design and improvements of the proposed Tentative Tract Map 33085 are
consistent with the City's General Plan, to provide for adequate storm water
drainage, and other infrastructure improvements with the implementation of
recommended conditions of approval to ensure proper street widths, perimeter
walls, storm drainage facilities, and timing of their construction.
3. The La Quinta Community Development Department has prepared
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 - Core Homes
October 25, 2005
Environmental Assessment 2005-537. Based on this Assessment, the
Community Development Department has determined that, although the
proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will
not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation measures incorporated
into the project approval will mitigate or reduce any potential impacts to a level
of non -significance. A pre -construction survey will be conducted for burrowing
owl species, the only species of concern identified for this site.
4. The design of Tentative Tract 33085 and type of improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems, in that this issue was considered in
Environmental Assessment 2005-537, in which no significant health or safety
impacts were identified for the proposed project.
5. As conditioned, the design of Tentative Tract 33085 and type of improvements,
will not conflict with easements, acquired by the public -at -large, for access
through, or use of property within the proposed subdivision.
6. The site for Tentative Tract 33085 is physically suitable for the proposed
subdivision, as natural slopes do not exceed 20%, and there are no identified
geological constraints on the property that would prevent development pursuant
to the geotechnical study prepared for the subdivision.
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 require compliance with those mitigation measures specified
by the Mitigation Monitoring Program of Environmental Assessment 2003-537,
prepared for Tentative Tract Map 33085;
3. That it does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 33085 to the City
Council, 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 25`h day of October, 2005, by the following vote to
wit:
AYES:
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Core Homes
October 25, 2005
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 33085
CORE HOMES. LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
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 Tentative
Tract Map, 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.
2. This Tentative Tract Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply
with the requirements and standards of Government Code § § 66410 through
66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta
Municipal Code ("LQMC").
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
• Coachella Valley Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• SunLine Transit Agency
• South Coast Air Quality Management District, Coachella Valley
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.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
A project -specific NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the
applicant, who shall then 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.
4. 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 w_w_w._cabmphan_dbo_oks_.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.
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
2
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
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.
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 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.
7. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development
include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1) Madison Street (Primary Arterial, Option A 110' ROW) — The
standard 55 feet from the centerline of Madison Street for a total
1 10-foot ultimate developed right of way.
8. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private 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.
9. The private street right-of-ways to be retained for private use required for this
development include:
A. PRIVATE STREETS
1) Residential Streets measured at gutter flow line to gutter flow line
3
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
shall have a 36-foot travel width.
B. CUL DE SACS
1) The cul de sac shall conform to the shape shown on the tentative
map with a 38-foot curb radius at the bulb or larger as shown on
the tentative map.
10. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street
right-of-ways shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map 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.
11. 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. Madison Street (Primary Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L.
The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall
design is approved.
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. Direct vehicular access to Madison Street from lots with frontage along
Madison Street is restricted, except for those access points identified on the
tentative tract map, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval.
4
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 - Recommended
October 25, 2005
The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the recorded final tract map.
15. 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.
16. 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 Tentative
Tract Map and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is
approved by the City Engineer.
17. The applicant shall enter into a reciprocal agreement with the owner(s) of the
property to the north, Tentative Tract Map No. 30378 for access to Madison
Street via Beth Circle. The applicant is advised that the approval of this
Tentative Tract Map No. 33085 is dependent on the completion of street
improvements for the development to the north, Tentative Tract Map No.
30378.
f3lr►_1ETi1r-0
18. Prior to the City's approval of a Final Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCAD files of the Final Map that was approved by the City's map checker
on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a
standard AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD
program.
Where a Final Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a
file that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept
a raster -image file of such Final Map. The Final Map shall be of a 1 " = 40'
scale.
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.
19. 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.
5
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
20. 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 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 Plan:
1"
= 40'
Horizontal
B.
PM10 Plan:
1"
= 40'
Horizontal
C.
SWPPP:
1"
= 40'
Horizontal
NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently.
D. Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan:
1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
E. Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan: 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
berm design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area.
F. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan:
1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
NOTE: D through F to be submitted concurrently.
The following plans shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department
for review and approval. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified,
unless otherwise authorized by the Building and Safety Director 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.
G. On -Site Residential Precise Grading Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal
2
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 - Recommended
October 25, 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.
All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping 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.
All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit
Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue
RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans
and/or as approved by the Engineering Department.
"Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall
& Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-
foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions.
21. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for
elements of construction which can be accessed via the Online Engineering
Library at the City website (www.la uinta.org). Navigate to the Public Works
Department home page and look for the Online Engineering Library hyperlink.
22. 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
23. Prior to approval of any Final Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off -
site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully
secured and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA")
guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its
obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be
7
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
required by the City.
24. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between
the applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the
completion of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall
comply with the provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC.
25. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of
any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the
proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey
monumentation.
26. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant
shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and
off -site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey
monumentation, for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such
estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or
ordinance.
For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs
shall be approved by the City Engineer.
At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for
conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall
also submit one copy each of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " reduction of each page of the
Final Map, along with a copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map.
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be
approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the
applicant's detailed cost estimates.
Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V.
improvements.
27. 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
F?
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
28. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
29. 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.
30. 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.
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.
31. 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.
32. 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
M
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 - Recommended
October 25, 2005
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 0 8") behind the curb.
33. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's
approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless
the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these
Conditions of Approval.
34. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot
higher from the building pads in adjacent developments.
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.
35. 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 Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the
proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance
finding review.
36. 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.
DRAINAGE
37. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage),
LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the approved preliminary hydrology
plan dated September 14, 2005 for Tentative Tract Map No. 33085. More
specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be
10
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
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 and include any resulting uncaptured
tributary stormwater flows. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour
or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off.
38. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received
and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief
route.
39. For properties where sump conditions exist, the applicant must either define a
diversion/overflow strategy or retain upstream stormwater as required for
existing as -built conditions from all off -site tributary flow from the respective
high points. The applicant must provide either on -site retention or alternative
facilities of diversion/pass through, if selected. Historical flow paths should be
identified and routing provided in the hydrology analysis equivalent to historical
flow direction. As local topography allows, tributary areas may exceed limits of
property lines adjacent to public roads. The 100-year storm shall be the
governing event in the designer's evaluation.
40. 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. In residential developments, nuisance
water shall be passed through a pre -filter system comparable to the MaxWell
Plus Primary Settling Chamber (or equivalent) before being disposed 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 surges of
up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft.
The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain nuisance water
surges from landscape area, residential unit, and off -site street nuisance water.
Flow from adjacent well sites shall be designed for retention area percolation by
separate infiltration system approved by the City Engineer. 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.
41. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water
(through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or
11
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 - Recommended
October 25, 2005
adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a
requirement for development of this property.
42. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless
approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer.
43. 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.
44. 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.
45. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
46. 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.
UTILITIES
47. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities),
LQMC.
48. Applicant is advised that there are existing Bureau of Reclamation (BOR)
facilities that affect this development. There may be conflicts with Irrigation
Lateral #119.2, and no final map can be approved until utility clearances have
been accomplished through CVWD. The final map shall reflect this facility and
its respective easement.
49. 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.
50. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development,
and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground.
12
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 - Recommended
October 25, 2005
All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles
are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground.
51. 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
52. 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.
53. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform to
the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Madison Street (Primary Arterial; 1 10' R/W):
Widen the west side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the
Tentative Map boundary to its ultimate width on the west side as
specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these conditions.
Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary
to augment and convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La
Quinta's urban arterial horizontal and vertical design standard. The west
curb face shall be located forty three feet (43') west of the centerline.
These improvements may be deferred to be completed with future
Madison Street Improvements.
If full Madison Street improvements are deferred, the applicant shall
construct interim street improvements as approved by the City Engineer.
In addition, the applicant is required to bond for the ultimate width
widening on Madison Street.
13
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 - Recommended
October 25, 2005
Other required improvements in the Madison Street right of way and/or
adjacent landscape setback area include:
a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to:
curb, gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs.
b) A 10-foot wide Multi -Purpose Trail. The applicant shall
construct a multi -use trail per La Quinta Standard 260 along
the Madison Street frontage within the landscaped setback.
The location and design of the trail shall be approved by the
City. A split rail fence shall be constructed along the
roadway side of the multi -purpose trail in accordance with
Section 9.140.060 (Item E, 3a) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Bonding for the fence to be installed shall be posted prior to
final map approval. At grade intersection crossings shall be
of a medium and design and location as approved by the
Engineering Department on the street improvement plan
submittal.
Improvements in the Madison Street right of way eligible for DIF
reimbursement but not conditioned of the applicant include:
c) Half width of an 18 - foot wide raised landscaped median
along the entire boundary of the Tentative Tract Map.
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).
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1) Construct full 36-foot wide travel width improvements measured
gutter flow line to gutter flow line where the residential streets are
double loaded.
2) The location of driveways of corner lots shall not be located within
the curb return and away from the intersection when possible.
C. PRIVATE CUL DE SACS
14
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 - Recommended
October 25, 2005
1) Shall be constructed according to the lay -out shown on the
tentative map with 38-foot curb radius or greater at the bulb
similar to the layout shown on the rough grading plan.
54. 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:
Residential 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.
55. 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.
56. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
Primary Entry (Beth Circle at Madison Strreet): Right turn movements in and out
and left turn movement in are permitted. Left turn out is prohibited.
57. 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.
58. 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.
59. Gated vehicular entry shall be limited to a common gated entry between
Tentative Tract Map No. 30378 and Tentative Tract Map No. 33085 on Beth
15
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
Circle at Madison Street, subject to review and approval by the Public Works
Department and Fire Marshal. The developers/owners of Tracts 30378 and
33085 shall be required to provide a copy of an executed agreement for access,
construction and maintenance, and provide notice in the respective CC&R's for
both tracts, to show concurrence with the gating restriction. In addition, this
shall be incorporated into the reciprocal access agreement as required under
Condition 18 of this approval, if deemed appropriate by the Public Works
Department. Condition 55 of City Council Resolution # 2002-96, as adopted for
Tract 30378 to the north, shall govern with respect to the gate design and
improvement requirements. Wall and gate design, color and materials will be
subject to review by the Community Development Department when permits for
those improvements are applied for.
FIRE MARSHAL
60. Any turn or turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot outside turning radius.
61. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet
of all portions of the exterior of the first floor.
62. The minimum dimension for roads and gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed
width, and a minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet, 6 inches. All gated entry
designs shall require review and approval by the Fire Marshall and incorporation
into street improvement plans to be submitted for approval.
63. Streets must be a minimum of 36 feet wide at all points if on -street parking is
to be allowed on both street sides. Areas between 28 and 36 feet will be
permitted parking on one street side, and streets less than 28 feet shall be
painted and posted as NO PARKING — FIRE LANE.
64. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible materials
being placed on any individual lot. Two sets of water plans shall be submitted
to the Fire Department for approval.
65. 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.
66. Final fire protection requirements will be determined when final maps/building
plans are submitted for review. Final conditions will be addressed when building
16
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
plans are submitted. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at
the time building and water system plans are submitted. Any interpretation as
to the meaning of any fire -related conditions shall be the sole responsibility of
the Fire Marshal.
CONSTRUCTION
67. 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 two homes within the development or when directed by the City,
whichever comes first.
LANDSCAPING
68. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
69. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention
basins, common lots and park areas. Plans for these areas shall be submitted for
review and approval through the Community Development Department (CDD),
prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. As part of CDD review,
the plans will require review and approval by the City's Architecture and
Landscape Review Committee, and the Planning Commission, prior to issuance
of any on or off -site improvement permits. All plans submitted for review shall
include water use calculations demonstrating plan compliance with the
requirements of Chapter 8.13, LQMC (Water Efficient Landscaping), along with
written acceptance of the plans by CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural
Commissioner. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks,
medians, retention basins, etc. shall be signed and stamped by a licensed
landscape architect.
When all reviews have been completed by CDD, the applicant shall submit the
approved plans for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not
approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer.
70. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the
requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with
17
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public
streets.
71. A minimum two rows of existing citrus trees shall be preserved in place along
the Madison Street perimeter of the tract, and a minimum one row of existing
citrus trees shall be preserved along the north and west perimeters of the tract.
If trees cannot be preserved in place, then they shall be relocated to the extent
needed to address this requirement. All preserved trees as existing or relocated
shall be called out on the landscape plans when submitted for plan check.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
72. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet
with the approval of the City Engineer.
73. 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.
74. 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.
75. 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
76. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance), LQMC.
77. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual
maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access
drives, and sidewalks.
im
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
FEES AND DEPOSITS
78. 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.
79. 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).
80. A fee of $1,314.00, payable to Riverside County, is due to this office within 24
hours of any City Council approval. This is required by the County to post the
Notice of Determination and offset costs associated with AB 3158 (Fish and
Game Code 711.4).
81. Applicant shall pay the fees as required by the Coachella Valley Unified School
District, as in effect at the time requests for building permits are submitted.
82. Applicant/developer shall pay any mandated fees associated with fire protection
facilities, as may be required by the Fire Marshal and/or the City of La Quinta.
Any required fee(s) shall be paid to the appropriate agency, prior to issuance of
the first dwelling unit permit.
83. Tentative Tract 33085 shall provide for parks through payment of an in -lieu fee,
as specified in Chapter 13.48, LQMC. Based on the requirements of Section
13.48.050 LQMC, the amount of park land required for 7 lots is 0.06 acres.
The in -lieu payment(s) shall be based upon this acreage requirement. In -lieu fees
may be paid for each proposed final map phase of a multiple -phased map.
Payment of the in -lieu fee shall be made prior to, or concurrently with
recordation of the first final map within the tentative map.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
84. Within 30 days of the initiation of any ground disturbing activity on the project
site, the project proponent shall cause a protocol -compliant burrowing owl
survey to be completed, submitted to the Community Development Department,
and approved. Should the species be identified on the site, the biologist's
recommendations for relocation shall be implemented prior to the issuance of
any ground disturbance permit.
W
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
85. An archaeological monitor shall be present during all earth moving activities.
The monitor shall be empowered to stop or redirect such activities if resources
are identified. The findings of the monitoring effort shall be documented in a
report delivered to the Community Development Department no more than 30
days from the completion of monitoring activities.
86. On and off -site monitoring of earth -moving and grading for the entire site shall
be conducted by a qualified paleontological monitor. Monitoring shall be
especially thorough in the southeastern portion of the site. The monitor shall be
equipped to salvage fossils as they are unearthed to avoid construction delays
and to remove samples of sediments that are likely to contain the remains of
small fossil invertebrates and vertebrates. The monitor shall be empowered to
temporarily halt or divert equipment to allow removal of abundant or large
specimens. The applicant shall have entered into a contract for archaeological
monitoring with a qualified archaeologist, with a copy of that
contract/agreement to be submitted with civil plans for any grading or other
land disturbance. The contract shall be reviewed and accepted by Community
Development prior to any grading permit approval.
87. Recovered specimens shall be prepared to the point of identification and
permanent preservation, including washing of sediments to recover small
invertebrates and vertebrates.
88. The following measures are required for the mitigation of exterior noise levels,
to allow the proposed development to comply with interior and exterior noise
level thresholds.
A. The developer shall construct a six-foot block wall, as measured from the
inside wall at pad elevation, that separates the entire eastern edge of the
site from Madison Street, and extending 100 feet west of Madison along
the north and south tract boundary.
B. A final acoustical analysis shall be completed and submitted for review at
time of building permit plan check, based on final lot layout and pad
elevations, to demonstrate that the City's standards for interior and
exterior CNEL levels will be met for each proposed dwelling unit.
89. Review of architecture and landscaping for production and/or individual custom
homes, shall be subject to Title 9, Section 9.60.330 and 9.60.340, LQMC, as
applicable. The Community Development Director or designee shall determine
whether the unit(s) applied for constitute custom homes or production -level
development. Any custom home design guidelines that may be required shall be
20
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Tract 33085 — Recommended
October 25, 2005
reflected or referenced in the CC&R's for TT 33085.
90. The entire perimeter wall design and location, including sound wall areas, entry
wall areas, and property line walls, shall be subject to review and approval by
the Community Development Department through a master wall plan. The plan
shall include a staggered, recessed or meandering wall along Madison Street,
corner cutback walls at all street corners, and a landscaped between back of
curb and the wall along the south side of Beth Circle. The landscaped setback
shall be of sufficient width to accommodate relocation or retention of existing
citrus tree stands. The west end of the wall along Beth Circle shall be set back
a minimum of 10 feet from the back of curb at the tract entry, with the
opposing tract entry wall section set back a minimum of 5 feet from back of
curb, so as to create an offset appearance at the entry to the tract. The wall
plan shall specify colors and materials to be used for the walls, capping,
pilasters, entry monuments, planters, and any other such features.
91. All lots within TT 33085 shall be limited to homes that are one story, 22 feet in
height.
92. Should any guest house/casitas be part of the floor plans designed for TT
33085, whether production or custom homes, a master Minor Use Permit for all
such guest houses/casitas shall be secured in conjunction with the recordation
of the Final Map. A covenant or provision in the CC&R's shall be recorded
informing all property owners of the Minor Use Permit and its conditions of
approval for the production homes.
21
ATTACHMENT ;
tz
AVENUE
n
SITE
AVENUE
50 T.5S
T.6S
VISTA
BONITA
IRAIL
52
AVENUE 51
OLD ORCH40
'-LANE
2 BEH CIRCLE
a
VICINITY MAP
N.T.S.
! II e
t$Blrrl � �tt �t� � $ If IIieEE:r
t
ATTACHMENT 2
e
e
e j
e
�
I
( I
"y 1
!11
•
n
� ' � �� rpttttrtllo�!�iltlillltrll!!!
B , ee eil�;! 11111 IFS#®(
I
41
e0
f ATTACHMENT #,
TO: LA QUINTA PLANNING DEPT. ATTN: WALLY NESBITT
FROM: ROBERT SMITH, 51425 MADISON
RE: TENATIVE TRACT MAP NO.33085 BY CORE HOMES JUN — 6 2005 A
i' r 7h if AT
t N1, Df' LtOPiN�T
DEAR MR. NESBITT,
THANK YOU FOR TALKING TO ME ABOUT THE CORE HOMES TENATIVE
TRACT MAP NO.33085 FOR THE 4.5 ACRES DIRECTLY NORTH OF OUR 4.5
ACRE DATE RANCH AT 51425 MADISON.
AS I TOLD TO YOU, I FEEL''/2 ACRE LOTS ARE NOT CONSISTANT WITH ANY
OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES. IN ADDITION TO MY 4 '/2 ACRE RANCH
TO THE SOUTH, THE 9 ACRES OF THE ORCHARD TO THE NORTH ARE 1
ACRE LOTS, AND THE POLO ESTATES TO THE WEST ARE 96 ACRES OF 2
ACRE LOTS. ACROSS THE STREET TO THE EAST ARE THE POLO GROUNDS
YET TO BE DEVELOPED BUT HOPEFULLY THEY WILL LEAVE A GOOD
AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE.
OVER THE YEARS THE DEVELOPERS HAVE DESTROYED A GOOD DEAL OF
THE THINGS THAT MADE LA QUINTA GREAT AND I HOPE WE CAN TRY TO
MAINTAIN WHAT IS LEFT OF THE TREES AND OPEN AREAS. WE NOW HAVE
THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THIS AS THE DEMAND FOR LARGER LOTS HAS
RECENTLY INCREASED DRAMATICALLY.
THE SHAPE OF THE CORE HOMES 4'/s ACRES LENDS ITSELF MUCH BETTER
TO I ACRE LOTS. THE ROAD COMES INTO THE MIDDLE OF THE PIECE
FROM THE ORCHARD, NOT MADISON. BY COMBINING LOTS 1 +2, 3+4, 5+E,
AND 6+7 INTO 1 ACRE LOTS WOULD MAKE THE DEVELOPMENT MUCH
MORE COMPATABLE WITH THE ORCHARD. THE LARGER LOTS WOULD
REQUIRE LESS PAVED ROAD, BE MORE ATTRACTIVE AND OPEN, AND
HAVE BETTER VIEWS. THIS WOULD ALLOW NICER HOMES, GREATER SET
BACKS FROM OUR PROPERTY WITH ITS CHEMICALS AND PESTICIDES, AND
THE PRESERVATION OF MORE OF THE MATURE CITRUS TREES LOCATED
ON THE PROPERTY NOW.
I FEEL THAT GOOD PLANNING FOR THIS AREA SHOULD KEEP THE
MINIMUM LOT SIZE TO I ACRE TO CONFORM WITH WHAT IS ALREADY
THERE AND SUCCESSFUL.
SINCERELY,
ROBERT SMITH
f0.��3DdY
<(3 3 53
PH #D
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 25, 2005
CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT #1
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
APPLICANT: REGENCY MARINITA-LA QUINTA, LLC
REQUEST: TO AMEND THE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD
SHOPPING CENTER TO INCLUDE A SUPERMARKET, DRUG
STORE, AND ADDITIONAL RETAIL WITH A MAXIMUM
BUILDING HEIGHT OF 35 FEET. THE AMENDMENTS ARE
SOUGHT TO CHANGE THE SITE PLAN TO RELOCATE THE
DRUG STORE SITE AND AMEND CERTAIN DESIGN
STANDARDS, INCLUDING REDUCING CERTAIN
LANDSCAPE SETBACKS FROM 15 TO 5 FEET ADJACENT
TO MONTICELLO PARK, AND TO SUBDIVIDE THE 10.6
ACRE SITE INTO 7 COMMERCIAL PARCELS.
LOCATION: THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND
FRED WARING DRIVE
PROPERTY
OWNER: REGENCY MARINITA-LA QUINTA LLC
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
REVIEWED THIS PROJECT UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA).
THIS DEVELOPMENT REQUEST HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY
REVIEWED UNDER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 02-
462, UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA). BASED UPON
THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A
SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT
AND NO ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
IS REQUIRED. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR
CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER
THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE
SECTION 21166.
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH: FRED WARING DRIVE, SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL
(ESPLANADE)
SOUTH: SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (MONTICELLO)
EAST: JEFFERSON STREET, VACANT LAND IN THE CITY OF
INDIO COMMERCIALLY ZONED
WEST: CITY PARK
BACKGROUND:
The Specific Plan was originally approved by the City Council in 2003. The original
Specific Plan was accompanied by a Site Development Permit for the grocery store
portion of the project. Since that time, changes in tenant requirements have led to
the redesign of the site to better fit current needs. The Specific Plan has been
amended to include a revised site plan and amendments to the development
regulations. A Tentative Parcel Map, to allow the subdivision of the site into seven
commercial parcels, is also proposed. There is no Site Development Permit
associated with this application at this time. In the future, Site Development
Permit(s) and Conditional Use Permit(s) will be required for building construction on
the site.
PROJECT REQUEST:
The project currently under review consists of two applications: an Amendment to
the Specific Plan, and a Tentative Parcel Map. Each of the applications is discussed
individually below.
Specific Plan
The proposed Specific Plan, as currently approved, does not significantly differ from
the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed Amendment (Attachment
1) focuses primarily on site design, and changes in potential land uses. The
architectural style of the center, and associated design guidelines, are not to be
amended. The building mass on the west end of the site is being reduced
somewhat by the reconfiguration of the site plan. The access points for the center,
as well as the turning movements allowed from these access points, are not being
amended.
The Specific Plan approved in 2003 is proposed to be amended as follows:
1. Amend the site plan to relocate and redistribute buildings.
2. Reduce the maximum square footage allowed within the project from
114,917 square feet to 111,470 (a reduction of 3%).
3. Amend the minimum landscaped setback along the west property line
(City Park) from 13.5 feet to 5 feet.
4. Amend the proposed hydrology on -site to include a combination of
retention basin and underground storage for storm flows.
5. Amend the hours of operation for the Market, Drug Store and restaurant
uses to allow 24 hour operation.
Site Plan Desiqn
The changes to the site plan occur primarily on the north half of the site. Please
refer to Exhibit 8 of the proposed amended Specific Plan, and the previously
approved site plan, attached to this staff report (Attachment 2). The drug store
which previously was planned to be attached to the market building (with
intervening shops), is now proposed to be a free-standing structure at the northeast
corner of the site. The fueling station previously occurring on the northeast corner
of the property, has been relocated to the southeast quadrant (please note that the
Specific Plan stipulates that if the fueling station is not built, that area would be
converted to parking, and surrounding buildings would be increased in size, up to
the maximum 25% building coverage). Two free-standing bank or restaurant sites
are now proposed, one in the northwest corner of the site, and one along the
eastern boundary, approximately at the mid -point of the site. Both of these sites
may include drive-thru facilities. Please note that all buildings within the site will
require, at a minimum, a Site Development Permit, to be reviewed by the
Commission. Some uses may also require a Conditional Use Permit, including the
fuel station. The site plan has been reviewed for purposes of a Specific Plan
review, not Site Development Permit. At the Site Development Permit stage
additional staff review and recommendations will be made.
The approved Specific Plan included drive-thru uses. The Specific Plan Amendment
text states that the project will permit restaurants with drive-thru, a deviation from
the Neighborhood Commercial zone, which does not permit these uses in that zone.
The section "Principal Use Permitted" on page 27, however, states only that the
uses permitted under the Zoning Ordinance will be permitted on this site. A
condition of approval has been added which adds this use with a Conditional Use
Permit on that page. The requirement for a Conditional Use Permit assures that the
design and circulation of each potential drive-thru can be studied when site -specific
plans are submitted. The Conditional Use Permit process includes the option to
deny the use, should the use or specific conditions make it undesirable.
The proposed changes in the site plan also propose a reduction in the access
"throats," inconsistent with the City's Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Ordinance
requires that parking lots of this size on Arterial roadways have access driveways
which extend 70 feet without possibility of internal turning movements. Both
access driveways on the eastern property line, off Jefferson Street, and the east
side of the eastern driveway on Fred Waring Drive do not meet this criteria,
providing access throats of approximately 55 feet. The Specific Plan is conditioned
to be amended to reflect 70 foot driveway throats. The Public Works Department
can work with the applicant in the ultimate design, particularly on Jefferson Street,
where the deceleration lanes may allow a reduction in the standards (please see
Specific Plan Condition of Approval No. 5). The increase can be accommodated in
Site Plan Review, by shifting drive aisles and parking areas.
The site could include up to three drive-thru facilities: the drug store, whose drive-
thru is proposed on the west side of the building; and the two bank/restaurant
sites, which would have drive-thru on the north side of each building. The
configuration of the drive-thru at 'Bank A" may result in a conflict with traffic in
the drive aisles. The details of this design will be reviewed with each Site
Development Permit application submitted, to assure safe driving movements.
Finally, the grade differential between the project site and the Monticello project
varies from east to west. At Jefferson Street, the two sites are roughly even. At
the western property boundary, the proposed project site is lower than the
Monticello site. Further, the Monticello project was conditioned to include six foot
high walls over two foot high berms to assure a separation of eight feet between
the commercial project site and the residential back yards. Condition of Approval
No. 16 requires that the height be maintained, should a new wall be constructed by
the project developer or on -site grading reduces the eight foot high minimum
separation between the single-family residential and neighborhood shopping center.
Square Footage Permitted
As stated above, the Specific Plan, as proposed, slightly reduces the square
footage allowed, based on the Site Plan provided in the document. Ultimately,
however, both the approved and the proposed Specific Plan allow a floor area ratio
of 0.25. The site could develop, under this standard, with as much as 115,434
square feet of commercial space. The change is only due to reconfiguration of the
buildings, and is not significant.
Landscape Setbacks
The proposed landscape setbacks conform to City standards, and maintain the
previously approved landscaped setbacks, with one exception. The applicant
proposes a reduction in the landscaped setback on the western property line to five
feet. The City standard is 15 feet. The approved Specific Plan allows 13.5 feet.
The Specific Plan states that the project as currently designed provides a range of
7.5 feet to 24.7 feet of setback along the western property line (Footnote #5,
Table 1, Page 5). However, by setting the standard at five feet as requested, the
project could be redesigned to include only a five foot setback along the entire
western property boundary. The adjacency to the park located immediately west
does lessen the need for considerable setbacks in this area, but does not eliminate
the need to provide proper softening of the project edge, or the aesthetic benefits
provided by adequate landscaped areas. Staff is concerned that the five foot
minimum is not adequate to allow for healthy growth of trees and other
landscaping, and will eventually degrade the property boundary's appearance. As a
result, and in order to assure that a balance can be reached between aesthetic
benefit and functionality of this area, a condition of approval has been added which
requires the amendment of Table 1 to allow a minimum eight foot setback, with an
average of 15 feet along the western property edge.
Hours of Operation
The Specific Plan as approved restricts operating hours as follows:
"The commercial and retail uses on site will operate from 6.00 AM to 12.00 AM,
Monday through Sunday. Restaurant and coffee shops will operate from 6.00 AM
to 1.00 AM Monday through Sunday, and the associated fuel station would be
open 24 hours seven days a week."
The proposed Amendment would allow:
"The retail uses on site will operate from 6.00 AM to 12.00 AM, Monday through
Sunday. Restaurant uses, fast food drive thru (sic) type, would be open 24 hours a
day, seven days a week, and the Market, Drug Store and fuel station would also be
open 24 hours a day, seven days a week."
Supermarket and drugstore uses are often open on a 24 hours basis, and have
limited activity. On the project site, neither of these uses is in proximity to
residential development. Residential uses do occur on the north and south, as well
as on the southeast. 24 hour operation of uses on the south boundary, particularly
in Pad and Shop 1, adjacent to the Monticello project, could be audible and a
nuisance to those residents. Similarly, a drive-thru restaurant in the northwest
corner of the site would be located approximately 200 to 250 feet south of the
homes at Esplanade. Given the particularly quiet noise environment during the night
time, noise from speakers at these locations will be particularly noticeable.
Therefore, hours of operation should be limited for Shop 1, Pad C, and Bank B, to
protect the residents adjacent to those building sites. Specific Plan Condition No.
14 reflects this restriction.
Secondary Gateway
The corner of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street is designated a Secondary
Gateway in the General Plan (Circulation Element, Image Corridors). As such, the
General Plan envisioned an "entry statement" for this location, which identified the
City and provided an aesthetic enhancement for the area. Both the Specific Plan
and the Parcel Map include a condition of approval to reserve an area for this
Gateway feature, and to either improve or bond for improvements to the
satisfaction of the Community Development and Public Works Directors.
Tentative Parcel Map
The second application under consideration is a commercial Parcel Map
(Attachment 3). The Map proposes the division of the 10.6 acre parcel into seven
parcels, generally co -terminus with each building's footprint and parking area. The
map is consistent with the Specific Plan. Since no Site Development Permits have
been requested at this time, amendments to the map may be required as actual
buildings are sited within the project, in order to meet the City's development
standards.
All improvements required for both Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive are
consistent with the previous approval for this site. At least a portion of the right-of-
way on Jefferson Street has been dedicated by the land owner. The project is
required to dedicate as necessary to complete the improvements listed. Street
improvements required under the Conditions of Approval are consistent with the
roadway designation for both Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, insofar as the
improvements will result in buildout of both streets as Major Arterials.
The Map is conditioned to provide reciprocal access and parking easements across
all lots, so that the ultimate operation of the center is as a unified whole.
The map is consistent with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the
City's Subdivision Ordinance, as conditioned.
Public Notice
This request was published in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 14, 2005, and
mailed to all affected property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project
site as required by Section 9.200.1 10 of the Zoning Code. To date, no letters have
been received.
Public Agency Review
A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City
Departments on August 9, 2005. All written comments received are on file with
the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received have
been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Findings to recommend approval of this request can be made and are contained in
the attached Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- , recommending to the City
Council approval of Specific Plan 2002-062, Amendment #1.
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- , recommending to the City
Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map 33908.
Attachments:
1. Specific Plan Amendment
2. Previously approved Site Plan
3. Tentative Parcel Map 33908
Prepared by:
Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Plarin&
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
OF SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT #1
CASE: SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT #1
APPLICANT: REGENCY MARINITA-LA QUINTA, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California
did, on the 251" day of October, 2005 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a
request by Regency Marinta-La Quinta, LLC, for approval of a Specific Plan
Amendment to establish development standards, principles, guidelines and programs
for lands totaling 10.6 acres and bounded by Jefferson Street on the east, and Fred
Waring Drive on the north, more particularly described as:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 604-521-004
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 published a public
hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 14, 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, said Specific Plan 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 this development request has been
previously reviewed under Environmental Assessment 02-462, under the provisions of
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based upon this Assessment, the
project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and no additional
environmental documentation is required. No changed circumstances or conditions are
proposed which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent Environmental
Assessment pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21 166; and
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 a recommendatior
to the City Council for approval of said Specific Plan:
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Specific Plan 2002-062 Amendment #1
Regency Marinita- La Quints LLC
Page 2
Finding A - Consistency with General Plan
The property is designated Neighborhood Commercial. The Specific Plan will result in
development of up to 115,434 square feet of retail and service commercial space,
consistent with the land uses envisioned in the General Plan.
Finding B — Public Welfare Enhancement
The Specific Plan 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 and Zoning
Ordinance, as well as other County and State standards, such as CEQA.
Findings C and D — Land Use Compatibility and Property Suitability
The Specific Plan is within a commercially designated and zoned area. The project
provides adequate buffering through landscaping and walls to ensure compatibility
with surrounding residential land uses. Additionally, the project will provide adequate
perimeter landscaping and acceptable architectural design guidelines.
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 acknowledge that Environmental Assessment 2002-462 has
determined that no significant effects on the environment have been identified
and mitigation measures are being imposed if needed; and
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Specific Plar
2002-062, Amendment #1, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution anc
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinte
Planning Commission, held on this 251" day of October, 2005, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
P:\reports-pc\9-28-04\ sp 03-073 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Specific Plan 2002-062 Amendment #1
Regency Marinita- La Quints LLC
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\9-28-04\ sp 03-073 pc res.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT #1
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
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 Tentative
Parcel Map, or any Parcel 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.
2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file
documents for plan checking processes.
3. Approval of this Specific Plan is subject to compliance with Section
9.240.010 of the Zoning Code, as applicable.
4. Within 30 days of City Council approval, the applicant shall deliver five
copies of the amended Specific Plan to the Community Development
Department, with all changes incorporated to reflect these Conditions of
Approval.
5. The Specific Plan shall be amended to provide a minimum 70 feet of
restricted access on all driveways accessing Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson
Street. A reduction in the restricted access may be allowed where
deceleration lanes are provided and the length of the deceleration lane is
sufficient to allow a car to come to a full stop.
6. The reference to Fred Waring Drive on Page 7 shall be changed from Primary
Arterial to Major Arterial, as designated in the General Plan.
7. The second sentence of the "Pedestrian" section on Page 22 shall be
amended to read: "Sidewalks will be designed eight feet wide and on -street
bicycle lanes will be eight feet except when adjacent to right turn
only/deceleration lanes, where they may be four feet wide."
8. The last sentence of the second paragraph of the "Grading Plan" section on
Page 23 shall be amended to read: "Rough and Precise Grading Plans are
subject to review and approval by the City according to standard engineering
protocols and recommendations of the Geotechnical Report, as approved by
the Public Works Department."
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT #1
REGENCY MARINITA - LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
9. The following shall be added to the "Drainage" section on Page 23.
The design of the underground retention shall consider the potential location
of the underground storage tanks per Riverside County Flood Control and
Water Conservation District guidelines.
Tributary and upstream stormwater flow on Fred Waring Drive presently is
diverted to the site. Future site modification may be necessary to accept
tributary flow and upstream stormwater. Historical flow paths will be
identified and routing provided in the hydrology analysis equivalent to
historical flow direction. As local topography allows, tributary areas may
exceed limits of property lines adjacent to public roads. Verification of the
proposed storm water retention system is presently under review by the
Public Works Department. If the proposed retention capacity or pass through
storm water flow is found to be inadequate during final design based on the
approved hydrology study for the project, adjustments to the site layout to
accommodate the increased retention/detention or pass through capacity
required to satisfy safety issues of the Public Works Department may be
required.
10. The Specific Plan shall be amended (Page 27, "Principal Uses Permitted") to
allow restaurants with drive-thrus with approval of a Conditional Use Permit.
The City reserves the right to approve or disapprove drive-thru restaurants.
11. The minimum landscaped setback adjacent to Park and Open Space
designations shall be eight feet, with an average of 15 feet.
12. The landscaping palette shall eliminate crepe myrtle as a parking lot tree.
13. The Jefferson Street landscaping plans shall incorporate berming and screen
walls of up to 40 inches in height to screen the parking lot areas from public
view.
14. Hours of operation on Page 38 of the Specific Plan shall be amended to read:
The retail uses on site will operate from 6.00 AM to 12.00 AM, Monday
through Sunday. All uses in Shop 1, Pad C and Bank B/Parcel 6 shall operate
from 6.00 AM to 12.00 AM, Monday through Sunday. Restaurant uses, fast
food drive-thru (sic) type, except Bank B/Parcel 6, would be open 24 hours a
day, seven days a week, and the Market, Drug Store and fuel station would
also be open 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-062, AMENDMENT #1
REGENCY MARINITA - LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
15. The project proponent shall reserve an area behind the corner cutback at the
intersection of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, of sufficient size to
allow for improvements associated with a Secondary Gateway designation
for this intersection, as referenced in the La Quinta General Plan. The area
should be between 300 and 600 square feet and consistently shaped in
relation to the ultimate right-of-way. The project proponent shall be
responsible for design and installation of improvements necessary to define a
Secondary Gateway, utilizing specific design elements which may include,
but not be limited to, low -profile City entry monument signing, upgraded
theme landscaping, decorative hardscape, enhanced lighting for design
features, small scale water feature(s), and similar aesthetic enhancements.
The maintenance of the Secondary Gateway improvements shall be the
responsibility of the land owner or Business Association formed to maintain
other common areas within the project. This requirement may be satisfied
through a performance bond that sets forth general unit costs for design,
materials and installation, based on an inventory of specific improvement
items to be incorporated into the design. The inventory of bonded items, unit
and design cost estimates shall be subject to acceptance by the Community
Development and Public Works Directors. The improvements shall be made,
or the bonds secured, prior to occupancy of the first building on the project
site.
16. The wall height at the southern property line shall be maintained as it
currently exists on the Monticello project. Should a new wall be constructed,
it shall be reconstructed or replacedso that the rear yards of the lots on
Monticello maintain their 6 foot walls on 2 foot berm from their grade.
17. Lighting on the western and southern sides of the Market, Shops 2 and 3,
Shop 1 and Pad C shall be limited to building -mounted fixtures at no more
than 12 feet above grade, or low -impact lighting which does not spill over
onto adjacent properties. The fixtures shall fully conform to the City's
lighting standards for shielding. All lighting plans shall clearly demonstrate
conformance with the City's lighting ordinance.
18. Development of this site shall be in conformance with the Exhibits approved
and contained in the files for Specific Plan 2002-062, Amendment #1, as
amended by these conditions.
19. The site plan shown in the Specific Plan is for reference purposes and is not
approved pursuant to the city's Site Development Permit process. Additional
recommendations and site plan adjustments may be required during the
City's review pursuant to Section 9.210.010-Site Development Permits,
LQMC.
3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
OF THE SUBDIVISION OF 10.6 ACRES INTO SEVEN
COMMERCIAL PARCELS
CASE NO.: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY MARINITA-LA QUINTA LLC
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 25' day of October, 2005, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing
to consider the request of Regency Marinita-La Quinta LLC, for the subdivision of
10.6 acres into seven commercial parcels, located at the southwest corner of
Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive, more particularly described as:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER 604-521-004
WHEREAS, said Tentative Parcel Map has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that this development request has been
previously reviewed under Environmental Assessment 02-462, under the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Based upon this Assessment,
the project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and no
additional environmental documentation is required. No changed circumstances or
conditions are proposed which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent
environmental assessment pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21 166; and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published the
public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on October 14, 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, 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 make the following Mandatory Findings to justify a
recommendation for approval of Tentative Parcel Map 33908:
1 . The Tentative Parcel Map with its improvements and design, are consistent
with the General Plan in that its street design and parcels are in conformance
with applicable goals, policies, and will provide adequate infrastructure and
public utilities.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Parcel Map 33908
Regency Marinta-La Quinta LLC
October 25, 2005
2. The design of the parcel map and its proposed improvements are not likely to
create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or
their habitat because the site does not contain significant biological
resources.
3. The design of the subdivision and subsequent improvements are not likely to
cause serious public health problems because the construction of a
neighborhood commercial center at this location will not have considerable
cumulative impacts. The project is consistent with the General Plan, and the
potential impacts associated with General Plan buildout.
4. The design of the parcel map and the proposed types of improvements will
not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access
through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently
exist and access is provided within the project and to adjacent public streets.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case;
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Tentative
Parcel Map 33908 to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this
Resolution, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 25" day of October, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Tentative Parcel Map 33908
Regency Marinta-La Quinta LLC
October 25, 2005
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
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 Tentative Parcel Map, 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.
2. This Tentative Parcel Map, and any Final Map recorded thereunder, shall comply with
the requirements and standards of Government Code § § 66410 through 66499.58
(the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code
("LQMC").
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, Green Sheet (Public Works
Clearance) for Building Permits, 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
• City of Indio (East half of Jefferson Street, only if necessary)
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.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
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.
4. 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.cab_illphandb_ oo_ks.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):
11 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.
Page 2 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
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.
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 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.
7. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development
include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1) Jefferson Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW, if necessary) — The
standard 60 feet from the centerline of Jefferson Street for a total 120-
foot ultimate developed right of way except an additional variable right
of way dedication measured 77 feet west of the centerline of Jefferson
Street to accommodate right turn only/deceleration lanes at the two
proposed entry driveways and dual left turn lanes on Jefferson Street at
the Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive intersection improvements
constructed by the Jefferson Street Improvements Project, Phase II.
21 Fred Waring Drive (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) — The standard 60 feet
from the centerline of Fred Waring Drive for a total 120-foot ultimate
developed right of way except an additional variable right of way
dedication at the Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive intersection
measured 69 feet south of the centerline of Fred Waring Drive plus a
variable dedication to accommodate improvements conditioned under
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS.
Page 3 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
8. The applicant shall retain for private use on the Final Map all private 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.
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 Tentative Tract Map 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.
11. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of-
ways as follows:
A. Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the
R/W-P/L. The applicant shall supplement the landscaped setback as needed to
reflect the new right of way configuration.
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
Parcel Map.
12. 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.
Page 4 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
13. Direct vehicular access to Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive from lots with
frontage along Jefferson Street and Fred Waring Drive is restricted, except for those
access points identified on the tentative tract map, or as otherwise conditioned in
these conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the
recorded parcel map.
14. 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.
15. 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 Tentative Tract Map and the
date of recording of any Final Map, unless such easement is approved by the City
Engineer.
FINAL PARCEL MAPS
16. Prior to the City's approval of a Parcel Map, the applicant shall furnish accurate
AutoCAD files of the Parcel Map that was approved by the City's map checker on a
storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. Such files shall be in a standard
AutoCAD format so as to be fully retrievable into a basic AutoCAD program.
Where a Parcel Map was not produced in an AutoCAD format, or produced in a file
that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept a raster -
image file of such Final Map. The Parcel Map shall be of a 1 " = 40' scale.
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.
17. 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.
18. 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 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
Page 5 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors.
A.
On -Site Rough Grading Plan
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
B.
PM 10 Plan
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
C.
SWPPP
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently.
7
E
Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan
Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan
1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
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.
F. On-Site/Off Site Storm Drain Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
NOTE: D through F to be submitted concurrently.
G. On -Site Precise Grading Plans
1 " = 30' Horizontal
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 and Signing & Striping 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.
All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit
Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs
at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans and/or as
approved by the Engineering Department.
"Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top
Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover,
or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions.
Page 6 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the
building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2001 California
Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment
must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A
copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department
in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking.
In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "Site Development" plan is
required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official and the City Engineer.
"On -Site 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.
19. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for
elements of construction which can be accessed via the Online Engineering Library at
the City website (www.la-quinta.org). Navigate to the Public Works Department
home page and look for the Online Engineering Library hyperlink.
20. 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
21. Prior to approval of any Final Parcel Map, the applicant shall construct all on and off -
site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured
and executed Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") guaranteeing the
construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or
shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City.
22. Any Subdivision Improvement Agreement ("SIA") entered into by and between the
applicant and the City of La Quinta, for the purpose of guaranteeing the completion
Page 7 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
of any improvements related to this Tentative Tract Map, shall comply with the
provisions of Chapter 13.28 (Improvement Security), LQMC.
23. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include the removal of any
existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed
improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monumentation.
When improvements are phased through a "Phasing Plan," or an administrative
approval (e.g., Site Development Permits), all off -site improvements and common on -
site improvements (e.g., backbone utilities, retention basins, perimeter walls,
landscaping and gates) shall be constructed, or secured through a SIA, prior to the
issuance of any permits in the first phase of the development, or as otherwise
approved by the City Engineer.
Improvements and obligations required of each subsequent phase shall either be
completed, or secured through a SIA, prior to the completion of homes or the
occupancy of permanent buildings within such latter phase, or as otherwise approved
by the City Engineer.
In the event the applicant fails to construct the improvements for the development,
or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to
the approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all
permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development
of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements.
24. Depending on the timing of the development of this Tentative Parcel Map, and the
status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required to:
A. Construct certain off -site improvements.
B. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement of its
costs by others.
C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are
considered to be an obligation of this tentative parcel map. The improvements
covered by the Jefferson Street Improvements Project are exempt from this
obligation.
D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others.
E. To agree to any combination of these means, as the City may require.
Page 8 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
F. Parcel map boundaries may need to be modified to conform to development
standards associated with building siting and Zoning Ordinance requirements.
Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant
shall complete Off -Site Improvements in the first phase of construction or prior of
issuance of the 3rd Building Permit.
In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are
constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final Map, or
the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the costs of such
improvements.
25. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant shall
submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off -site
improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for
checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit
cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance.
For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be
approved by the City Engineer.
At the time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for
conditional approval of the Final Map by the City Council, the applicant shall also
submit one copy each of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " reduction of each page of the Final Map,
along with a copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map.
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved
by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost
estimates.
Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements.
GRADING
26. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
27. 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.
28. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval
of all of the following:
Page 9 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-__
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
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 Parcel Map that a soils report has been
prepared in accordance with the California Health & Safety Code § 17953.
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.
29. 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.
30. 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.
31. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's
approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative parcel map, unless
the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of
Approval.
Page 10 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
32. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot from
the building pads in adjacent developments.
33. 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.
34. 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 Tentative Parcel Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading
changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review.
35. 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.
DRAINAGE
36. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
37. For properties where sump conditions exist, the applicant must either define a
diversion/overflow strategy or retain upstream stormwater as required for existing as -
built conditions from all off -site tributary flow from the respective high points. The
applicant must provide either on -site retention or alternative facilities of
diversion/pass through, if selected. Historical flow paths should be identified and
routing provided in the hydrology analysis equivalent to historical flow direction. As
local topography allows, tributary areas may exceed limits of property lines adjacent
to public roads. The 100-year storm shall be the governing event in the designer's
evaluation.
38. In design of above ground 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.
Page 11 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
39. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets.
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.
As tributary and upstream stormwater flow on Fred Waring Drive is presently
diverted to the site, the applicant or his design professional may be required to
perform future site modifications that may including proposed pad and parking area
reconfiguration to accept the tributary flow and upstream stormwater. Historical flow
paths shall be identified and routing provided in the hydrology analysis equivalent to
historical flow direction. As local topography allows, tributary areas may exceed
limits of property lines adjacent to public roads. Verification of the proposed storm
water retention system is presently under review by the Public Works Department. If
in the event, the proposed retention capacity or pass through storm water flow is
found to be inadequate during final design based on the approved hydrology study for
the development, adjustments to the site layout as needed to accommodate the
increased retention/detention or pass through capacity may be required to satisfy
safety issues of the Public Works Department.
40. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by
the Community Development Director and the City Engineer.
41. 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. Retaining walls are an exception to this
condition.
42. 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)l7►, LQMC.
43. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
44. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity
Page 12 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-__
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic
drainage relief route.
45. The underground retention system proposed by the applicant shall be approved by
the City Engineer. The approved design shall incorporate mechanisms for perpetual
maintenance and operation of the system by the applicant or his successors. The
applicant shall design to contain stormwater in reinforced concrete underground
retention storage within the parking area as approved by the City Engineer.
Additionally, the applicant's design professional shall design the underground
retention storage with special consideration to the Fueling Station's underground
gasoline storage tanks per Riverside Flood Control and Water Conservation District
guidelines and incorporate necessary BMPs in each design to ensure that gasoline
leakage and spillages do not become entrapped in the underground retention storage.
HTll ITIFS
46. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities),
LQMC.
47. 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.
48. 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.
49. 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
50. 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
Page 13 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section
13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed.
51. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the
General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Jefferson Street (Major Arterial; 120' R/W):
The Jefferson Street Improvements Project will widen Jefferson Street along
the Tentative Parcel Map boundary for right turn only/deceleration lanes at the
two proposed entry driveways and dual left turn lanes on Jefferson Street at
the Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive intersection. The applicant shall
construct the following improvements within the Jefferson Street right or way
and/or adjacent landscape setback area:
a) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb,
gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs.
b) 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.
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).
2) Fred Waring Drive (Major Arterial; 120' R/W):
Widen the south side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Tentative
Parcel Map boundary to its ultimate width on the south side as specified in the
General Plan and the requirements of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or
Page 14 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert
it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design
standard. The south curb face shall be located forty eight feet (48') south of
the centerline, except at locations where additional street width is needed to
accommodate:
a) Bus turnout (if required by Sunline Transit)
b) A deceleration/right turn only lane on Fred Waring Drive at
Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive intersection. The south curb
face shall be located fifty nine (59') south 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 and as required by the City Engineer. The south curb face
shall align with the Jefferson Street Improvements project.
c) A 200-foot long dual left turn lane for eastbound Fred Waring
Drive traffic to northbound Jefferson Street at the Jefferson
Street/Fred Waring Drive intersection plus variable taper length as
required by the City Engineer. Pursuant to this condition, the
applicant shall construct 72 feet of street improvements on Fred
Waring Drive at the Jefferson Street/Fred Waring Drive to
accommodate a 4-foot median, two 10-foot left turn lanes, three
1 1-foot through lanes, a 4-foot bicycle lane and an 1 1-foot right
turn only/deceleration lane.
Other required improvements in the Fred Waring Drive right or way and/or
adjacent landscape setback area include:
c) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to : curb,
gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs.
d) 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.
Page 15 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
e) Modify the traffic signal at the Jefferson Street/Fred Waring
Drive intersection. Construct necessary modifications to
accommodate the improved roadway section.
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. The applicant is
responsible for the remaining cost of the improvements.
52. 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 Spaces and Parking
Aisles (Light Traffic Areas) 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b.
Parking Aisles (Heavy Traffic) 4.0" a.c./6.0" c.a.b.
Major Arterial 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
53. 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.
54. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following:
A. Jefferson Street
1) Primary Entry (southerly portion of site): Right turn in and out
movements and Left turn movements in are permitted. Left turn out
movements are prohibited. The applicant shall design the median island
on the Entry Drive to have a splitter median island located in the
driveway throat that adequately channelizes 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
Page 16 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
concepts approved by the City Engineer.
2) Secondary Entry (northerly portion of parcel map between Parcel 4 and
7): Right turn in and out movements are permitted. Left turn in and out
movements are prohibited. All right -turn -out only driveways shall have a
splitter median island located in the driveway throat that adequately
channelizes 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.
B. Fred Waring Drive
11 Primary Entry (easterly portion of site): Right turn in and out movements
and are permitted. Left turn out in and out movements are prohibited.
The applicant shall design the median island on the Entry Drive to have
a splitter median island located in the driveway throat that adequately
channelizes 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.
2) Secondary Entry (westerly portion of parcel map): Right turn in and out
and left turn in movements are permitted. Left turn movements out are
prohibited. All right -turn -out only driveways shall have a splitter median
island located in the driveway throat that adequately channelizes 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.
55. 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.
56. 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.
CONSTRUCTION
57. 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
Page 17 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
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
58. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
59. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots and park areas.
60. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention
basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect.
61. 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.
62. 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
63. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine
Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
64. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with
the approval of the City Engineer.
65. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such other
appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to
Page 18 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction
supervision.
66. 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.
67. 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
68. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance),
LQMC.
69. 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
70. 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.
71. 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).
72. Prior to completion of any approval process for modification of boundaries of the
property or lots subject to these conditions, the applicant shall process a
reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the property and pay the cost
of such reapportionment.
OTHER
Page 19 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-__
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33908
REGENCY-MARINITA LA QUINTA, LLC
OCTOBER 25, 2005
73. The project proponent shall reserve an area behind the corner cutback at the
intersection of Fred Waring Drive and Jefferson Street, of sufficient size to allow for
improvements associated with a Secondary Gateway designation for this intersection,
as stipulated in the La Quinta General Plan. The area should be between 300 and 600
square feet and consistently shaped in relation to the ultimate right-of-way. The
project proponent shall be responsible for design and installation of improvements
necessary to define a Secondary Gateway, utilizing specific design elements which
may include, but not be limited to, low -profile City entry monument signing, upgraded
theme landscaping, decorative hardscape, enhanced lighting for design features,
small scale water feature(s), and similar aesthetic enhancements. The maintenance of
the Secondary Gateway improvements shall be the responsibility of the land owner or
Business Association formed to maintain other common areas within the project. This
requirement may be satisfied through a performance bond that sets forth general unit
costs for design, materials and installation, based on an inventory of specific
improvement items to be incorporated into the design. The inventory of bonded
items, unit and design cost estimates shall be subject to acceptance by the
Community Development and Public Works Directors. The improvements shall be
made, or the bonds secured, prior to occupancy of the first building on the project
site.
74. The project proponent shall provide cross -lot reciprocal access and parking easements
for all lots within the parcel map. These easements shall be shown on the final parcel
map.
Page 20 of 20
i
wwwwwwwwwwwwwwwww