2005 05 24 PCTiht 4 4QuArw
Planning Commission Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-quinta.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
MAY 24, 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 2005-016
Beginning Minute Motion 2005-008
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled
for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your
comments to three minutes.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of the Minutes for the Regular Meeting of April 26, and May
10, 2005.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doe
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 2005-835
Applicant.......... Stamko Development Co.
Location........... Southwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road
within the Centre at La Quinta commercial development
Request............ Consideration of development plans for a multi -tenant
retail store consisting of 23,000 square feet.
Action .............. Request to continue to June 14, 2005
B. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-829
Applicant.......... Tarlos & Associates
Location........... The northeast corner of Auto Center Drive and La Quinta
Drive
Request............ Consideration of development plans to allow the
construction of a 3,100 square foot Wendy's restaurant
on a 0.80 acre site.
Action .............. Resolution 2005-
C. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-832
Applicant.......... Alfred H. Cook, AIA/William R. Kelly Trust
Location........... Parcel 12 of Tentative Parcel Map 29889 - the east side
of Washington street, + 300 feet south of Avenue 47
Request............ Consideration of architectural plans for a 4,600 square
foot, one-story medical office building in the La Quinta
Professional Plaza
Action .............. Resolution 2005-
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc
D. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-827
Applicant.......... Colbourn -Currier -Noll Architecture, Inc. for Innovative
Resort Communities
Location........... Southeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60
Request............ Consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for
four prototypical residential plans and clubhouse for use
in Tract 31732.
Action .............. Resolution 2005-
E. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-828
Applicant.......... Colbourn -Currier -Noll Architecture, Inc. for Innovative
Resort Communities
Location........... Northeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 61
Request............ Consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for
four prototypical residential plans and clubhouse for use
in Tract 31733
Action .............. tion 2005-
F. Item ................ SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-831 AND SIGN
PERMIT 2005-879
Applicant.......... Thomas Enterprises
Location........... Northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street
Request............ Consideration of development plans for Phase 2 of the
Pavilion at La Quinta project consisting of 72,770 square
feet and sign permit for Best Buy.
Action .............. Resolution 2005- and Minute Motion 2005-
G. Item ................ ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2005-082
Applicant.......... City of La Quinta
Location........... City-wide
Request............ Consideration of an Amendment to Title 9 of the La
Quinta Charter and Municipal Code Amending Chapters
9.60 and 9.210 relating to Home Occupations
Action .............. Resolution 2005-
VI. BUSINESS ITEM: None.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Review of City Council meeting of May 17, 2005.
C. Department Report - Landscape Ordinance update.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular
Meeting to be held on June 14, 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, May 24, 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, May 20,
2005.
DATED: May 20, 2005
BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
Public Notices
The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special
equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at
777-7025, twenty-four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations
will be made.
If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning
Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City
Clerk's office at 777-7025. A one (1) week notice is required.
If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a
Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all
documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for
distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00
p.m. meeting.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\PCAgendaW.doc
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
April 26, 2005
I. CALL TO ORDER
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Kirk who asked Commissioner Quill to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Rick Daniels, Kay Ladner, Paul
Quill, and Chairman Tom Kirk.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, City
Attorney Kathy Jenson, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, Principal
Planner Fred Baker, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, and Executive
Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of the
regular meeting of March 22, 2005. There being no corrections, it was
moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to approve the
minutes as submitted.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Tentative Tract Map 33015; a request of Riviera Villas, LLC for
consideration of a nine -unit single-family detached residential
condominium subdivision, with one custom lot on 2.37 acres, located
within PGA West Palmer Private Course area, at the northeast corner of
Shoal Creek and Riviera.
1. Commissioner Daniels stated he had a potential conflict of interest
due to the location of his residence in relation to the tract. He
excused himself and left the dais.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-26-05.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
April 26, 2005
2. 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.
3. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked if there was an arrangement with
the homeowners' association (HOA) to accept the maintenance.
Staff stated it was his understanding.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. David Turner, representing the applicant, stated
they had reached an agreement with Res 1 HOA to be annexed.
He went on to give a history of the project and their request. He
asked for clarification on conditions in regard to the off -site
improvements that were not completed by the prior owners in
regard to fees and/or improvements. Specifically Conditions #22,
#16.E., 34.A.1.b., and #44. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer
stated that in respect to the Avenue 54 there is no street widening
and staff does not want the meandering sidewalk. Condition
#34.A.1.b. the applicant will construct the block wall. Condition
#44 is a timing issue only and Condition #16.E. can be deleted.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, the public participation was closed and open for
Commission discussion.
6. Commissioner Alderson asked if there was a house designed for
this parcel and was it part of this tract. Staff stated a Laurel's
plan it was approved for this lot. The custom lot will be sold and
has nothing to do with this site development permit.
7. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, the public hearing was closed.
8. It was moved by Commissioners Alderson/Quill to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 2005-015 approving Tentative Tract Map
33015, as recommended by staff and as follows:
a. Conditions 16.E., 34.A.1.a. deleted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Ladner, Quill, and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT:
Commissioner Daniels.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-26-05.doc 2
Planning Commission Minutes
April 26, 2005
Commissioner Daniels rejoined the Commission.
B. Sign Application 2005-871; a request of Prest/Vuksic Architects for
McDermott Enterprise for consideration of a revised Sign Program for the
La Quinta Professional Plaza, located on the southeast corner of
Washington Street and Avenue 47.
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 there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked if the majority of the tenants were
to be office uses with some commercial users. Staff stated there
are two commercial tenants and the remainder are office uses.
3. Commissioner Daniels asked for a definition of "raceway". Staff
clarified it was the housing of the sign that carries the internal
components.
4. Chairman Kirk asked if the Zoning Code allowed a sign on every
elevation. Staff stated it was determined on how the building was
situated.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. John Vuksik, representing the applicant, stated
he was available to answer any questions.
6. Chairman Kirk asked about national "branding" as to where it
came from. Mr. Vuksic stated it has become a common term as
most national tenants will not occupy a building unless they know
they will be able to use their logo sign.
7. Commissioner Alderson stated the color is not covered under the
brand identity.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if the owner of the building had a more
stringent sign requirement than the City's Zoning Code, could the
Commission approve a change to the owner's requirements. City
Attorney Kathy Jenson stated it was a fine line where the City
regulations start and stop.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-26-05.doc 3
Planning Commission Minutes
April 26, 2005
9. There being no further public comment, the public participation
was closed and open for Commission discussion.
10. It was moved by Commissioners Ladner/Daniels to adopt Minute
Motion 2005-004 approving Sign Application 2005-871, as
recommended by staff. Unanimously approved.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None.
A. Site Development Permit 2005-834; a request of David Sacculla, Choice
Enterprises for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for
three new prototype residential units with two facades, located at the
southwest corner of Avenue 60 and Madison Street.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Daniels asked if the applicant removed the date
palms from the plans. Staff stated yes.
3. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. David Sacculla, representing Choice Enterprise,
stated he did have an objection to removing the date palms. Every
tract in the Valley has date palms and it would deter from his
project.
4. Commissioner Daniels asked the location of the proposed palm
trees. Staff stated on the perimeter. Mr. Sacculla stated they
would be staggered on the perimeter and throughout the project.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, it was open for Commission discussion.
6. Commissioner Alderson asked if there was an alternative palm tree
such as a Queen Palm. Staff stated it is at the pleasure of the
Commission.
7. Commissioner Quill stated he agreed the date palm tree was a part
of the desert and he had no objection to allowing the tree.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-26-05.doc 4
Planning Commission Minutes
April 26, 2005
8. Commissioner Ladner stated aesthetically they are the proper tree
for this area.
9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to adopt Minute Motion 2005-
005 approving Site Development Permit 2005-834, as
recommended by staff with the removal of the date palm
condition. Unanimously approved.
B. Site Development Permit 2004-820; a request of Ehline company for
coral Ridge L.L.C. for consideration of a condition review of landscaping
plans for Tract 31249 (Village at Coral Mountain), located on the south
side of Avenue 58, % mile west of Madison Street.
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 there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked about setting the turf back from the
curb.
3. Commissioner Quill questioned whether or not the turf would be
next to the curb. Staff stated the Architecture and Landscape
Review Committee was concerned also and went with staff's
recommendation to move the turf back from the curb.
Commissioner Quill stated the Commission had approved the
landscaping for the models with the turf next to the curb, but not
for the production units; the turf should be moved back. Staff
stated the models were not included in this application as this
approval is for the production units.
4. Commissioner Alderson asked the height of the palm trees at the
entry. Staff estimated 15-25 feet.
5. Commissioner Quill stated the plans should state the grass should
be a hybrid Bermuda sod.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. The applicant was not present.
7. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, it was open for Commission discussion.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-26-05.doc 5
Planning Commission Minutes
April 26, 2005
8. Commissioner Quill stated the transitional area from the curb
should be a condition. Staff stated it would read a sprinkler head
distance.
9. It was moved by Commissioners Alderson/Quill to adopt Minute
Motion 2005-006 approving Site Development Permit 2004-820,
as recommended by staff. Unanimously approved
10. Commissioner Quill stated it was unfortunate that the applicant
was not present to answer questions of the Commission.
11. Commissioner Daniels agreed.
12. Commissioner Ladner agreed, but as they did not know the reason,
she would not want to penalize the applicant without knowing.
13. Commissioners Alderson/Quill withdrew their motion and second.
14. Commissioners Quill/Daniels moved to continue to May 10, 2005.
Unanimously approved.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioners gave a brief summary of the Planners Institute they
attended.
B. Community Development Director Doug Evans gave a Department Report.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Daniels/Ladner to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on May 10, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. This
meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:57 p.m. on April 26, 2005.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-26-05.doc 6
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
May 10, 2005
CALL TO ORDER
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Vice Chairman Quill who asked Commissioner Ladner to lead the
flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Rick Daniels, Kay Ladner, Paul Quill
and Chairman Kirk.
C. Staff present: Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner
Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, and Executive Secretary
Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT:
A. Ms. Kay Wolff, 77-227 Calle Ensenada, asked to address the
Commission on some issues of concern to her. Some of those concerns
are water, noise, traffic, view, security, and safety. She asked where
the planning for the future begins in regard to City staff, boards and/or
commissions. It should be contained in the General Plan. The
community does not understand its meaning and how it affects their
City. When the City updated the General Plan she did not see any
evidence that the City was going to keep the density low to retain the
unique nature La Quinta has been known for. She would like to know
who is responsible to oversee these issues. Is it the Council level or
Planning Commission, or staff; is there a vision for the City of La Quinta
and if so, who has it. It isn't in the General Plan. Why are we talking
about turf at Commission instead of the bigger picture? How are we
going to keep La Quinta from urban sprawl and differentiate ourselves
from other cities? She realizes these are rhetorical questions, but she
would like to bring it to the Commissions attention.
1. Commissioner Quill thanked Ms. Wolff for her diligence in
maintaining the Bear Creek Bike Path. He agrees with her
comments and understands her concerns.
2. Commissioner Ladner stated she too agrees, but at the same time
she realizes what their parameters are as Commissioners.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-10-05.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
May 10, 2005
3. Commissioner Alderson stated as the newest member of the
Commission he is just getting an understanding what the General
Plan is and how it applies to the City.
4. Chairman Kirk thanked her for coming and providing her insight.
He would like to believe the General Plan is the City's vision and
hopes it can be addressed more if annexation to the east is
considered. It may be an opportunity to lower the density and
preserve the rural lifestyle. He asked that Ms. Wolff keep
watching the Planning Commission and City Council and reminding
them there needs to be a "grand plan" and not get caught up in
the little issues. They have gone from approving every project that
requests water intensive landscaping to observing very strict
landscaping requirements.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
A. Staff asked that the approval of the minutes be deleted from the agenda.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS: None.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Continued - Site Development Permit 2004-820; a request of Ehline
company for coral Ridge L.L.C. for consideration of a condition review of
landscaping plans for Tract 31249 (Village at Coral Mountain), located on
the south side of Avenue 58, %z mile west of Madison Street.
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 there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Daniels asked if the primary concern was the
distance of the sprinklers from the curb. Staff stated yes and
explained moving them back was to keep the back spray from out
of the street.
3. Commissioner Alderson asked if the sprinklers were to be 18
inches from the curb or whether or not it was a water
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-10-05.doc 2
Planning Commission Minutes
May 10, 2005
conservation issue. Staff stated yes, to keep it from draining into
the street. By moving it back 18 inches the turf does not erode
and cause drainage into the street where decomposed granite (DG)
could allow the water to go into the street.
4. Commissioner Quill stated he had just attended a meeting where a
discussion was held on keeping the water from draining into the
street. This was the reason the Commission continued this item.
The models were agreed to and the remaining units would be
restricted from using the turf at the curb.
5. Mr. Chris Hermann, landscape architect, stated they have
addressed this concern before and have had success with moving
the sprinklers back 18 inches and using turf to the curb. The issue
is not just irrigation, but engineering, curb and gutter designs, and
grading. He believes the better solution is to reduce the grade up
against curb. He does not believe the gravel strip is the best
solution. He also has concerns about the DG strip and the
maintenance. Bermuda grass is aggressive and will grow into
anything. The best solution to him would be to move the
sprinklers in the 18 inches with turf. This meets CVWD
requirements.
6. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Quill asked if they had any detail drawings to ensure
the grass would not grow over, etc. Mr. Hermann stated they
could provide them, but did not have any with him. Commissioner
Quill stated it should be in the fine grading plan as well as the
landscaping plan. Mr. Hermann stated they could do this.
7. Commissioner Daniels asked if there was a qualified landscape
architect on the site to inspect the installation. Mr. Hermann
stated no. It is the general superintendent who is responsible to
handle the grading and the irrigation system, etc.
8. Commissioner Alderson asked if the Bermuda grass is a hybrid.
Mr. Hermann stated it is.
9. Commissioner Quill displayed a hand drawing showing the sod
planted two inches below the curb, at the back of the curb,
sloping down into a swale at 2%, and then the sprinkler head
installed at 18 inches from the back of the curb. Mr. Hermann
stated he would agree with this design.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-10-05.doc 3
Planning Commission Minutes
May 10, 2005
10. Commissioner Ladner asked if he had any pictures of where this
design had been successful. Hermann stated no.
11. Chairman Kirk asked if he could confirm they had met the CVWD
standards; if so, by how much. Mr. Hermann stated they met
them confidently. The calcs are on the front of the landscaping
plans. Discussion followed regarding the calcs.
12. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, it was open for Commission discussion.
13. Commissioner Ladner stated she agrees with the high maintenance
this puts on the HOA. She would agree with the sprinkler heads
being moved back 18 inches, but she is still concerned with what
the grass will look like.
14. Commissioner Quill stated he believes the 18 inches will be
sufficient. His concern is that after time the grass will still grow
and water will still end up in the gutter. He would like to see the
swale.
15. Commissioner Ladner stated she was concerned with someone
tripping in the swale. Mr. Hermann stated it is a CC&R issue.
16. Commissioner Daniels stated the 1 % grade is sufficient.
17. Commissioner Alderson stated the two inches below the curb will
help.
18. Commissioner Daniels stated there is a conflict between the City
standards and this application. He agrees with Commissioner
Quill's drawing but, he would like to see the final grading certified
by the landscape architect that it meets these parameters. Lastly,
he would like to see staff look into changing the Code to add this
drawing standard to the Code.
19. Chairman Kirk stated the solution he would like to see is very little
turf. It is not fair to put it on this applicant because the landscape
Ordinance does not require it. Another problem is the faulty
irrigation systems. He would encourage tightening up the
Landscape Ordinance, but there still remains a problem if there is
faulty equipment.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-10-05.doc 4
Planning Commission Minutes
May 10, 2005
20. It was moved by Commissioners Daniels/Quill to adopt Minute
Motion 2005-007 approving Site Development Permit 2004-820,
as recommended by staff and as amended:
a. Sprinklers shall be located 18 inches from the back of the
curb. The turf shall be recessed below the back of curb
two inches. The area between the back of curb and 18-
inch sprinkler line shall be lowered 1 %.
b. The grading shall be certified by the landscape architect.
21. Commissioners Alderson and Ladner stated their concern about
going overboard on the conditions.
22. Following discussion, the motion was unanimously approved.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioner Daniels asked that staff have a work session for the
Commission to discuss the Landscape Ordinance and CVWD
requirements. He asked if the Commission was being affective adding
this type of standards to the Ordinance. Chairman Kirk asked if Mr.
Hermann would like to help with the drafting of the amendment. Mr.
Hermann stated he would be happy to volunteer. Chairman Kirk asked
that staff invite CVWD as well as Mr. Hermann, and Kay Wolff to the
work session. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Quill/Ladner to have this item placed on the agenda. Unanimously
approved.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Daniels/Quill to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on May 24, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. This
meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:49 p.m. on May 10, 2005.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-10-05.doc 5
PH A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
CASE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT
PLANS FOR A MULTI -TENANT RETAIL STORE OF 23,000
SQUARE FEET
LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 1 1 1 AND DUNE
PALMS ROAD WITHIN THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY OWNER: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
REPRESENTATIVE: PERKOWITZ AND RUTH, ARCHITECTS
ZONING: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS:
THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT FOR THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA
COMMERCIAL CENTER, SPECIFIC PLAN 97- 029,
AMENDMENT NO. 3. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES
OR CONDITIONS AND NO NEW INFORMATION IS
PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION
OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION
21 166
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH:
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
SOUTH:
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
EAST:
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
WEST:
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Planning Commission continue this item to June 14, 2005 to
allow the applicant time to address the Architecture Landscape Review Committee
comments.
Attachments:
Letter from Applicant
Prepared by:
Fred Baker, AICP
Principal Planner
ATTACHMENT #1
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
78-060 Calle Estado
Suite 5
La Quinta, CA 92253
760-777-7686
May 18, 2005
Mr. Doug Evans
Director of Community Development
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Re: Postponement of Planning Commission Hearing
Dear Mr. Evans:
MAY 172005
Please consider this letter Stamko Development's formal request to postpone the
scheduled hearing on its Site Development Permit Application concerning the property
located at the SWC of Highway 111 and Dune Palms Rd. This hearing is presently
scheduled before the Planning Commission on May 24. Stamko wishes to postpone the
hearing to the Commission's next regularly scheduled meeting on June 14.
The reason for this request is that Stamko is considering comments made in the LARC
meeting concerning certain modifications to the fascia of the proposed building. The time
required working with our architects and obtaining cost estimates preclude our being
prepared for the May 241h meeting.
If you have any questions, please contact either Christine Clarke, President of Stamko or
Ituss Beckner, Advisor
Stamko Development Co.
CC: Ms Christine F. Clarke
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-829
APPLICANT: TARLOS & ASSOCIATES
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS TO CONSTRUCT
A 3,100 SQUARE FOOT WENDY'S RESTAURANT ON A 0.80
ACRE SITE
LOCATION: THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF AUTO CENTER DRIVE AND LA
QUINTA DRIVE
PROPERTY
OWNER: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT FOR THE CENTRE AT LA QUINTA COMMERCIAL
CENTER, SPECIFIC PLAN 97-029, AS AMENDED. NO
CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS AND NO NEW
INFORMATION IS PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE
PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE
SECTION 21166
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL, GOODYEAR TIRE
SOUTH: DRIVEWAY AND VACANT LAND
EAST: PARKING LOT
WEST: LA QUINTA CENTRE DRIVE
BACKGROUND:
The proposed project is to be located within the Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan.
The small parcel is located east of the auto dealers, south of the Goodyear Tire
Center, and northwest of the Super Walmart.
PROJECT REQUEST:
The applicant requests approval of a Site Development Permit to allow the
construction of a 3,100 square foot Wendy's Restaurant, including a drive -through.
The proposed restaurant will be located immediately south of the existing Goodyear
Tire building, within Stamko's Specific Plan area for the Auto Center. The use is
permitted in the Regional Commercial zone.
Site Design
The proposed project occurs within the Centre at La Quinta, where improvements
have previously been completed. Existing landscaped setbacks occur on the
western and southern property lines. Driveways and parking areas have been
constructed on the north, south and eastern sides of the site. The project is
designed to place the building close to the street rights of way (the western and
southern portions of the site) to provide greatest visibility.
Two points of access are proposed, one on Auto Center Drive, and one on the
internal driveway to the east of the site. Both access points are proposed to allow
full turn movements in and out of the site. Given the access on internal project
driveways or streets, the access points should not cause traffic conflicts.
The proposed drive -through aisle is located adjacent to the landscape setback, and
includes a wall of indeterminate height. The Architecture and Landscape Review
Committee required that the wall be four feet in height, of painted split -faced block,
painted in one of the building colors (please see color board). In addition, they
recommended that a hedge be placed in the landscape area from the end of the
wall on the south property line to the pedestrian crossing on the site. The four foot
wall, combined with the hedge, will provide sufficient screening of the vehicles in
the drive -through.
Internal circulation is proposed to provide two-way access on the eastern parking
area, and one-way access on the western drive aisle. With adequate signage, the
circulation on the site has been designed to function efficiently.
Parking
A total of 25 parking spaces have been provided on -site. The Zoning Code requires
a total of 31 parking spaces for the use (one space per 100 square feet of building
area), however, the site is part of a considerably larger shopping center, and there
is extensive parking immediately adjacent to the east, north and south. The project
Developer, Stamko Development Co., has provided written assurance that the
parking spaces adjacent to the site can be used to make up the parking differential
on -site. It is further likely that some of Wendy's customers will be from within the
Center and will walk, thereby reducing parking demand.
Building Design
The building being proposed is flat -roofed, and includes considerable variation in the
building planes. Canopies are included on three sides, and a slate veneer will accent
the entry, as well as covering the columns of the drive -through and being used as a
wainscoting. Colors for the stucco are proposed to be rich earth tones.
Sufficient attention to detail has been placed in the building design to assure that it
will not look like a "corporate box," and will integrate well into the Center. The
development standards for the Zone, as well as the requirements of the Specific
Plan, have been met or exceeded.
Architecture and Landscaping Review:
The Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) of the City of La
Quinta, California reviewed this request on May 18, 2005 (Attachment 2), and
unanimously recommended approval.
Public Notice
This request was published in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 13, 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. 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:
Findings to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached
Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION:
The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code. The
findings for approval, included in the attached Resolutions, can be made.
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- approving Site
Development Permit 2005-829, subject to conditions.
Attachments:
1 . Elevations, site plan, etc.
2. ALRC draft minutes for May 18, 2005
Prepared by:
Nicole Sauviat Cr;-Ite, Consull rng Planner
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING A SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION
OF A 3,100 SQUARE FOOT WENDY'S RESTAURANT ON A
0.82 ACRE SITE
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-829
APPLICANT: JOHN TARLOS AND ASSOCIATES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the, 24th day of May, 2005 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, to review
building elevations, site and landscape plans for a 3,100 square foot fast food
Wendy's restaurant on a 0.82 acre site located at the northeast corner of La Quinta
Drive and Auto Center Drive, and further described as:
Assessor's Parcel Number 649-670-032; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC)
of the City of La Quinta, California did on the 181h day of May, 2005 hold a public
meeting to review building elevations, site and landscape plans for a 3,100 square foot
fast food Wendy's restaurant on a 0.82 acre site, and unanimously recommended
approval; and
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of
1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63). The City Council certified a Supplemental
Environmental Impact Report (State Clearing House No. 9701 1055 the Centre at La
Quinta Commercial Center, Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment No. 3). No changed
circumstances or conditions and no new information is proposed which would trigger
the preparation of a subsequent Environmental Assessment 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 wanting to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of
said Site Development Permit 2005-829.
1. The proposed commercial building is consistent with the City's General Plan in
that the property is designated Regional Commercial (RC). The project is
consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan Land
Use Element as conditioned.
�' 4
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Wendys\Reso.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-829,
Tarlos and Associates
Adopted:
2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Centre
at La Quinta Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment No. 3 in that the project is a
permitted use and complies with the development standards and design
guidelines.
3. The proposed building is consistent with the City's Zoning Code, in that
development standards and criteria contained in the Centre at La Quinta Specific
Plan 97-029, Amendment No. 3. provide site -specific criteria which have been
met.
4. The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the commercial
development in the area, and is within the development limits established in the
Specific Plan.
5 The landscape design of the proposed project, with conditions recommended by
the ALRC, complements the building and the surrounding commercial area
through the use of varied plant materials in sufficient size and quantity to
provide a high quality project site.
6. The architectural design of the project is compatible with surrounding
commercial buildings and development in the general vicinity, and provides
sufficient architectural detail to assure a quality 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
Commission in this case;
2. That it does approve Site Development Permit 2005-829 for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this the 24th day of May, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Wendys\Reso.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-829,
Tarlos and Associates
Adopted:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS,
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Wendys\Reso.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-829
TARLOS AND ASSOCIATES
MAY 24, 2005
GENERAL
1. 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 plan. 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 a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant
shall obtain applicable permits and/or clearances from the following public
agencies:
Fire Marshal
Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
Community Development Department
Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
Desert Sands Unified School District
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
SunLine Transit Agency
SCAQMD Coachella Valley
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.
3. Permits issued under this approval may 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). If previously paid by the developer,
the applicant shall provide proof of payment with the building permit application.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Wendys\COAs.doc - 1 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-829
Adopted: May 24, 2005
PROPERTY RIGHTS
4. 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.
5. 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.
6. If the City Engineer determines that access rights to proposed street rights of
way shown on the approved Site Development Plan are necessary prior the
applicant dedicating the rights of way, the applicant shall grant the necessary
rights of way within 60 days of written request by the City.
7. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks/public utility easements along
public rights of way as follows:
A. La Quinta Drive — 10-foot from the R/W-P/L as specified in the Specific
Plan 97-029.
The setback requirement applies to all frontage 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 dedicate blanket easements for those purposes.
8. Direct vehicular access to this Site Development Permit site is restricted, except
for those access points identified on the approved site plan, or as otherwise
conditioned in these conditions of approval. No direct access from Parcel 10 is
permitted to La Quinta Drive.
9. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access
to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, and common areas.
10. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as
appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining
wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur.
. U
2
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-_
Conditions of Approval -,Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-829
Adopted: May 24, 2005
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.
11. 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.
12. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review
and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified
below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified,
unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be
prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the
applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here
pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors.
A. On -Site Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal
B. PM 10 Plan 1 " = 40' 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.
"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 including ADA accessibility to surrounding buildings, parking
facilities and public streets.
3
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-829
Adopted: May 24, 2005
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the
City Engineer.
13. 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.
14. 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
15. 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.
GRADING
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad
certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each
pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the
difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction.
0
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-829
Adopted: May 24, 2005
DRAINAGE
19. "Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage
plan for Parcel Map 30420. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and
disposed of in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer.
UTILITIES
20. 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.
21. 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 ACCESS POINTS
22. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking).
The applicant shall redesign the parking area adjacent to the eastern store front
to provide better maneuverability for vehicle back out and conformance with
LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). The applicant shall consider angled parking
stalls in the redesign to provide better maneuverability while maintaining the 6
stalls.
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.
23. 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.
k,
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-_
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-829
Adopted: May 24, 2005
LANDSCAPING
24. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks and park areas.
25. 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.
26. 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
27. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
28. 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.
29. 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.
30. 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.
6
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-_
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-829
Adopted: May 24, 2005
MAINTENANCE
31. 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
32. 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.
33. 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).
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS
34. The wall bordering the drive -through aisle shall be 4 feet in height (as measured
from the drive -through aisle grade), painted split -faced block, painted in one of
the building colors as presented on the materials board.
35. A hedge shall be planted from the end of the drive -through wall at the southern
property line to the pedestrian crosswalk. The plant type for the hedge shall be
provided in the final landscaping plan for the project.
36. The metal canopy color shall be consistent with the color shown on the
materials board, but of a deeper tone. The under -side of the canopy shall be
painted one of the two lightest colors shown on the materials board.
37. The bird of paradise shown on the landscaping plan adjacent to the west wall of
the building shall be replaced with lantana.
38. The final landscaping plan for the project shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department for review and approval prior to the issuance of
building permits.
39. Directional arrows shall be painted on the parking drives as shown on the
project site plan. "Wrong Way, Do Not Enter" signs shall be placed immediately
south of the trash enclosure facing south, and at the north end of the parking
N
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-_
Conditions of Approval — Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-829
Adopted: May 24, 2005
island facing northeast
40. No signage is approved as part of this permit. Signage applications shall be
submitted separately, and shall conform to the Zoning Ordinance and Sign
Program for this site.
8
ATTACHMENT #2
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A Regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
May 18, 2005 10:00 a.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
was called to order at 10:09 a.m. by Executive Secretary Betty
Sawyer.
B. Committee Members present: Frank Christopher, Bill Bobbitt, and
David Thorns.
C. Staff present: Consulting Planner Nicole Criste and Executive
Secretary Betty Sawyer.
flIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1111211QI[*ZKe]ZiLVil: 4i1l1 =* -
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: None
V. BUSINESS ITOMS:
A. Site Development Permit 2005-829; a request of Tarlos & Associates
} for consideration of architectural and conceptual landscaping plans for
a 3,100 square foot Wendy's restaurant located at the northeast
corner of Auto Center Drive and La Quinta Drive.
1. Consulting Planner Nicole Criste presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department. Staff introduced John
Tarlos, architect for the project, who gave a presentation on the
project.
2. Mr. Russ Beckner, representing Stamko asked what material
would be used on the exterior. Mr. Tarlos stated it is stucco.
3. Committee Member Thorns asked the height of the drive-thru
lane wall and the color of the canopy sections. Mr. Tarlos
stated 3.5 feet and both the upper and underside are blue
metal.
GAWPD0CS\ALRC\5-18-05 ALRC.doc - 1 -
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
April 6, 2005
4. Committee Member Christopher stated he agrees with the
accent blue color, but not like the Center.
5. Mr. Beckner asked if it was the same color as the rest of the
Centre. Mr. Tarlos stated yes. They were trying to match the
blue in the center. Mr. Beckner stated they had no objection to
it being a different color, such as the green on the Goodyear
building. Discussion followed regarding the accent colors.
6. Committee Member Thorns stated his concern was that the blue
not be used again.
7. Committee Member Christopher stated he would like it to be a
deeper color than what is on the Goodyear building and on the
color sample board.
8. Committee Member Thorns stated his concern with the drive -
through lane wall. It is a tight and does not come completely
around. Mr. Tarlos stated they were intending to use greenery
for the remainder strip.
9. Committee Member Christopher suggested a low hedge (3-4
feet) would be a softer buffer.
10. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the wall should be high
enough to shield the lights.
11. Committee Member Christopher stated the wall should be four
feet to ensure you are above the headlight height. Mr. Tarlos
stated that with the curb and hedge it would be 3-feet to 4-
feet.
12. Committee Member Christopher stated it would be nice to have
some vertical trees along the front to break up the streetscape.
Mr. Beckner stated the landscaping is existing and approved
under the Specific Plan.
13. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the Mexican Bird -of -Paradise
which will grow to a height that may not be wanted. He would
suggest the Lantana, or lower growing shrub. Also, use the
Bougainvillea on walls other than the north. �.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-18-05 ALRC.doc 2
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
April 6, 2005
14. Committee Member Thorns asked the material of the drive-thru
wall. Mr. Tarlos stated split -faced block. They can leave it
natural or it can be painted. They would prefer natural.
15. Committee Member Christopher asked that it be painted one of
the colors of the building.
16. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Member Christopher/Thoms to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-021 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2005-829, as recommended by staff and
as amended:
a. The wall bordering the drive -through aisle shall be four
feet in height (as measured from the drive -through aisle
grade), painted split -faced block, painted in one of the
building colors as presented on the materials board.
b. A hedge shall be planted from the end of the drive -
through wall at the southern property line to the
pedestrian crosswalk. The plant type for the hedge shall
be provided in the final landscaping plan for the project.
C. The metal canopy color shall be consistent with the color
shown on the materials board, but of a deeper tone. The
under -side of the canopy shall be painted one of the two
lightest colors shown on the materials board.
d. The bird of paradise shown on the landscaping plan
adjacent to the west wall of the building shall be replaced
with lantana.
e. The final landscaping plan for the project shall be
submitted to the Community Development Department
for review and approval prior to the issuance of building
permits.
f. Directional arrows shall be painted on the parking drives
as shown on the project site plan. "Wrong Way, Do Not
Enter" signs shall be placed immediately south of the
trash enclosure facing south, and at the north end of the
parking island facing northeast
GAWPDOCS\ALRC\5-18-05 ALRC.doc 3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
April 6, 2005
Unanimously approved.
VI. 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 Bobbitt/Thorns t� adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and
Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on June 1, 2005.
This meeting was adjourned 4t 10:25 a.m. on May 18, 2005.
Respectfully submitted, a, _
BETTY J. SAWYER
Executive Secretary
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-18-05 ALRC.dcc 4
PH C
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-832
APPLICANT: ALFRED H. COOK, AIA
PROPERTY OWNER: WILLIAM R. KELLY TRUST
REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR A 4,600
SQUARE FOOT, ONE-STORY MEDICAL OFFICE
BUILDING, IN THE LA QUINTA PROFESSIONAL PLAZA
(PALM DESERT NATIONAL BANK COMPLEX)
LOCATION: PARCEL 12 OF TPM 29889 - ON THE EAST SIDE OF
WASHINGTON STREET, t 300 FEET SOUTH OF AVENUE
47 (ATTACHMENT 1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-832 IS WITHIN
SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-049 (LA QUINTA PROFESSIONAL
PLAZA), FOR WHICH AN ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT WAS PREPARED (EA 2000-405) AND
CERTIFIED BY THE LA QUINTA CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL
17, 2001 (RESOLUTION 2001-42). NO CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS EXIST WHICH
WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF ANY
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW, PURSUANT
TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166.
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: CC (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL)
ZONING: CC (COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL)
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
The 4.9-acre La Quinta Professional Plaza was approved as a 53,500 square -foot
commercial office complex in April 2001. That approval included a Specific Plan for
the entire site, along with a Site Development Permit for the existing Palm Desert
National Bank. In December 2002, a minor change was approved by the
Community Development Director to allow Parcel 11 a 1,650 s.f. increase in
approved building area and use change from office/restaurant to all restaurant
(Bobbi J's and Louise's Pantry). All additional structures for the site are to be in
compliance with the approved Specific Plan (SP 2000-049), and are reviewed via
the Site Development Permit process.
Project Background
The applicant proposes a 4,600 gross square foot office building for medical tenant
use on Parcel 12 of PM 29889, south of Avenue 47 and west of Caleo Bay Drive
(Attachment #2). This office space is proposed for three medical tenant office
improvements.
Building Architecture - This proposed building incorporates the general architectural
theme set forth in the approved La Quinta Professional Plaza Specific Plan, and is
consistent with the design of other buildings previously approved for this complex.
There are minor variations in window treatments, accents and building elevation
massing, but they appear to complement the overall architectural theme of the
Specific Plan. The architecture also carries over elements of the Palm Desert
National Bank and Louise's Pantry buildings (stone veneer), which are within this
commercial plaza. The design does introduce a new color to the development, a
"Spring Leaves" green, similar to that at City Hall. It will be used on the window
mullions of the building. Building height is single -story, at 20 feet, 6 inches to the
roof peak. Staff's only comment is that the east elevation may not provide
adequate recessing of windows to address solar exposure, to the extent reflected
in the west elevation design.
Building Height - The Specific Plan allows for building heights up to 35 feet (tower
features may extend up to 40 feet). The proposed office building height is well
below that at 20 feet 6 inches. Building height is also restricted through the Zoning
Code requirement limiting building heights along arterials to one story, 22 feet high.
Parking — The proposed building will include the construction of nine parking stalls
as per the approved civil engineering plans for the overall parking area. The Specific
Plan was approved with a total of 214 parking spaces; the final civil engineering
design yielded 211 spaces. As a medical office, this project requires 25 parking
stalls as opposed to 19 as a general office use. The original Specific Plan approval
was based on all buildings being general office. However, an administrative (staff
level) amendment to allow Parcel 11 to develop as all restaurant with an additional
1,650 s.f. of building area, from 3,600 to approximately 5,250 s.f. was approved.
In summation of the above information, the required parking for the entire complex,
as currently approved, is 269. Inclusion of this proposal as medical office will
increase that total parking requirement to 275. As stated, a total of 211 of the
original 214 spaces are approved for development in the complex.
Landscaping - In regard to landscaping, as with the other buildings reviewed
previously for this complex, the landscape improvements relate primarily to the
peripheral areas of the building. The entire parking area and on -site circulation was
installed as part of Phase 1 improvements, so landscaping associated with this
building is limited to infill of existing planters and surrounds of the building itself.
v e
Lighting - The developer previously installed all parking area fixtures at a height of
18 feet for all poles. This lighting plan is in compliance with the applicable Zoning
Code sections on lighting of parking lots, and has been accepted by the City. No
other lighting is proposed beyond exterior building -mounted fixtures, which will be
addressed during plan checking.
Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) Action - On May 4, 2005
the ALRC reviewed the project landscaping and building architecture (Attachment
#3). No significant issues were raised by the Committee. There was brief
discussion in regard to the accent color to be used, which led to the following
recommendation:
1 . The building shall incorporate a bronze accent finish, in lieu of the proposed
Spring Leaf green accent color
The ALRC unanimously recommended approval of the Site Development Permit
subject to the above.
Public Notice
This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 14, 2005. All
property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice as required. No negative comments have been received. Any
correspondence received before the meeting will be transmitted to the Planning
Commission.
Public Agency Review
Staff transmitted the applicant's request to all responsible and concerned public
agencies. All comments received are on file at the Community Development
Department, and have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval,
as appropriate.
ANALYSIS:
Specific Plan Consistency — As previously stated, the Specific Plan was originally
approved based on all buildings as office uses, with the exception of Parcel 11
being approved as office/restaurant. The Specific Plan does not prohibit nor identify
the types of office uses to be established. It does set forth parking requirements for
the entire complex based on general office uses (1 space per 250 s.f. of gross floor
area). However, a medical office use is considered consistent with the intent of the
Specific Plan to provide a range of office uses "in a unique center for professional
office space in a campus -like setting" (Page 1, La Quinta Professional Plaza Specific
Plan). In addition, Condition #6 of the Specific Plan approval (Attachment 4) allows
for minor changes to the Specific Plan at a staff level; minor changes to use
allowances, such as the use approval of Parcel 11 for Bobbi J's and Louise's
Pantry, have been considered consistent. A request to allow medical office in
Buildings 6 and 7 was verbally accepted by the Director in January 2003, but was
never formally approved.
Parking - The entire Specific plan currently provides for 211 spaces to serve the
entire complex; only the restaurant uses and this proposed medical office building
are to be other than general office use. This proposed medical office building will
require six more spaces than if developed as general office use. The two existing
restaurant uses on Parcel 11, adjacent to this project, were approved by an
administrative amendment to the Specific Plan, authorized under Condition #6 of
that approval. The amendment approval was based on the availability of shared use
parking on a day/night basis. Given the proximity of this project to the restaurant
uses, and alternating peak traffic periods between the office and restaurant uses,
staff does not anticipate any significant parking issues to result from the
incremental increase in parking demand from this medical office use. There will be
adequate "spill -over" parking to the north and east during peak restaurant
operation, along with the parking stalls adjacent to this building, to accommodate
the overall parking needs of the complex. However, based on this project and
previous amendments, and considering that all parking improvements have been
completed or committed per the original Specific Plan, no further changes to uses
within the Specific Plan which increase parking requirements should be granted.
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 - , confirming the
environmental determination of the Community Development Director, and
granting approval of Site Development Permit 2005-832, subject to
conditions as recommended by staff.
Prepared by:
Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. SDP 2005-832 Site Plan
3. ALRC minutes of 5/04/05
4. Condition #6 of La auinta Professional Plaza Specific Plan
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A ONE-STORY, 4,600
SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL OFFICE STRUCTURE
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-832
ALFRED H. COOK, AIA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 24`h day of May, 2005, consider a Site Development Permit
application by Alfred H. cook, AIA, for a one-story, 4,600 square -foot medical office
structure, located on the east side of Washington Street, ± 300 feet south of
Avenue 47, and more particularly described as:
PARCEL 12 OF PARCEL MAP 29889
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit application has complied
with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community
Development Department did prepare Environmental Assessment 2000-405, which
was certified by the La Quinta City Council on April 17, 2001 (Resolution 2001-42).
Based on that Assessment, it has been determined that none of the circumstances
exists, as set forth in Public Resources Code 21166, that would trigger preparation
of any further environmental review; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning
Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval of said
Site Development Permit:
1. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta
General Plan, as it will be developed in a manner consistent with the General
Plan Land Use designation of Community Commercial and other current City
standards.
2. The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta
Zoning Code, as the project contemplates land uses that are permitted under
existing Community Commercial zoning, and which were previously
addressed in the EIR certified for the La Quinta General Plan, and approved
under Specific Plan 2000-049. Specifically, development of existing CC -
zoned land is considered to implement zoning consistency with the General
Plan and said Specific Plan. The medical uses proposed are determined to be
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-832 — Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
consistent with the intent and purpose of the La Quinta Professional Plaza
Specific Plan, in that medical office uses will further said intent and purpose
through the provision of a broader range of professional office space to create
a unique center.
3. The proposed Site Development Permit complies with the requirements of
"The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"
as amended (City Council Resolution 83-63), as it has been determined that
said Site Development Permit was considered during review of Environmental
Assessment 2000-405, prepared for Specific Plan 2000-049, and certified by
the La Quinta City Council on April 17, 2001. No changed circumstances
exists that would trigger preparation of any further environmental review
have been shown to exist.
4. The architectural design aspects of the proposed Site Development Permit
will be compatible with, and not detrimental to, surrounding development in
the Lake La Quinta tract, the approved Specific Plan 2000-049, and with the
overall design quality prevalent in the City.
5. The site design aspects of the proposed Site Development Permit will be
compatible with, and not detrimental to, surrounding development in the Lake
La Quinta tract, the approved Specific Plan 2000-049 and with the overall
design quality prevalent in the City. The building pad, mass and footprint are
consistent with the specific plan approval.
6. The project landscaping for the proposed Site Development Permit has been
designed to unify and enhance visual continuity of the proposed project with
the surrounding development, and is consistent with the landscape concept
approved for Specific Plan 2000-049.
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 2005-832 for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 832 - Kelly\peresosdp832.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-832 — Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this the 24th day of May, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 832 - Kelly\peresosdp832.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005- EXHIBIT "A"
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-832
ALFRED H. COOK, AIA
MAY 24, 2005
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Site Development Permit (SDP) 2005-832 shall be developed in compliance
with these conditions and all approved site plan, elevation, color, materials
and other approved exhibits submitted for this application, and any
subsequent amendment(s). In the event of any conflicts between these
conditions and the provisions of SDP 2005-832, these conditions shall take
precedence.
2. SDP 2005-832 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation
measures for the following related approvals:
• Environmental Assessment 2000-405
• Specific Plan 2000-049
• Tentative Parcel Map 29889
In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions
of these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine
precedence.
3. This approval shall expire two years after its effective date, as determined
pursuant to Section 9.200.060.0 of the Zoning Code, unless extended
pursuant to the provisions of Section 9.200.080.
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.
5. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the
applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public
agencies:
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
• Riverside County Fire Marshal
• La Quinta Building and Safety Department
• La Quinta Public Works Department
(Grading/Improvement/Encroachment Permits)
• La Quinta Community Development Department
• Riverside County Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Southern California Gas Company
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• Waste Management of the Desert
• SCAQMD Coachella Valley
Exhibit "A"
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.
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.
6. 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
("SW PPP") .
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
Exhibit "A"
The applicant or design professional can obtain the California
Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at
www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation.
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to
any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this project.
C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for
inspection at the project site at all times through and including
acceptance of all improvements by the City.
D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following
Best Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC):
1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2) Temporary Sediment Control.
3) Wind Erosion Control.
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
E. All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall
be approved by the City Engineer prior to any onsite or offsite grading,
pursuant to this project.
F. The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire
duration of project construction until all improvements are completed
and accepted by the City.
7. All aspects of this project (plan preparation, all construction phases,
operations, etc.) shall be subject to and comply with the adopted Mitigation
Monitoring Program and Negative Declaration (EA 2000-405), as certified by
the La Quinta City Council.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
Exhibit "A"
8. Prior to the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire, or confer,
those easements, and other property rights necessary for the construction
and/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 the maintenance, construction and
reconstruction of essential improvements.
9. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public
right-of-ways as follows:
A. Washington Street (Augmented Major Arterial — 120' R.O.W) — 20-
foot from the R/W-P/L.
The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not
limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned
setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those
purposes on the Final Map.
10. Direct vehicular access to Washington Street is restricted, except for those
access points identified on the approved Parcel Map No. 29889, or as
otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. The vehicular access
restrictions are as shown on the recorded Parcel Map No. 29889.
11. 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.
12. The applicant shall enter into a reciprocal easement agreement with all parcel
within Parcel Map No. 29889 for all common use access driveways and
parking lot infrastructures.
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.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
Exhibit "A"
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.
13. 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 Commercial Precise Grading Plan
1 "
= 30'
Horizontal
B.
PM 10 Plan
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
C.
SWPPP
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
Note. A thru C to be submitted concurrently.
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 annotated 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, retaining and perimeter walls, etc. ADA accessibility to public
streets, adjacent buildings and existing and proposed handicap parking shall
be shown on the Precise Grading Plans at a scale to be determined by the
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
Exhibit "A"
Public Works Department. Precise Grading Plans shall also require approval
by the Community Development and Building and Safety Departments.
14. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes
for elements of construction on the Public Works Online Engineering Library
at.http://www.la-uinta.org/publicworks/tractl/z onlinelibrary/Ointropage.htm.
15. 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.
16. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD
format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the
City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
17. Should the applicant fail to construct the improvements for the development,
or fail to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, the
City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits, and/or final
building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of
the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements.
FIRE PROTECTION
18. Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Fire Marshal. More
specific, detailed requirements shall be addressed at time plans are submitted
for plan checking. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department
for plan review, to run concurrent with City plan checking.
GRADING
19. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050
(Grading Improvements), LQMC.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
Exhibit "A"
20. 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.
21. 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 applicable improvement plans 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.
22. 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.
23. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City
Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the Site
Development Permit Plan, unless the pad elevations have other requirements
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
Exhibit "A"
imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval.
24. 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.
25. 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.
nRAINAr;F
"Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage
report for Parcel Map No. 29889 and as revised for this site development permit.
Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner." The applicant shall
demonstrate to the Public Works Department's satisfaction, the ability of the
existing drainage system to accept the stormwater flow in Lake La Quinta.
26. 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.
27. 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.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005- Exhibit "A"
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
28. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood
boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
29. 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.
30. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received
and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief
route.
UTILITIES
31. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110
(Utilities), LQMC.
32. 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.
33. 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
34. 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.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005- Exhibit "A"
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
35. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design
procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil
strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic).
Minimum structural sections shall be as follows:
Parking Lot 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
36. 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.
37. 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.
38. The applicant shall remove and replace the existing sidewalk as needed at all
locations where it is cracked, uneven at joints, or otherwise damaged
pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Section 5610. This requirement
applies to all sidewalk located in the public right of way adjacent to the
property being developed.
39. The applicant shall be advised of its continuing obligation to maintain all
sidewalk located in the public right of way adjacent to its property in a good
state of repair pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Section 5610.
PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS
40. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150
(Parking). In particular, the following are conditioned with this approval. The
applicant shall restripe the parking lot striping to the City of La Quinta
standard double hairpin stripe.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
Exhibit "A"
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.
A. General access points and turning movements of traffic to off site
public streets are limited to the access locations in the approved
Parcel Map No. 29889 and these conditions of approval.
41. The applicant is required to reconstruct the access driveway at the east
boundary adjacent to Parcel 11 (Louise's Pantry) as required by the Public
Works Department. At a minimum, the applicant shall redesign and construct
the access driveway per Public Works Department design requirements.
CONSTRUCTION
42. 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.
LANDSCAPING
43. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks)
& 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
44. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention
basins, common lots and parking lot areas.
45. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, retention
basins, common lots and parking lot areas shall be signed and stamped by a
licensed landscape architect.
46. 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
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
Engineer.
Exhibit "A"
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City
Engineer.
47. 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 or private parking areas.
48. Final landscape plans shall be coordinated and designed to integrate a
transitional landscape approach with the proposed SDP 2005-830 site
immediately south of this project.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
49. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that
meet with the approval of the City Engineer.
50. 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.
51. 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.
52. 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.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005- Exhibit "A"
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
MAINTENANCE
53. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance), LQMC.
54. 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
55. 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.
56. 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).
MISCELLANEOUS
56. The applicant shall submit a detailed building lighting plan, to include exterior
fixture details and outdoor perimeter walkway and accent lighting. Details
and specifications for each fixture to be used shall be provided with said
plan. The lighting plan shall be approved by the Community Development
Department prior to issuance of the building permit.
57. All roof -mounted mechanical equipment must be screened and installed using
compatible architectural materials and treatments, in a manner so as not to
be visible from surrounding properties and streets. Working drawings
showing all such equipment and locations shall be submitted to the Building
and Safety Department along with construction plan submittal for building
permits. Method and design of screening must be approved by the
Community Development Department prior to any issuance of building
permits related to structures requiring such screening.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005- Exhibit "A"
Conditions Of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2005-832
Alfred H. Cook, AIA
May 24, 2005
58. The "Spring Leaves Green" accent color shall be replaced with a bronze
finish accent color.
59. Approval of SDP 2005-832 shall constitute approval of a minor change
under Condition 6 of the approved SP, to allow a 4,600 s.f. medical office
use on Parcel 12 in lieu of the originally approved 4,600 s.f. of general office
use.
ATTACHMENT #1
ed ?
fipgL� �$
^ b'l91 ^ 4 O *I I
�' �► a4 N m
Q _ Nth N
4038
P
" `" 4
ASSESSOR'S MAP OK643 PC.ZO
Riverside County, Calif.
s�6 N
d
E"' 1B•
� O
N �
�Q
g g
I
0
N
�' 1
g 4 v 9+•
a ate• ��:
3/
N W'.3'W" W P Inov
sa
ATTACHMENT 2
66r9
J
h
t
9
co
8_'=
_
6't
Q
O
44
4AMIK
?
h
.0
Wcpo
Li—
N
�U p�
U ¢o o
.00
%J
a{ �
¢0Z,;;
29'2
`
Z CL
oa.
.Q
u 0�
; i
n3nn,a Ana
•
� _ ,
e n
2
U
N
O>
y
a
d
j
R
Y
IID VAU T
a
n •tlnaeone
h
_. __ _ __ �_ _ .__1,2_54'___
a � U_❑
'Oa '-
a tt=
U� 0��.
❑ OP.P
DJV �
O�
� � III
tl� O
G
V
Ua
_
_
J
a'DI
WASHINGTON - _ STREET - p,
ATTACHMENT #3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
3. Committee Member Christopher asked if the window casing on
the west end of the building was recessed. Mr. Fernando
Andrade explained how the walls recess and popout to create
shadow lines. The entry and fist floor windows are shaded by
the cover.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt commended the applicant on the
design of the building. On the parking area bordering
Washington Street, where the existing #andscaping is on the
grade, is this higher than the parking lot? The applicant stated
the plants will hide the parking lot.
5. Mr. David Thorns, 47-410 Via Cordova asked the color of the
building. Mr. Andrade went over the proposed colors and
stated the building would have a smooth trowel finish. Mr.
Thorns asked if the landscaping on the west elevation could be
improved as well as the landscaping along Washington Street.
6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-018 confirming their
recommendation for approval of Site Development Permit 2005-
830, as recommended by staff and amended:
a. The applicant shall provide plans for the covered entry
way.
b. The parking lot shall have adequate landscaping on all
sides per the existing requirements, to hide the front of
the car screens from Caleo Bay and Washington Street.
C. The parking lot islands shall not have any plant material.
Unanimously approved with Committee Member Thorns being
absent.
Committee Member Thoms rejoined the Commission.
.. F. Site Development Permit 2005-832; A request of William Kelly Trust
for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a 4,600
square foot one story office building in the La Quinta Professional
Plaza located on Parcel 12 of Parcel Map 29889 — the east side of
Washington Street 300 feet south of Avenue 47.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 7
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department. Staff introduced D. Bill
Kelly, the applicant, and Al Cook, the architect who gave a
presentation on the project.
2. Committee Member Christopher stated he would prefer the light
aqua accent color proposed. Mr. Cook stated he would prefer
the color proposed. He would suggest using a little deeper
green or bronze.
3. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Thoms to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-020 recommending approval of
Village Use Permit 2005-027, as recommended by staff and
amended:
a. Coordinate the landscaping between this project and the
project to the south.
b. Change the accent color on the window frames to either
a bronze or deeper green.
Unanimously approved.
G. Y.11age Use Permit 2005-027; a request of Calle Estado, LLC for
consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a 10,896
gros§ s.f. two story retail/office building in the Village at La Quinta
located on the southwest corner of Calle Estado.
1. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the information
contained in the staff report. Staff introduced Steve Nieto,
designer of the building.
2. Committees , Member Christopher asked if any greenery was
proposed alo*g the streetscape. Staff stated there are only two
tree wells.
3. Committee Memb6i .Thoms suggested pots or something of that
nature be added. Thorns
east elevation is very blank as well.
Staff suggested somelbing in the nature of murals until a
building is built next to if:.", Committee Member Thoms stated it
currently is a parking lot.'s. Staff stated it is an illegal use.
Committee Member Thorns stated this is the elevation you see
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 8
ATTACHMENT 4
Resolution 2001-43
Conditions of Approval - FINAL
Specific Plan 2000-049
Waste Management per Condition 6 of SDP 2001-691.
C. Figures 9, 12 and 13, for the temporary bank facility, shall be revised
to show that access to and from Washington Street shall be limited to
use of the one existing drive approach.
D. Page 16, Temporary Bank Facility - Amend text: "if the permanent
bank facility is not completed within a two-year period from its
effective approval date, then the temporary use shall be removed
unless substantial completion on said permanent bank facility has been
pursued. The determination on 'substantial completion' shall be made
by the Community Development Director".
E. The Specific Plan shall require that a facility to accommodate a
minimum of five bicycles shall be provided for any restaurant use (pp.
14, 32,43).
F. Drainage Plan - Section F, Page 25, shall include reference to an
appendix of the Specific Plan which shall contain the signed drainage
agreement between Lake La Quinta and the applicant.
G. Page 32, Property Development Standards, shall be amended to reflect
the preceding requirements 4.A and 4.C.
H. Page 38 and 39, Signage (sic) Guidelines - Change all reference to
'signage' to 'sign' or signs'. Amend text: "A detailed sign program for
the Specific Plan area will be submitted prior to occupancy permits for
any permanent building".
6. Minor changes, as determined by the Community Development Director to be
consistent with the intent and purpose of the Specific Plan, may be
approved. Examples include modifications to landscaping materials and/or
design, parking and circulation arrangements not involving reductions in
required standards beyond those identified in the Specific Plan, minor site,
building area or other revisions necessary due to changes in technical plan
aspects such as drainage, street improvements, grading, etc. Such changes
may be approved on a staff -level basis and shall not constitute a requirement
to amend the Specific Plan. Consideration for any modifications shall be
requested in writing to the Director and submitted with appropriate graphic
and/or textual documentation in order to make a determination on the
request.
7. All aspects of this project (plan preparation, all construction phases,
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-827
APPLICANT: COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC. FOR
INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
ARCHITECT: COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC.
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING
PLANS FOR FOUR PROTOTYPICAL RESIDENTIAL PLANS AND
CLUBHOUSE FOR USE IN TRACT 31732
LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND AVENUE 60
BACKGROUND:
Tentative Tract Map 31732 was approved for this 39.7 acre property on January 21,
2004, for Michael La Melza. The tract consists of 197 residential lots and a recreation
lot (Attachment 1). The applicant has purchased the property and submitted
prototypical plans for four residential models and clubhouse plans (Attachment 2). The
project is a medium density (five dwelling per acre) and utilizes alley access for garages
for some of the lots.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The residences are designed in a Mediterranean style. Each plan has three front
elevation treatments. The plans vary in size from 1,337 to 2,509 square feet in size.
The two smallest plans are one-story in height with the other two plans two -stories
high. The highest two-story plan is just over 22 feet in height. Each of the prototype
floor plans contains a casita option. The two larger two story plans use an alley
accessed garage.
The following is a brief description of the plans:
PI AN 1 Tq7
Size - 1,337 square feet + 253 sq ft casita option
# of bedrooms - two + one optional
Baths - 2 + one optional
Garages- two cars
Building height - 14.65' - one story
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-827\sdp 2005-827 pc rpt.doc
PI AN 1 RAR
Size -
# of bedrooms -
Baths -
Garages -
Building height -
PI AN 9n55
1,546 square feet +
two + one optional
three
two cars
15'-8" - one story
234 sq ft casita option
Size -
2,055 square feet + 238 sq ft casita option
# of bedrooms -
three + one optional
Baths -
3.5 + one optional
Garages-
two cars at rear of house
Building height -
22'-8" - two stories
PLAN 2223
Size -
2,223 square feet + 286 sq ft casita option
# of bedrooms -
three + one optional
Baths -
2.5 + one optional
Garages-
two cars at rear of house
Building height -
21'-10" -two stories
The exterior colors and materials are earth tones with the roof either concrete "S" or
flat tiles. Stucco texture is not indicated. Stone veneer is used on portions of the
lower facades for Elevation "A" for each plan. Material and color samples have been
submitted and will be available at the meeting.
The architectural plans for the 3,409 square foot one story high clubhouse on the
recreation lot are Mediterranean in style and uses plaster walls, stone veneer with a
concrete S-tile roof. The recreation lot will include a swimming pool, spa, bar-b-que,
tables and lounge chairs.
Landscaping plans have been submitted for the tract and include the private recreation
lot within the tract and perimeters adjacent to Monroe Street and Avenue 60
(Attachment 3). Preliminary level plans are provided for the street entry on Monroe
Street and recreation lot. Perimeter and privacy walls and entry gate design are also
provided.
Typical planting plans for the production home front yards have been provided. Turf
areas are kept to a minimum of approximately 30-40% of the front yard planted area.
An 18-inch wide gravel border is provided adjacent to the curbs, next to the lawn. The
ALRC recommended this gravel border be deleted and the lawn sprinkler heads placed
18-inches behind the curbs if acceptable to CVWD. It was believed the lawn area
between the heads and curbs would get enough water from seepage and overspray. If
the gravel border is required by CVWD, the ALRC required the border meander enough
to allow emitter irrigated groundcover planting in the widest border areas.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-827\sdp 2005-827 pc rpt.doc
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC):
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of April 6, 2005, and on a 3-0 vote
recommended denial of the request as submitted (Attachment 3). The applicants
chose to revise the plans and requested the ALRC review the revised plans. On May
4, 2005 the ALRC on a 3-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2005-015 recommending
approval of the revised plans, subject to conditions (Attachment 4). These conditions
pertained to placement of the sprinkler heads as noted above, deletion of several plant
species, and provision for a variety of garage door designs.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 13, 2005. All
property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing
notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. As of this writing, no comments
have been received.
FINDINGS.
The Findings as required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the
Zoning Code can be made as noted below.
1. Compliance with Zoning Code- The project is consistent with the Design
Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the
Zoning Code, which requires a minimum of two different front elevations, varied
roof heights and planes. The proposed units comply with these requirements in
that three facades for each of the plans are proposed and varied planes and roof
lines are provided.
2. Architectural Design- The architectural design of the project, including, but not
limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors,
architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are compatible
with surrounding development in the City.
3. Compliance with CEQA- This request has been previously assessed in
conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2003-492 which was certified by
the City Council on January 20, 2004, and therefore, no further environmental
review is needed.
4. Site Design- The site design of the project, including, but not limited to project
entries, interior circulation, pedestrian, equestrian and bicycle ways, pedestrian
amenities, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding
development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City and laid out
and provided in compliance with the Zoning Code requirements.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-827\sdp 2005-827 pc rpt.doc
5. Landscape Design- New home and project landscaping includes, but not limited
to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials will be
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. It will provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual
continuity of the project, complement the surrounding project area and comply
with City and CVWD water efficiency, ensuring efficient water use.
6. Compliance with General Plan- The project is in compliance with the General
Plan in that the property to be developed is designated for residences as
proposed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- , approving Site Development
Permit 2005-827, pursuant to the above -noted Findings and subject to the attached
conditions.
Attachments:
1. Tract/Location map
2. Plan exhibits (for Planning Commission only)
3. Minutes for the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee meeting of
April 6, 2005
4. Draft minutes for the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee meeting
of May 4, 2005
Prepared by:
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
p:\stan\sdp\sdp 2005-823 pc rpt.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR FOUR
SINGLE-FAMILY PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND
CLUBHOUSE FOR USE IN TENTATIVE TRACT 31732 LOCATED
AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND
AVENUE 60
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-827
APPLICANT: COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC. FOR
INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 24" day of May, 2005, held a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider a request by Colbourn -Currier -Noll Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort
Communities for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for four single-
family prototype residential unit plans and clubhouse for use in Tentative Tract
31732, located at the southeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60, more
particularly described as follows:
Tentative Tract 31732
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee of
the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 4th day of May, 2005, hold a public
meeting to review architecture and landscape plans for four single-family prototype
residential unit and clubhouse plans and recommended approval by adoption of
Minute Motion 2005-015; and,
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2003-492) was
certified by the City Council for Tentative Tract Map 31732. 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 justify approval of said Site Development
Permit:
Planning Commission Resolution 2005 -
Site Development Permit 2005-827
Colbourn -Currier -Noll Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort Communities
Recommended: May 24, 2005
1. Compliance with Zoning Code- The project is consistent with the Design
Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of
the Zoning Code, which requires a minimum of two different front elevations,
varied roof heights and planes. The proposed units comply with these
requirements in that three facades for each of the plans are proposed and
varied planes and roof lines are provided.
2. Architectural Design- The architectural design of the project, including, but
not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors,
architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are
compatible with surrounding development in the City.
3. Compliance with CEQA- This request has been previously assessed in
conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2003-492 which was certified
by the City Council on January 20, 2004, and therefore, no further
environmental review is needed.
4. Site Design- The site design of the project, including, but not limited to
project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian, equestrian and bicycle ways,
pedestrian amenities, and other site design elements are compatible with
surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City
and laid out and provided in compliance with the Zoning Code requirements.
5. Landscape Design- New home and project landscaping includes, but not
limited to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant
materials will be 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. It will provide an overall unifying
influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, complement the
surrounding project area and comply with City and CVWD water efficiency,
ensuring efficient water use.
6. Compliance with General Plan- The project is in compliance with the General
Plan in that the property to be developed is designated for residences as
proposed.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-827\sdp 05-827 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005 -
Site Development Permit 2005-827
Colbourn -Currier -Noll Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort Communities
Recommended: May 24, 2005
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Site Development Permit.
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2005-827, subject to
the attached conditions, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24" day of May, 2005, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-827\sdp 05-827 pc res.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-827
COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE FOR
INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
GENERAL
1. This approval is for the following prototype plans:
Plan 1337
Plan 1546
Plan 2055
Plan 2223
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this
approval, final working drawings shall be approved by the Community
Development Department.
3. Guest houses/casitas', as defined in LQMC Section 9.60.100, are limited to
one per lot/primary dwelling. Any guest house/casita will require approval of
a Minor Use Permit, subject to the provisions of said Section as determined
by the Community Development Department.
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
development application or any application thereunder. The City shall have
sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the developer of any claim, action or
proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
5. This Site Development Permit is valid for one year, unless an extension is
applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section
9.200.080 of the Zoning Code.
6. SDP 2005-827 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation
measures, which are incorporated by reference herein, for the following
related approvals:
• Environmental Assessment 2003-492
• Specific Plan No. 218 (Riverside County)
• Tentative Tract Map 31732
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP C5-827\sdp 2005-827 coa.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-827
COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE FOR INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of
these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine precedence.
No development permits will be issued until compliance with these conditions has
been achieved.
7. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the
City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from
the following agencies, if required:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permits)
• 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)
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances
from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of
improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when
submitting those improvement plans for City approval.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
8. Applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Art in Public Places program in effect at the time of issuance of
building permits.
9. 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)
10. Prior to building permit issuance, parkland dedication fees shall be paid
unless these fees have been or will be paid during the process of recordation
of the subdivision map.
11. The model home sales complex, including landscaping, deposit fee, signage,
fencing, flags, etc., shall comply with the requirements of Section 9.60.250
(Model Home Complexes) and Section 8.13.030D (Water Efficiency
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-827\sdp 2005-827 coa.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-827
COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE FOR INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
Provisions for New or Rehabilitated landscapes) of the Municipal Code.
Minor Use Permit approval is required prior to establishing any of the model
units or temporary sales facilities.
LANDSCAPING
12. Final front yard landscaping plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
professional and submitted to the Community Development Department for
review and approval prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the model
units authorized by this approval. Said plans shall be in compliance with
Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping) of the Municipal Code. The
landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley
Water District and Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner prior to
submittal of the final plans to the Community Development Department.
Front yard landscaping for each dwelling shall consist of a minimum of two
trees (i.e., a minimum 1.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade
level after planting), ten 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Palm trees may
count as a shade tree if the trunk is six feet tall. Double lodge poles (two-
inch diameter) shall be used to stake trees. All shrubs and trees shall be
irrigated by bubbler or emitters.
Future home buyers shall be offered a no -turf, desert landscape option in
front yards. Typical plans for a no -turf desert landscape design shall be
approved by the Community Development Department with the Final front
yard landscaping plans.
13. The developer shall submit final landscaping plans for all retention basins,
interior common areas and perimeter landscaped lot and parkway along
Monroe Street and Avenue 60, to the Community Development Department
for approval prior to issuance of any precise grading permits. The landscape
and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District
and Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner prior to submittal of the final
plans to the Community Development Department.
14. Wildflower seed mixes, if used, that are susceptible to weed control
problems shall not be used in any hydro -seed operations. An alternative
seed mix which will achieve erosion and dust control, with minimal weed
growth, shall be approved by the Community Development Department.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-827\sdp 2005-827 coa.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-827
COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE FOR INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
15. The sprinkler heads shall be placed 18" from curbs with turf between heads
and curbs. However, if an 18" gravel strip is required adjacent to curb by
CVWD the strip shall be meandering with some ground cover plant material
in widened areas.
16. The Pinus eldarica, Buxus Microphilla Japonica, Jacaranda, and Ulmus
parviflora shall be deleted from the plant palette.
BUILDING DESIGN
17. The applicant shall submit perimeter block wall plans and details, to include
exterior color and finish. Perimeter wall design shall be decorative. The
block wall plan shall be approved by the Community Development Director
prior to issuance of any building permits for wall construction.
18. Final location of all structures submitted for plan check shall comply with all
setback standards of the zoning district or Specific Plan No. 18, as
applicable. Minor amendments to the development plans (e.g. architectural
details, house plotting, etc.) shall be subject to approval by the Community
Development Director.
17. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment must be screened within or
otherwise integral to the roof structure, using compatible architectural
materials and treatments, so as to not be visible from surrounding properties
and streets. Working drawings showing all such equipment and locations
shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department along with
construction plan submittal for building permits.
18. All two car garages shall maintain the 20-foot x 20-foot minimum interior
dimensions as specified in Chapter 9.150 (Parking), LQMC.
19. For the front loaded garages, for every third unit, the garage door
appearance shall be varied.
20. The community identification sign shall reviewed separately by the
Community Development Department under a Sign Application.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-827\sdp 2005-827 coa.doc
ATTACHMENT 1
uice.. e
r
ji all
t, IfFit
ATTACHMENT #3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
April 6, 2005
Unanimously approved.
D. Site Development Permit 2004-827; a request of Colbourn -Currier -Noll
Architecture for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans
for four prototypical residential plans, clubhouse and common area
landscaping plans for Tract 31732 located on the southeast corner of
Monroe Street and Avenue 60.
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 the
applicants Michael Bash, Inno Brafad, and Sandra Esco.
2. Committee Member Christopher asked if this was to be
affordable housing. Ms. Sandra stated the perimeters were to
stay between 40-70 feet. They have added some detail and
undulation to keep it economical and yet have variety. The
price range would be $400,000 to $800,000. The largest
would be 2,600 square feet.
3. Committee Member Thoms stated the density is very high.
Staff stated it is medium density. Mr. Bash stated the density
has been reduced from the original design. Committee Member
Thoms asked if it has been approved. Staff stated yes, by the
Planning Commission and City Council. Committee Member
Thoms stated there is a lot of busy detail on the elevations.
The applicant stated there is an optional casita.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what material would be used
on the wall. The applicant stated it is a masonry block wall
with a cap. Committee Member Bobbitt asked why there was
no entry off Avenue 60. The applicant stated they were
restricted to not having an entry off Avenue 60. Committee
Member Bobbitt asked if the gates would be automatic. The
applicant stated yes, with electronic gates on Monroe Street.
5. Committee Member Christopher asked if the turning radius was
a City standard. Staff stated yes, and it is approved by the
Public Works Department.
6. Committee Member Thoms stated he would struggle to approve
the architecture.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\4-6-05 ALRC.doc 8
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
April 6, 2005
7. Committee Member Christopher stated that if the price range
was $350,000 to $500,000, he could possibly see it, but up
into the $800,000 price range the basic architecture is certainly
not up to what has been approved by this Committee. There
needs to be more attention to the architecture. The applicant
stated that with the casitas it would go up to $800,000.
Without the casitas it should only be $400,000 to $600,000.
8. Committee Member Thoms stated the color of the materials is
dull. The applicant asked what colors would be better. She
showed a color sample board of Tract 31733. Committee
Member Thoms suggested the applicant take another look to
enhance or reduce the clutter for the price range. The applicant
asked if they wanted more detail or if they could explain what is
wanted. Committee Member Thoms stated there are too many
gable ends. One of the units has three different window
shapes.
9. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he agrees. He does not like
the design. They look busy and he does not like the color or
the roof lines.
10. Committee Member Christopher stated that if you look at the
classic Spanish Revival or Tuscan architecture it would help
their design. They need to review some of these elements as
they are missing in these plans. The Committee's statement is
that this does not aesthetically meet the City's design criteria.
Community Development Director Doug Evans stated they have
expressed their concerns and this architect can enhance their
product based on their comments. We do not want to redesign
the project, but the Committee can state it does not meet the
criteria of the City for a community.
11. Committee Member Christopher stated that if their theme is to
be Spanish or Tuscan then they need to review the elements of
those designs. The front gate elements are plain and simple
with vertical lines. They need something with more detail with
aesthetic value. Staff noted the landscape plan was
conceptual. One entrance in and out is also a concern. Staff
noted the subdivision design has been approved.
12. Committee Member Thoms noted the plans are conceptual and
the California Pepper should be limited as well as the mesquites.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\4-6-05 ALRC.doc 9
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
April 6, 2005
13. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-011 recommending denial of Site
Development Permit 2004-827, with a note to the Planning
Commission that they review the architecture plans to be more
in line with classic architecture if they are trying to achieve the
Tuscan or Spanish Revival look. More color and deviation in the
colors is also needed. Unanimously approved.
E. Site Development Permit 2004-828; a request of Colbourn -Currier -Noll
Architecture for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans
for three prototypical residential plans, clubhouse and landscaping
plans for Tract 31733 located on the northeast corner of Monroe
Street and Avenue 61.
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 noted the
architecture is similar and the Committee may want to apply the
same comments to this tract.
2. Committee Member Thoms noted the site plan is better.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the price range would be
the same. The applicant stated approximately the same.
4. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Thoms to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-012 recommending denial of Site
Development Permit 2004-828. Unanimously approved.
F. Site Development Permit 2004-834; a request of Choice Enterprises
for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for three new
prototype residential units with two facades each located at the
southwest corner of Avenue 60 and Madison Street.
1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained
in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department. Staff introduced the applicant David
Sacculla, who gave a presentation on the project.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\4-6-05 ALRC.doc 10
ATTACHMENT #4
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
b. The blue horizontal spoilers (metal beams), shall be
removed;
C. Provide additional stack stone/natural wainscoting on
parts of the front elevation of the building.
B. Site Development Permit 2004-827; a request of Colbourn -Currier -Noll
Architecture for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans
for a 136,000 square foot retail store and a gas station located on the
southwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road.
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 the
applicants Steve Kellogg, landscape architect, and Bill Currier.
2. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no problem with the
landscaping design. He did ask about the 18" header board
with decomposed granite (DG); his experience has been that it
looks terrible and is not well maintained. He recommends
taking the lawn to the curb and moving the spray heads 18
inches back from the curb. Mr. Kellogg stated CVWD requires
them to use a header board to keep the water from running into
the street. Committee Member Bobbitt recommended the pits
be eliminated. Also, the Buxus microphilla Japonica will not do
well. The date palms should not be used in any pedestrian
traffic area. The Jacaranda and Ulmus parriflora will be
deciduous and he would not recommend them.
3. Committee Member Thorns asked that the Jacaranda be
eliminated. Also, the front yard 18-inch strip should be
redesigned to be meandering and widened if they are required to
keep it with DG and some groundcover in the widened areas.
4. Committee Member Christopher commended the redesign of the
units. He has no problem with the two-story street front on the
one-story because the garage takes up too much of the
elevation. He would suggest radiusing the top of the garage
door sill on every third one-story unit.
5. Committee Member Thorns noted the one plan is very weak
from the street. The applicant gave a description of the unit
stating the casitas hides the entry. The casita is hipped all
around.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Member Thoms/Christopher to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-015 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2004-827, as recommended by staff and
as amended:
a. The sprinkler heads shall be 18 inches from the curb with
turf between heads and curbs. If the 18 inch gravel
border is required by CVWD, the 18 inch strip shall be
meandering with some groundcover in widened areas.
b. Recommended the Pinus Eldarica, Buxus Microphilla
Japonica, Jacaranda and Ulmus parriflora be eliminated
from the plant list.
C. On the front loaded one-story units, for every third unit
the garage door appearance shall be varied.
C. Site Development Permit 2004-828; a request of Colbourn -Currier -Noll
Architecture for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans
for a 136,000 square foot retail store and a gas station located on the
southwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road.
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 the
applicants Steve Kellogg, landscape architect and Bill Currier.
2. Committee Member Christopher asked about the five
rectangular pads in the center. The applicant identified them as
home sites that back up to the putting green. On the
architectural plans, the softened eyebrow makes a big
difference on the streetscape.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt commended the applicant on the
site plan. He asked what area was to be maintained by the
HOA. The applicant explained.
4. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Member Bobbitt/Christopher to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-016 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2004-828, as recommended by staff and
as amended:
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 4
PH E
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-828
APPLICANT: COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC. FOR
INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
ARCHITECT: COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC.
REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR
FOUR PROTOTYPICAL RESIDENTIAL PLANS AND CLUBHOUSE
FOR USE IN TRACT 31733
LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND AVENUE 61
BACKGROUND:
Tentative Tract Map 31733 was approved for this 34.6 acre property on January 21,
2004, for Michael La Melza. The tract consists of 125 residential lots and a recreation
lot (Attachment 1). The applicant has purchased the property and submitted
prototypical plans for three residential models and clubhouse plans (Attachment 2).
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The residences are designed in a Mediterranean style. Each plan has three front
elevation treatments. The plans vary in size from 2,086 to 2,654 square feet in size.
The smallest plan is one-story in height with the other two plans two -stories high.
Each of the prototype floor plans contains a casita option.
The following is a brief description of the plans:
PLAN 2086
Size - 2,086 square feet +
# of bedrooms - two + one optional
Baths - 2.5 + one optional
Garages- two cars
Building height - 18' - one story
210 sq ft casita option
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 2005-828 pc rpt.doc
PI AN 9r,74
PI AN 7Fi-F;4
Size -
2,574 square feet +
# of bedrooms -
three + one optional
Baths -
2.5 + one optional
Garages-
two cars
Building height -
22'-6" - two stories
Size - 2,654 square feet +
# of bedrooms - three + one optional
Baths - 3.5 + one optional
Garages- two cars
Building height - 22'-6" - two stories
262 sq ft casita option
+ optional den
254 sq ft casita option
The exterior colors and materials are earth tones with the roof either concrete "S" or
flat tiles. Stucco texture is not indicated. Stone veneer is used on portions of the
facade for Elevation "A" for each plan. Material and color samples have been submitted
and will be available at the meeting.
The architectural plans for the 3,400 square foot one story high clubhouse on the
recreation lot are Mediterranean in style and uses plaster walls, stone veneer with a
concrete S-tile roof. The recreation lot will include a swimming pool, putting green,
spa, bar-b-que, tables, lounge chairs and small parking lot.
Landscaping plans have been submitted for the tract and include the private recreation
lot within the tract and for the perimeters adjacent to Monroe Street and Avenue 61
(Attachment 3). Preliminary level plans are provided for the street entry on Monroe
Street and recreation lot. Perimeter and privacy walls and entry gate design are also
provided.
Typical planting plans for the production home front yards have been provided. Turf
areas are kept to a minimum of approximately 30-40% of the front yard planed area.
An 18" wide gravel border is provided adjacent to the curbs next to the lawn. The
ALRC recommended that this border be deleted and that the lawn sprinkler heads be
placed 18" behind the curbs if acceptable to CVWD. It was felt the lawn area between
the heads and curbs would get enough water from seepage and overspray. If the
gravel border is required by CVWD, the ALRC required the border meander enough to
allow emitter irrigated groundcover planting in the widest border areas.
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC):
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of April 6, 2005, and on a 3-0 vote
recommended denial of the request as submitted (Attachment 3). The applicants
chose to revise the plans and requested the ALRC review the revised plans. On May
4, 2005 the ALRC on a 3-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 2005-016 recommending
approval of the revised plans, subject to conditions (Attachment 4).
\.
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 2005-828 pc rpt.doc
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 13, 2005. All
property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing
notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. As of this writing, no comments
have been received.
FINDINGS -
The Findings as required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the
Zoning Code can be made as noted below.
1. Compliance with Zoning Code- The project is consistent with the Design
Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the
Zoning Code, which requires a minimum of two different front elevations, varied
roof heights and planes. The proposed units comply with these requirements in
that three facades for each of the plans are proposed and varied planes and roof
lines are provided.
2. Architectural Design- The architectural design of the project, including, but not
limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors,
architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are compatible
with surrounding development in the City.
3. Compliance with CEQA- This request has been previously assessed in
conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2003-493 which was certified by
the City Council on January 20, 2004, and therefore, no further environmental
review is needed.
4. Site Design- The site design of the project, including, but not limited to project
entries, interior circulation, pedestrian, equestrian and bicycle ways, pedestrian
amenities, and other site design elements are compatible with surrounding
development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City and laid out
and provided in compliance with the Zoning Code requirements.
5. Landscape Design- New home and project landscaping includes, but not limited
to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials will be
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. It will provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual
continuity of the project, complement the surrounding project area and comply
with City and CVWD water efficiency, ensuring efficient water use.
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 2005-828 pc rpt.doc
6. Compliance with General Plan- The project is in compliance with the General
Plan in that the property to be developed is designated for residences as
proposed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- , approving Site Development
Permit 2005-828, pursuant to the above -noted Findings and subject to the attached
conditions.
Attachments:
1. Tract/Location map
2. Plan exhibits (for Planning Commission only)
3. Minutes for the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee meeting of
April 6, 2005
4. Draft minutes for the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee meeting
of May 4, 2005
Prepared by:
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
p:\stan\sdp\sdp 2005-828 pc rpt.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR THREE
SINGLE-FAMILY PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND
CLUBHOUSE FOR USE IN TENTATIVE TRACT 31733 LOCATED
AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF MONROE STREET AND
AVENUE 61
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-828
APPLICANT: COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE, INC. FOR
INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 24" day of May, 2005, held a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider a request by Colbourn -Currier -Noll Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort
Communities for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for three single-
family prototype residential unit plans and clubhouse for use in Tentative Tract
31733, located at the northeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 61, more
particularly described as follows:
Tentative Tract 31733
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee of
the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 4th day of May, 2005, hold a public
meeting to review architecture and landscape plans for three single-family prototype
residential unit and clubhouse plans and recommended approval by adoption of
Minute Motion 2005-016; and,
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2003-493) was
certified by the City Council for Tentative Tract Map 31733. 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 justify approval of said Site Development
Permit:
1. Compliance with Zoning Code- The project is consistent with the Design
Guidelines of Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of
the Zoning Code, which requires a minimum of two different front elevations,
P:\stan\sdp\sdp 05-828 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005 -
Site Development Permit 2005-828
Colbourn -Currier -Noll Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort Communities
Recommended: May 24, 2005
varied roof heights and planes. The proposed units comply with these
requirements in that three facades for each of the plans are proposed and
varied planes and roof lines are provided.
2. Architectural Design- The architectural design of the project, including, but
not limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors,
architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are
compatible with surrounding development in the City.
3. Compliance with CEQA- This request has been previously assessed in
conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2003-492 which was certified
by the City Council on January 20, 2004, and therefore, no further
environmental review is needed.
4. Site Design- The site design of the project, including, but not limited to
project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian, equestrian and bicycle ways,
pedestrian amenities, and other site design elements are compatible with
surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City
and laid out and provided in compliance with the Zoning Code requirements.
5. Landscape Design- New home and project landscaping includes, but not
limited to the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant
materials will be 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. It will provide an overall unifying
influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, complement the
surrounding project area and comply with City and CVWD water efficiency,
ensuring efficient water use.
6. Compliance with General Plan- The project is in compliance with the General
Plan in that the property to be developed is designated for residences as
proposed.
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 correct and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Site Development Permit.
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2005-828, subject to
the attached conditions, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 05-828 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005 -
Site Development Permit 2005-828
Colbourn -Currier -Noll Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort Communities
Recommended: May 24, 2005
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24th day of May, 2005, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 05-828 pc res.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-828
COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE FOR INNOVATIVE RESORT
COMMUNITIES
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
GENERAL
1. This approval is for the following prototype plans:
Plan 2086
Plan 2574
Plan 2654
2. Prior to issuance of building permits for any of the units authorized by this
approval, final working drawings shall be approved by the Community
Development Department.
3. Guest houses/casitas', as defined in LQMC Section 9.60.100, are limited to
one per lot/primary dwelling. Any guest house/casita will require approval of
a Minor Use Permit, subject to the provisions of said Section as determined
by the Community Development Department.
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
development application or any application thereunder. The City shall have
sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the developer of any claim, action or
proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
5. This Site Development Permit is valid for one year, unless an extension is
applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section
9.200.080 of the Zoning Code.
6. SDP 2005-828 shall comply with all applicable conditions and/or mitigation
measures, which are incorporated by reference herein, for the following
related approvals:
• Environmental Assessment 2003-493
• Specific Plan No. 218 (Riverside County)
• Tentative Tract Map 31733
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 2005-828 coa.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-828
COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE FOR INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of
these approvals, the Community Development Director shall determine precedence.
No development permits will be issued until compliance with these conditions has
been achieved.
7. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the
City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from
the following agencies, if required:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permits)
• 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)
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances
from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of
improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when
submitting those improvement plans for City approval.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
8. Applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the City's
adopted Art in Public Places program in effect at the time of issuance of
building permits.
9. 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)
10. Prior to building permit issuance, parkland dedication fees shall be paid
unless these fees have been or will be paid during the process of recordation
of the subdivision map.
11. The model home sales complex, including landscaping, deposit fee, signage,
fencing, flags, etc., shall comply with the requirements of Section 9.60.250
(Model Home Complexes) and Section 8.13.030D (Water Efficiency
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 2005-828 coa.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-828
COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE FOR INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
Provisions for New or Rehabilitated landscapes) of the Municipal Code.
Minor Use Permit approval is required prior to establishing any of the model
units or temporary sales facilities.
LANDSCAPING
12. Final front yard landscaping plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape
professional and submitted to the Community Development Department for
review and approval prior to issuance of any occupancy permit for the model
units authorized by this approval. Said plans shall be in compliance with
Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping) of the Municipal Code. The
landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley
Water District and Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner prior to
submittal of the final plans to the Community Development Department.
Front yard landscaping for each dwelling shall consist of a minimum of two
trees (i.e., a minimum 1.5 inch caliper measured three feet up from grade
level after planting), ten 5-gallon shrubs, and groundcover. Palm trees may
count as a shade tree if the trunk is six feet tall. Double lodge poles (two-
inch diameter) shall be used to stake trees. All shrubs and trees shall be
irrigated by bubbler or emitters.
Future home buyers shall be offered a no -turf, desert landscape option in
front yards. Typical plans for a no -turf desert landscape design shall be
approved by the Community Development Department with the Final front
yard landscaping plans.
13. The developer shall submit final landscaping plans for all retention basins,
interior common areas and perimeter landscaped lot and parkway along
Monroe Street and Avenue 60, to the Community Development Department
for approval prior to issuance of any precise grading permits. The landscape
and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Coachella Valley Water District
and Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner prior to submittal of the final
plans to the Community Development Department.
14. Wildflower seed mixes, if used, that are susceptible to weed control
problems shall not be used in any hydro -seed operations. An alternative
seed mix which will achieve erosion and dust control, with minimal weed
growth, shall be approved by the Community Development Department.
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 2005-828 coa.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-828
COLBOURN-CURRIER-NOLL ARCHITECTURE FOR INNOVATIVE RESORT COMMUNITIES
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
15. The sprinkler heads shall be placed 18" from curbs with turf between heads
and curbs. However, if an 18" gravel strip is required adjacent to curb by
CVWD the strip shall be meandering with some ground cover plant material
in widened areas.
16. The Pinus eldarica, Buxus Microphilla Japonica, Jacaranda, and Ulmus
parviflora shall be deleted from the plant palette.
BUILDING DESIGN
17. The applicant shall submit perimeter block wall plans and details, to include
exterior color and finish. Perimeter wall design shall be decorative. The
block wall plan shall be approved by the Community Development Director
prior to issuance of any building permits for wall construction.
18. Final location of all structures submitted for plan check shall comply with all
setback standards of the zoning district or Specific Plan No. 18, as
applicable. Minor amendments to the development plans (e.g. architectural
details, house plotting, etc.) shall be subject to approval by the Community
Development Director.
17. Any roof -mounted mechanical equipment must be screened within or
otherwise integral to the roof structure, using compatible architectural
materials and treatments, so as to not be visible from surrounding properties
and streets. Working drawings showing all such equipment and locations
shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department along with
construction plan submittal for building permits.
18. All two car garages shall maintain the 20-foot x 20-foot minimum interior
dimensions as specified in Chapter 9.150 (Parking), LQMC.
19. The community identification sign shall reviewed separately by the
Community Development Department under a Sign Application.
Q
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\SDP 05-828\sdp 2005-828 coa.doc
ATTACHMENT #1
fill;
Iron
7-7-1
11 1 d
7f
Ilk
ATTACHMENT #3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
April 6, 2005
13. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christopher/Bobbitt to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-011 recommending denial of Site
Development Permit 2004-827, with a note to the Planning
Commission that they review the architecture plans to be more
in line with classic architecture if they are trying to achieve the
Tuscan or Spanish Revival look. More color and deviation in the
colors is also needed. Unanimously approved.
E. Site Development Permit 2004-828; a request of Colbourn -Currier -Noll
Architecture for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans
for three prototypical residential plans, clubhouse and landscaping
plans for Tract 31733 located on the northeast corner of Monroe
Street and Avenue 61.
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 noted the
architecture is similar and the Committee may want to apply the
same comments to this tract.
2. Committee Member Thorns noted the site plan is better.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the price range would be
the same. The applicant stated approximately the same.
4. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Christop her/Thoms to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-012 recommending denial of Site
Development Permit 2004-828. Unanimously approved.
F. Site Development Permit 2004-834; a request of Choice Enterprises
for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for three new
prototype residential units with two facades each located at the
southwest corner of Avenue 60 and Madison Street.
1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained
in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community
Development Department. Staff introduced the applicant David
Sacculla, who gave a presentation on the project.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\4-6-05 ALRC.doc 10
ATTACHMENT #4
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Member Thoms/Christopher to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-015 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2004-827, as recommended by staff and
as amended:
a. The sprinkler heads shall be 18 inches from the curb with
turf between heads and curbs. If the 18 inch gravel
border is required by CVWD, the 18 inch strip shall be
meandering with some groundcover in widened areas.
b. Recommended the Pinus Eldarica, Buxus Microphilla
Japonica, Jacaranda and Ulmus parriflora be eliminated
from the plant list.
C. On the front loaded one-story units, for every third unit
the garage door appearance shall be varied.
C. Site Development Permit 2004-828; a request of Colbourn -Currier -Noll
Architecture for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans
for a 136,000 square foot retail store and a gas station located on the
southwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road.
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 the
applicants Steve Kellogg, landscape architect and Bill Currier.
2. Committee Member Christopher asked about the five
rectangular pads in the center. The applicant identified them as
home sites that back up to the putting green. On the
architectural plans, the softened eyebrow makes a big
difference on the streetscape.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt commended the applicant on the
site plan. He asked what area was to be maintained by the
HOA. The applicant explained.
4. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Member Bobbitt/Christopher to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-016 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2004-828, as recommended by staff and
as amended:
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 4
PH F
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
CASE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-831 AND SIGN PERMIT
2005-879
APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES
ARCHITECT: SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS
LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND ADAMS
STREET
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR PHASE 2 OF
THE PAVILION AT LA QUINTA PROJECT CONSISTING OF
72,770 SQUARE FEET AND SIGN PERMIT FOR BEST BUY
ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSESSED
IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2003-481, PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066, WHICH
WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 7,
2003. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE
PROPOSED, NOR ANY NEW INFORMATION SUBMITTED
WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SINCE THIS
REQUEST IMPLEMENTS THE APPROVED SPECIFIC PLAN.
ZONING: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
SURROUNDING
ZONING AND
LAND USES:
NORTH:
CP / MINI STORAGE FACILITY AND CR / POST
OFFICE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND GYM
SOUTH:
CR / AUTO CENTER
EAST:
CR/VACANT
WEST:
CR / ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
BACKGROUND:
The 17.48-acre property is located along the Highway 111 commercial corridor
east of Adams Street (Attachment 1). Across Adams Street to the west is the
Shell gasoline station and Jiffy Lube. To the north is Storage USA, Gold's Gym,
and the Post Office, with three auto dealers to the south across Highway 1 1 1. To
the east of the subject property is vacant commercial land that is not approved for
development.
Specific Plan 2003-066 was approved for this property on October 7, 2003 and
allows the construction of a 175,200 square foot shopping center, including four
detached pads, varying from 3,900 to 9,000 square feet. Since the approval, staff
has allowed a minor change for Shop 1 to be detached from the main structure and
minor revisions to the parking lot design to accommodate the change. Additionally,
Site Development Permits have been approved for the first phase construction and
Chick-fil-a. The first phase consists of three major tenants (A [Henry's Market], B
[Bed, Bath and Beyond] and C), Shops 1 and 2, 3 (Catherine's) and Pads 1 and 3 in
approximately 95,600 square feet of floor space. Chick-fil-a is on a free-standing
pad along Highway 111 with 4,694 square feet of floor space. Grading is just
beginning on the site.
PROJECT PROPOSAL AND DISCUSSION:
The architectural and landscaping plans have been submitted for the Phase 2 area
of the project (Attachment 2). This includes the east side of the main building.
The entire parking lot and perimeter improvements were approved with the Phase 1
plans. Four tenant spaces are indicated for this phase.
The required parking for the original Specific Plan had been calculated based on
170,000 square feet of retail uses and 5,000 square feet of drive -through and fast
food restaurant. This required a total of 901 spaces. The Specific Plan provided
915 spaces, which exceeded the required spaces.
When the Phase 1 plans were approved, the Center was revised to have 160,094
square feet of floor space, of which 20,045 square feet was for restaurant use.
This required 830 parking spaces for the retail and restaurant uses proposed. The
plans indicated that 831 spaces would be provided for the entire project.
This Phase 2 proposal again modifies the square footage and parking slightly. The
Center is proposed to have 171,294 square feet of floor space with 26,945 square
feet of restaurant space. The current plans indicate 851 parking spaces are
required with 858 spaces provided. The Zoning Code allows 20% of the total
Center to be restaurant space. Therefore, under the current proposal, 24,259
square feet of restaurant uses are allowed. The tenants indicated on the plans are
Best Buy, Office Max, Drexel Heritage Furniture, and Famous Footwear.
u„
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
The Specific Plan called for the architecture of the Center to be a traditional
Mediterranean Tuscany village style. The development plans submitted follows this
theme and includes the use of hip, gable and shed roofs, deep set windows,
covered plaster arcades, some parapet walls with a cornice treatment, limited
wood trellis', decorative wrought iron grills and varying heights and wall planes.
Two overhead doors are proposed on the east side of the structure for Best Buy's
audio/video car installations. The architecture is generally an extension of the
Phase 1 approval. The west end of this phase will abut the east side of Bed, Bath
and Beyond.
The rear facing elevations of the large building structure consist primarily of flat
roofs with a cornice, medium sand finish exterior plaster and loading docks for Best
Buy and Office Max. Most of the rear elevation is shown as a light tan color.
Exterior materials consist of clay tile roofing, a medium sand finish plaster, some
decorative tile, stacked El Dorado stone on some towers and arcades. Colors are
proposed to include a red blend clay tile, tan to brown split face block, and a
variety of beige to tan to light gray plaster. The plaster colors will be used in
multiple combinations on each building to provide a varied streetscape. These
colors and materials match those approved for Phase 1 (SDP 2004-807).
Building heights vary for all of the one-story building with the main tower structure
near the east property line being the highest at 41 feet — 8 inches. The highest
entry towers for the Phase 1 Henry's market, on the south and west sides of the
building are 37 feet — 6 inches high. Other heights on this structure vary from
approximately 28-feet to 35 feet - 8 inches.
SIGN PERMIT REQUEST:
As part of the project the applicants have submitted the proposed signs for Best
Buy that will be on the east end of the building and have parking lot frontage to the
south and east. An identification sign is proposed on each frontage on the tower
features. An additional mobile installation sign is proposed over the overhead doors
on the east side.
Under the approved sign program for the Center tenants over 15,000 square feet in
area are allowed a maximum 100 square feet and can be approved by staff. Signs
over 100 square feet in area are allowed only if approved by the Planning
Commission. Because their two main identification signs each exceed 100 square
feet this application has been submitted for Planning Commission approval.
The identification signs will be identical in size, color and design. The sign is their
typical "ticket" shaped internally illuminated sign. The sign is 10 feet - 6 inches tall
and 17 feet — 1 inch long with a total of 179.4 square feet. The background will
be yellow translucent panaflex (Plexi-glas) with the 36 inch high "Best Buy" letters
done in black translucent film. The trim and returns will be black.
I
J
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
The "ticket" sign will be mounted on the Best Buy towers at a slight angle with the
horizon. Behind the ticket the mounting surface immediately surrounding the sign
will be dark blue. On the south facing tower, this blue background area will cover
approximately half of the wall surface. On the east facing tower, which is smaller,
the blue will cover the entire wall surface, including the returns on the north and
south.
An internally illuminated "license plate" style sign is proposed above the overhead
doors to identify the auto products installation area. This sign is proposed at three
feet high by six feet long. It will read "Best Buy mobile installation" on three lines
with a small Best Buy ticket sign in the lower right corner. This sign is bark blue
with yellow letters, except for the ticket lettering which is black.
The other three tenants show signs on the elevation plans. This is for information
only. These signs will need to be approved separately pursuant to the approved
sign program.
ISSUES:
While the Phase 1 rear elevation of the main building appears similar to the
proposed Phase 2 rear, Phase 1 did have a tile mansard feature behind Henry's
Market and had more variation in horizontal planes. When the ALRC reviewed the
plans, exposed storm water downspouts were shown on the rear elevation. The
architect noted they were not being used. The plans have been revised, eliminating
them. The removal of the downspouts emphasizes the building walls. At a
minimum, the wall colors should change where the horizontal planes change. This
occurs at four places, corresponding with the four rental spaces.
The Best Buy signs on the south and east tower, at 179 + square feet each, are
the same size, even though the south facing tower is three times wider and at 41'-
8", six feet higher than the east facing tower. The easterly sign covers most of
the tower face. This sign should be reduced to a size more proportionate to the
mounting surface size. With regard to the sign facing Highway 1 1 1, the sign is
larger than the sign approved for the recently completed Circuit City. It has
approximately the same amount of floor area and setback from Highway 111.
Circuit City's Highway 111 sign is 100 square feet in area with the rear facing sign
36 square feet. Therefore, the Best Buy signs should be comparable in size to the
Circuit City signs.
For comparison purposes the following signs have been approved along Highway
111:
Marshall's 157 square feet
Staples 82
Stater Brothers 180
Big 5 66
Ross Dress for Less 115
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
Walmart Super Center 230
Target 186
Circuit City 100
Additionally, the blue background is not a color approved as an exterior material
color in the Center. It can be treated as an accent building or sign color. However,
it should be eliminated on the tower returns of the east tower and reduced at least
on the sides of the east face to provide a transition. An additional concern is that
blue painted stucco fades quickly in the desert environment. Therefore, if the
desire is to have a blue background for the sign, the blue should not be painted
stucco.
The sign program for the Center provides for supplementary signs such as menu
signs or directional signs such as the Best Buy mobile installation sign. They are
allowed on an as required basis with no specific size requirements. Because
customers will be directed around the building to the installation area, the sign does
not need to be 3-feet by 6-feet (18 square feet). The sign at four feet long with a
proportional height would be appropriate.
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE:
The Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) reviewed this request
at their meeting of May 4, 2005 and adopted Minute Motion 2005-017,
recommending approval of the architectural plans, subject to several revisions
(Attachment 3). The applicant indicates the plans presented have been revised to
address the ALRC requirements.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
These applications were advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 13, 2005.
All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the Public
Hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. As of this writing, no
comments have been received.
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS:
The findings needed to approve this Site Development Permit, as noted in the
Zoning Code, can be made as stipulated in the attached Resolution with the
Conditions of Approval.
SIGN APPLICATION FINDINGS:
The Best Buy signs with the revisions noted above would be consistent with the
purpose and intent of the Zoning Code and applicable Specific Plan Sign Program.
Furthermore, they will be in harmony and visually compatible with the signs
permitted in the sign program.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- , approving - Site
Development Permit 2005-831, subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
2. Adopt Minute Motion 2005- approving Sign Application 2005-879,
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Development Plans
3. Minutes of Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee meeting of May
4, 2005
Prepared by:
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
p \stan\ sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 2004-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS
FOR PHASE 2 OF A SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND
ADAMS STREET
CASE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-831
APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California did, on the 24' day of May, 2005, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider a request by Thomas Enterprises for approval of a Site Development
Permit to allow Phase 2 (with 72,770 square feet) of a shopping center on 17.4±
acres located at the northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street in the CR
(Regional Commercial) zone district, more particularly described as:
APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published a
public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on the 131h day of May, 2005 as
prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all
property owners within 500 feet of the site; and
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has
determined that the request has been assessed in conjunction with Environmental
Assessment 2003-481 prepared for Specific Plan 2003-066, for which a Mitigated
Negative Declaration was certified on October 7, 2003. No changed
circumstances or conditions are proposed, nor any new information submitted
which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental review in
accordance with Section 15162 of the Guidelines for Implementation the California
Environmental Quality Act; 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
approval of said Site Development Permit:
1. The General Plan designates the project area as Regional Commercial. The
proposed commercial buildings are consistent with this land use designation.
r
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Adopted: May 24, 2005
Page 2
2. The proposed commercial buildings are designed to comply with the Zoning
Code and Specific Plan requirements, including, but not limited to, height
limits, parking, lot coverage, and signs.
3. The Community Development Department has determined that this request
has been assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2003-
481, prepared for Specific Plan 2003-066, which was certified by the City
Council on October 7, 2003. No changed circumstances or conditions are
proposed, nor any new information submitted which would trigger the
preparation of a subsequent environmental review.
4. The architectural design of the project, including, but not limited to the
architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural
details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with the
surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City.
5. The site design of the project, including, but not limited to project entries,
interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities,
screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site
design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the
quality of design prevalent in the City.
6. Project landscaping, including, but not limited to the location, type, size,
color, texture, and coverage of plant materials has been designed and
conditioned to provide relief, compliment 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, provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual
continuity of the project, and compliment the surrounding project area,
ensuring lower maintenance and water use.
7. The building signs will comply and be consistent with the intent of the
Zoning Code and Center's Sign Program.
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
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Adopted: May 24, 2005
Page 3
2. That it does hereby acknowledge that Environmental Assessment 2003-
481 has determined that no significant effects on the environment have
been identified and mitigation measures have been imposed; and
3. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2005-831, 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 24' day of May, 2005, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc res.doc `�
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-831 - THOMAS ENTERPRISES
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: MAY 24, 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 Site Development Permit.
The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City,
the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the
following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• 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
• Caltrans
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; 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
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water
Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP").
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on
or off -site grading being done in relation to this project.
C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection
at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all
improvements by the City.
D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best
Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC):
1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2) Temporary Sediment Control.
3) Wind Erosion Control.
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
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 BMP's shall remain in effect for the entire
duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and
accepted by the City.
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).
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
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 2 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance,
construction and reconstruction of essential improvements.
6. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate,
from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall
construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer,"
"surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their
respective professions in the State of California.
7. 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.
8. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and
approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall
be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise
authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if
additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to
prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by
other agencies and utility purveyors.
A. On -Site Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal
B. PM 10 Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal
C. SWPPP 1 " = 40' Horizontal
NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently.
"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,
retaining and perimeter walls, etc. ADA accessibility to public streets, adjacent
buildings and existing handicap parking shall be shown on the Site Development
Plans at a scale to be determined by the Public Works Department.
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
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 3 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
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.
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.
9. City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of
construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the applicant may purchase
such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City.
10. 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
11. Depending on the timing of development under this permit and the status of off -site
improvements at that time, the applicant may be required to construct improvements,
to construct additional improvements subject to reimbursement by others, to reimburse
others who construct improvements that are obligations of this permit, to secure the
cost of the improvements for future construction by others, or a combination of these
methods.
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. Additionally, the applicant may
be required to upgrade previously approved plans, including Bus Shelter, to the latest
City of La Quinta standards at the time of construction.
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 4-
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
GRADING
12. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
13. 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.
14. 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.
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils
Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an
engineering geologist.
The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control
Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit.
15. 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.
16. 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 Site Development Permit site plan, the applicant shall submit the proposed
grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review.
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 5 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
17. 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.
nRAINAGF
"Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for
Parcel Map No. 29351 or as modified for this Site Development Permit. Nuisance water
shall be disposed of in an approved manner."
18. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. Site Grading and Pad
Elevations on precise grading and storm drain plans shall conform to approved rough
grading plans and may be subject to modification upon the review and approval on
the on -site drainage study for Phase I of The Pavilion Development.
19. The applicant shall confirm off -site tributary flow collection in previous drainage
facilities constructed for Parcel Map No. 29351 as part of these conditions.
20. 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.
21. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
22. When an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into 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 the 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 tentative parcel map 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 final development CC&Rs for meeting these
potential obligations.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 6 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
UTILITIES
23. 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.
24. 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.
25. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for
approval by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
26. 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.
27. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). In
particular, the following are conditioned with this approval.
A. Cross slopes should be a maximum of 2% where ADA accessibility is required
including accessibility routes between buildings.
B. Building access points shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans to better
evaluate ADA accessibility issues.
C. Parking stall striping shall be the City of La Quinta double striped hairpin
design.
28. 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 Areas (Parking and Low Traffic) 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b.
Parking Areas (High Traffic) 4.5" a.c./5.5" c.a.b.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 7 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
29. 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.
30. 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
31. 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.
LANDSCAPING
32. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
33. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required parking lot and building planting
areas.
34. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped parking lots and planting areas shall be
signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect.
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.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 8 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
35. 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
36. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit
Agency and approved by the City Engineer. Pursuant to the construction of this
improvement, the applicant may be required to update Bus Shelter plans to the latest
City of La Quinta standards
QUALITY ASSURANCE
37. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with
the approval of the City Engineer.
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. 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
41. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance),
LQMC.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 9 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
42. 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
43. 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.
44. 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).
FIRE MARSHAL
45. Any turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot outside turning radius.
46. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all
portions of the exterior of the first floor.
47. The minimum dimension for roads and gates is 20 feet clear and obstructed width and
a minimum vertical clearance of 13'-6".
48. Public streets must be a minimum 36 feet wide at all points if on street parking is to
be allowed on both sides. Areas 36 to 28 feet will be permitted parking on one side;
less that 28 shall be posted and painted as NO PARKING — FIRE LANE.
49. 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 the site. Two sets of water plans are to be submitted to the Fire Department for
approval.
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.
51. Fire Mitigation Fees shall be paid if in affect at the time of building permit issuance.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 1 0 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
52. The rear wall of each of the abutting tenants shall be painted a different color.
53. The "Best Buy" signs shall be reduced in size by 40% to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department.
54. On the east facing Best Buy tower the "blue background" shall be eliminated on the
side returns with minimum 12" tan stucco bands provided on each side of the east
facing blue background. The blue shall not be painted stucco, but blue on an
alternative material as approved by the Community Development Department.
55. The Best Buy mobile installation sign shall be four feet long with the height
proportionate (based on original sign submitted).
56. Signs for tenants other than Best Buy are not approved and are subject to separate
approval.
57. The following Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee conditions shall be
implemented in the final working drawings:
A. The Tower structures at the top rear where they meet the roof should be
lengthened towards the rear of the building and provided with a finished solid
back to ensure the back ends of the towers are not visible and provide adequate
bulk to the tower.
B. Landscape planters shall be provided in front of the buildings in the sidewalk in
non -pedestrian areas.
C. The main tower columns shall be provided with stone veneer.
D. On the east facing tower elevation the "blue" background shall be reduced along
the bottom.
I
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 11 -
MINUTE MOTION 2005-
SIGN APPLICATION 2005-879 - THOMAS ENTERPRISES
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: MAY 24, 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 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. The "Best Buy" signs shall be reduced in size by 40% to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department.
3. On the east facing Best Buy tower the "blue background" shall be eliminated on the
side returns with minimum 12" tan stucco bands provided on each side of the east
facing blue background. The blue shall not be painted stucco, but blue on an
alternative material as approved by the Community Development Department.
4. The Best Buy mobile installation sign shall be four feet long with the height
proportionate (based on original sign submitted).
5. Signs for tenants other than Best Buy are not approved and are subject to separate
approval.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa for sa 05-879.doc
ATTACHMENT #3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
a. The sprinkler heads shall be 18 inches from the curb with
turf between heads and curbs. If the 18 inch gravel
border is required by CVWD, the 18 inch strip shall be
meandering with some plant material in widened areas.
b. Recommended the Pinus Eldarica, Buxus Microphilla
Japonica, Jacaranda and Ulmus parriflora shall be
eliminated from the plant list.
C. On the front loaded one-story units, for every third unit
the garage door appearance shall be varied.
D. Site Development Permit 2005-831; a request of Thomas Enterprises
for consideration of development plans for Phase 2 of the Pavilion at
La Quinta project consisting of 72,700 square feet for the property
located the northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street.
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 Norm
Barrett representing Smith Consulting Architects, who gave a
presentation on the project.
2. Committee Member Christopher asked if the blue color would
be confined to the Best Buy building only. Mr. Barrett stated
yes and showed the location. Committee Member Christopher
stated the sign size should be consistent. Mr. Barrett stated
both signs are the same size and will be 179 square feet.
Committee Member Christopher noted the amount of flat roof
and stated one of the buildings should have a gable roof added.
Mr. Barrett stated they were designed to meet the tenant's
request.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about staff's
recommendation to add the trellis between the buildings. Mr.
Barrett stated they could add it back on. Committee Member
Bobbitt asked about staff's recommendation on the front facade
to pull the roof back another ten feet. Mr. Barrett stated they
could do that. Staff stated the rear elevations need some
additional detail if the downspouts are removed. Mr. Barrett
explained the detail they had added and noted it backs up to the
Post Office parking lot.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 5
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
4. Committee Member Christopher asked that some stacked stone
be added to towers to match the other end of the Center. Mr.
Barrett suggested it be added to the columns.
5. Committee Member Thorns asked that the Drexel building add a
gable roof. Discussion followed regarding the concern of the
tenants. Committee Members suggested adding the stone to
the front of the Drexel building as well.
6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Christopher to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-017 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2005-831, as recommended by staff and
as amended:
a. Stack stone shall be added to the columns of the Office
Max and Drexel buildings.
b. Eliminate the recommendation for the trellis work.
C. The east elevation sign for the Best Buy building, the blue
area on the lower portion shall be reduced.
d. Landscape planters shall be provided in front of the
building in non -pedestrian areas.
e. Lengthen all tower structures at the top rear where they
meet the roof towards the rear of the building and
provide with a finished solid back to ensure they are not
visible and provide adequate bulk to the towers.
E. Site Development Permit 2005-830; a request of GSR Andrade
Architects for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for
a 2 story, 37,212 square foot medical office building on a 2.85 acre
site located on the east side of Washington Street, on the south side
of the La Quinta Professional Plaza.
1. Committee Member Thorns withdrew from discussion due to a
potential conflict of interest due to the location of his residence.
2. Associate Planner Wally Nesbit presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department. Staff introduced the
applicant, Fernando Andrade, who gave a presentation on the
project.
Yb
r•
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 6
PH F
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
CASE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2004-831 AND SIGN PERMIT
2005-879
APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES
ARCHITECT: SMITH CONSULTING ARCHITECTS
LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND ADAMS
STREET
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR PHASE 2 OF
THE PAVILION AT LA QUINTA PROJECT CONSISTING OF
72,770 SQUARE FEET AND SIGN PERMIT FOR BEST BUY
REVIEW: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSESSED
IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2003-481, PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2003-066, WHICH
WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON OCTOBER 7,
2003. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE
PROPOSED, NOR ANY NEW INFORMATION SUBMITTED
WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SINCE THIS
REQUEST IMPLEMENTS THE APPROVED SPECIFIC PLAN.
ZONING: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: M/RC (MIXED REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
SURROUNDING
ZONING AND
LAND USES: NORTH: CP / MINI STORAGE FACILITY AND CR / POST
OFFICE UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND GYM
SOUTH: CR / AUTO CENTER
EAST: CR/VACANT
WEST: CR / ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
BACKGROUND:
The 17.48-acre property is located along the Highway 111 commercial corridor
east of Adams Street (Attachment 1). Across Adams Street to the west is the
Shell gasoline station and Jiffy Lube. To the north is Storage USA, Gold's Gym,
and the Post Office, with three auto dealers to the south across Highway 1 1 1. To
the east of the subject property is vacant commercial land that is not approved for
development.
Specific Plan 2003-066 was approved for this property on October 7, 2003 and
allows the construction of a 175,200 square foot shopping center, including four
detached pads, varying from 3,900 to 9,000 square feet. Since the approval, staff
has allowed a minor change for Shop 1 to be detached from the main structure and
minor revisions to the parking lot design to accommodate the change. Additionally,
Site Development Permits have been approved for the first phase construction and
Chick-fil-a. The first phase consists of three major tenants (A [Henry's Market], B
[Bed, Bath and Beyond] and C), Shops 1 and 2, 3 (Catherine's) and Pads 1 and 3 in
approximately 95,600 square feet of floor space. Chick-fil-a is on a free-standing
pad along Highway 111 with 4,694 square feet of floor space. Grading is just
beginning on the site.
PROJECT PROPOSAL AND DISCUSSION:
The architectural and landscaping plans have been submitted for the Phase 2 area
of the project (Attachment 2). This includes the east side of the main building.
The entire parking lot and perimeter improvements were approved with the Phase 1
plans. Four tenant spaces are indicated for this phase.
The required parking for the original Specific Plan had been calculated based on
170,000 square feet of retail uses and 5,000 square feet of drive -through and fast
food restaurant. This required a total of 901 spaces. The Specific Plan provided
915 spaces, which exceeded the required spaces.
When the Phase 1 plans were approved, the Center was revised to have 160,094
square feet of floor space, of which 20,045 square feet was for restaurant use.
This required 830 parking spaces for the retail and restaurant uses proposed. The
plans indicated that 831 spaces would be provided for the entire project.
This Phase 2 proposal again modifies the square footage and parking slightly. The
Center is proposed to have 171,294 square feet of floor space with 26,945 square
feet of restaurant space. The current plans indicate 851 parking spaces are
required with 858 spaces provided. The Zoning Code allows 20% of the total
Center to be restaurant space. Therefore, under the current proposal, 24,259
square feet of restaurant uses are allowed. The tenants indicated on the plans are
Best Buy, Office Max, Drexel Heritage Furniture, and Famous Footwear.
0
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thorras - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
The Specific Plan called for the architecture of the Center to be a traditional
Mediterranean Tuscany village style. The development plans submitted follows this
theme and includes the use of hip, gable and shed roofs, deep set windows,
covered plaster arcades, some parapet walls with a cornice treatment, limited
wood trellis', decorative wrought iron grills and varying heights and wall planes.
Two overhead doors are proposed on the east side of the structure for Best Buy's
audio/video car installations. The architecture is generally an extension of the
Phase 1 approval. The west end of this phase will abut the east side of Bed, Bath
and Beyond.
The rear facing elevations of the large building structure consist primarily of flat
roofs with a cornice, medium sand finish exterior plaster and loading docks for Best
Buy and Office Max. Most of the rear elevation is shown as a light tan color.
Exterior materials consist of clay tile roofing, a medium sand finish plaster, some
decorative tile, stacked El Dorado stone on some towers and arcades. Colors are
proposed to include a red blend clay tile, tan to brown split face block, and a
variety of beige to tan to light gray plaster. The plaster colors will be used in
multiple combinations on each building to provide a varied streetscape. These
colors and materials match those approved for Phase 1 (SDP 2004-807).
Building heights vary for all of the one-story building with the main tower structure
near the east property line being the highest at 41 feet — 8 inches. The highest
entry towers for the Phase 1 Henry's market, on the south and west sides of the
building are 37 feet — 6 inches high. Other heights on this structure vary from
approximately 28-feet to 35 feet - 8 inches.
SIGN PERMIT REQUEST:
As part of the project the applicants have submitted the proposed signs for Best
Buy that will be on the east end of the building and have parking lot frontage to the
south and east. An identification sign is proposed on each frontage on the tower
features. An additional mobile installation sign is proposed over the overhead doors
on the east side.
Under the approved sign program for the Center tenants over 15,000 square feet in
area are allowed a maximum 100 square feet and can be approved by staff. Signs
over 100 square feet in area are allowed only if approved by the Planning
Commission. Because their two main identification signs each exceed 100 square
feet this application has been submitted for Planning Commission approval.
The identification signs will be identical in size, color and design. The sign is their
typical "ticket" shaped internally illuminated sign. The sign is 10 feet - 6 inches tall
and 17 feet — 1 inch long with a total of 179.4 square feet. The background will
be yellow translucent panaflex (Plexi-glas) with the 36 inch high "Best Buy" letters
done in black translucent film. The trim and returns will be black.
Gi
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
The "ticket" sign will be mounted on the Best Buy towers at a slight angle with the
horizon. Behind the ticket the mounting surface immediately surrounding the sign
will be dark. blue. On the south facing tower, this blue background area will cover
approximately half of the wall surface. On the east facing tower, which is smaller,
the blue will cover the entire wall surface, including the returns on the north and
south.
An internally illuminated "license plate" style sign is proposed above the overhead
doors to identify the auto products installation area. This sign is proposed at three
feet high by six feet long. It will read "Best Buy mobile installation" on three lines
with a small Best Buy ticket sign in the lower right corner. This sign is bark blue
with yellow letters, except for the ticket lettering which is black.
The other three tenants show signs on the elevation plans. This is for information
only. These signs will need to be approved separately pursuant to the approved
sign program.
ISSUES.
While the Phase 1 rear elevation of the main building appears similar to the
proposed Phase 2 rear, Phase 1 did have a tile mansard feature behind Henry's
Market and had more variation in horizontal planes. When the ALRC reviewed the
plans, exposed storm water downspouts were shown on the rear elevation. The
architect noted they were not being used. The plans have been revised, eliminating
them. The removal of the downspouts emphasizes the building walls. At a
minimum, the wall colors should change where the horizontal planes change. This
occurs at four places, corresponding with the four rental spaces.
The Best Buy signs on the south and east tower, at 179 + square feet each, are
the same size, even though the south facing tower is three times wider and at 41'-
8", six feet higher than the east facing tower. The easterly sign covers most of
the tower face. This sign should be reduced to a size more proportionate to the
mounting surface size. With regard to the sign facing Highway 1 1 1, the sign is
larger than the sign approved for the recently completed Circuit City. It has
approximately the same amount of floor area and setback from Highway 111.
Circuit City's Highway 111 sign is 100 square feet in area with the rear facing sign
36 square feet. Therefore, the Best Buy signs should be comparable in size to the
Circuit City signs.
For comparison purposes the following signs have been approved along Highway
111:
Marshall's
Staples
Stater Brothers
Big 5
Ross Dress for Less
157 square feet
82
180
66
115
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
Walmart Super Center 230
Target 186
Circuit City 100
Additionally, the blue background is not a color approved as an exterior material
color in the Center. It can be treated as an accent building or sign color. However,
it should be eliminated on the tower returns of the east tower and reduced at least
on the sides of the east face to provide a transition. An additional concern is that
blue painted stucco fades quickly in the desert environment. Therefore, if the
desire is to have a blue background for the sign, the blue should not be painted
stucco.
The sign program for the Center provides for supplementary signs such as menu
signs or directional signs such as the Best Buy mobile installation sign. They are
allowed on an as required basis with no specific size requirements. Because
customers will be directed around the building to the installation area, the sign does
not need to be 3-feet by 6-feet (18 square feet). The sign at four feet long with a
proportional height would be appropriate.
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE:
The Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) reviewed this request
at their meeting of May 4, 2005 and adopted Minute Motion 2005-017,
recommending approval of the architectural plans, subject to several revisions
(Attachment 3). The applicant indicates the plans presented have been revised to
address the ALRC requirements.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
These applications were advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 13, 2005.
All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the Public
Hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. As of this writing, no
comments have been received.
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT FINDINGS:
The findings needed to approve this Site Development Permit, as noted in the
Zoning Code, can be made as stipulated in the attached Resolution with the
Conditions of Approval.
SIGN APPLICATION FINDINGS:
The Best Buy signs with the revisions noted above would be consistent with the
purpose and intent of the Zoning Code and applicable Specific Plan Sign Program.
Furthermore, they will be in harmony and visually compatible with the signs
permitted in the sign program.
• J
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- , approving - Site
Development Permit 2005-831, subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
2. Adopt Minute Motion 2005- approving Sign Application 2005-879,
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Development Plans
3. Minutes of Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee meeting of May
4, 2005
Prepared by:
GDA,, VA -
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
p \stan\ sp 03-066 thomas\sdp 2004-831 sa 2005-879 pc rpt.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS
FOR PHASE 2 OF A SHOPPING CENTER LOCATED ON
THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND
ADAMS STREET
CASE: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-831
APPLICANT: THOMAS ENTERPRISES
,WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California did, on the 241h day of May, 2005, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to
consider a request by Thomas Enterprises for approval of a Site Development
Permit to allow Phase 2 (with 72,770 square feet) of a shopping center on 17.4 ±
acres located at the northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street in the CR
(Regional Commercial) zone district, more particularly described as:
APN's: 649-020-043, -063, -064, and -065
WHEREAS, the Community Development Department published a
public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on the 13`h day of May, 2005 as
prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all
property owners within 500 feet of the site; and
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Community Development Department has
determined that the request has been assessed in conjunction with Environmental
Assessment 2003-481 prepared for Specific Plan 2003-066, for which a Mitigated
Negative Declaration was certified on October 7, 2003. No changed
circumstances or conditions are proposed, nor any new information submitted
which would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental review in
accordance with Section 15162 of the Guidelines for Implementation the California
Environmental Quality Act; 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
approval of said Site Development Permit:
1. The General Plan designates the project area as Regional Commercial. The
proposed commercial buildings are consistent with this land use designation.
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc res.doc 0
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Adopted: May 24, 2005
Page 2
2. The proposed commercial buildings are designed to comply with the Zoning
Code and Specific Plan requirements, including, but not limited to, height
limits, parking, lot coverage, and signs.
3. The Community Development Department has determined that this request
has been assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2003-
481, prepared for Specific Plan 2003-066, which was certified by the City
Council on October 7, 2003. No changed circumstances or conditions are
proposed, nor any new information submitted which would trigger the
preparation of a subsequent environmental review.
4. The architectural design of the project, including, but not limited to the
architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural
details, roof style, and other architectural elements are compatible with the
surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City.
5. The site design of the project, including, but not limited ' to project entries,
interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities,
screening of equipment and trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site
design elements are compatible with surrounding development and with the
quality of design prevalent in the City.
6. Project landscaping, including, but not limited to the location, type, size,
color, texture, and coverage of plant materials has been designed and
conditioned to provide relief, compliment 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, provide an overall unifying influence, enhance the visual
continuity of the project, and compliment the surrounding project area,
ensuring lower maintenance and water use.
7. The building signs will comply and be consistent with the intent of the
Zoning Code and Center's Sign Program.
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
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc res.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Adopted: May 24, 2005
Page 3
2. That it does hereby acknowledge that Environmental Assessment 2003-
481 has determined that no significant effects on the environment have
been identified and mitigation measures have been imposed; and
3. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2005-831, 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 24th day of May, 2005, by the following vote,
to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc res.doc _
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-831 - THOMAS ENTERPRISES
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: MAY 24, 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 Site Development Permit.
The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City,
the applicant shall obtain the necessary clearances and/or permits from the
following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• 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
• Caltrans
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; 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
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water
Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP").
B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on
or off -site grading being done in relation to this project.
C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection
at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all
improvements by the City.
D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best
Management Practices ("BMPs") (8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC):
1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control).
2) Temporary Sediment Control.
3) Wind Erosion Control.
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
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 BMP's shall remain in effect for the entire
duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and
accepted by the City.
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).
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
11.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 2 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance,
construction and reconstruction of essential improvements.
6. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate,
from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall
construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer,"
"surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their
respective professions in the State of California.
7. 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.
8. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and
approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall
be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise
authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if
additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to
prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by
other agencies and utility purveyors.
A. On -Site Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal
B. PM 10 Plan
1 " = 40' Horizontal
C. SWPPP 1 " = 40' Horizontal
NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently.
"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,
retaining and perimeter walls, etc. ADA accessibility to public streets, adjacent
buildings and existing handicap parking shall be shown on the Site Development
Plans at a scale to be determined by the Public Works Department.
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
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 3 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
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.
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.
9. City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of
construction. For a fee, established by City Resolution, the applicant may purchase
such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City.
10. 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.
MPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
11. Depending on the timing of development under this permit and the status of off -site
improvements at that time, the applicant may be required to construct improvements,
to construct additional improvements subject to reimbursement by others, to reimburse
others who construct improvements. that are obligations of this permit, to secure the
cost of the improvements for future construction by others, or a combination of these
methods.
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. Additionally, the applicant may
be required to upgrade previously approved plans, including Bus Shelter, to the latest
City of La Quinta standards at the time of construction.
1�3
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831pc coa.doc - 4 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-531 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
GRADING
12. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
13. 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.
14. 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.
All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils
Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an
engineering geologist.
The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an
amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control
Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit.
15. 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.
16. 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 Site Development Permit site plan, the applicant shall submit the proposed
grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review.
14
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc -5-
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
17. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall
provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor.
DRAINAGE
"Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for
Parcel Map No. 29351 or as modified for this Site Development Permit. Nuisance water
shall be disposed of in an approved manner."
18. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. Site Grading and Pad
Elevations on precise grading and storm drain plans shall conform to approved rough
grading plans and may be subject to modification upon the review and approval on
the on -site drainage study for Phase I of The Pavilion Development.
19. The applicant shall confirm off -site tributary flow collection in previous drainage
facilities constructed for Parcel Map No. 29351 as part of these conditions.
20. 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.
21. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
22. When an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into 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 the 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 tentative parcel map 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 final development CC&Rs for meeting these
potential obligations.
15
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831pc coa.doc - 6 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-531 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
UTILITIES
23. 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.
24. 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.
25. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for
approval by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
26. 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.
27. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). In
particular, the following are conditioned with this approval.
A. Cross slopes should be a maximum of 2% where ADA accessibility is required
including accessibility routes between buildings.
B. Building access points shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans to better
evaluate ADA accessibility issues.
C. Parking stall striping shall be the City of La Quinta double striped hairpin
design.
28. 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 Areas (Parking and Low Traffic) 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b.
Parking Areas (High Traffic) 4.5" a.c./5.5" c.a.b.
1.6
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 7 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
29. 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.
30. 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
31. 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.
LANDSCAPING
32. The applicant shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
33. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required parking lot and building planting
areas.
34. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped parking lots and planting areas shall be
signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect.
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.
'7
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - PavillionsMp 2005-831 pc coaAoc - 8 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-331 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
35. 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
36. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine Transit
Agency and approved by the City Engineer. Pursuant to the construction of this
improvement, the applicant may be required to update Bus Shelter plans to the latest
City of La Quinta standards
QUALITY ASSURANCE
37. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with
the approval of the City Engineer.
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. 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
41. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance),
LQMC.
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831pc coa.doc - 9 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
42. 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
43. 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.
44. 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).
FIRE MARSHAL
45. Any turn -around requires a minimum 38-foot outside turning radius.
46. All structures shall be accessible from an approved roadway to within 150 feet of all
portions of the exterior of the first floor.
47. The minimum dimension for roads and gates is 20 feet clear and obstructed width and
a minimum vertical clearance of 13'-6".
48. Public streets must be a minimum 36 feet wide at all points if on street parking is to
be allowed on both sides. Areas 36 to 28 feet will be permitted parking on one side;
less that 28 shall be posted and painted as NO PARKING — FIRE LANE.
49. 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 the site. Two sets of water plans are to be submitted to the Fire Department for
approval.
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.
51. Fire Mitigation Fees shall be paid if in affect at the time of building permit issuance.
19
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831pc coa.doc - 1 0 -
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-831 - Thomas Enterprises
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Adopted: May 24, 2005
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
52. The rear wall of each of the abutting tenants shall be painted a different color.
53. The "Best Buy" signs shall be reduced in size by 40% to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department.
54. On the east facing Best Buy tower the "blue background" shall be eliminated on the
side returns with minimum 12" tan stucco bands provided on each side of the east
facing blue background. The blue shall not be painted stucco, but blue on an
alternative material as approved by the Community Development Department.
55. The Best Buy mobile installation sign shall be four feet long with the height
proportionate (based on original sign submitted).
56. Signs for tenants other than Best Buy are not approved and are subject to separate
approval.
57. The following Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee conditions shall be
implemented in the final working drawings:
A. The Tower structures at the top rear where they meet the roof should be
lengthened towards the rear of the building and provided with a finished solid
back to ensure the back ends of the towers are not visible and provide adequate
bulk to the tower.
B. Landscape planters shall be provided in front of the buildings in the sidewalk in
non -pedestrian areas.
C. The main tower columns shall be provided with stone veneer.
D. On the east facing tower elevation the "blue" background shall be reduced along
the bottom.
20
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa.doc - 11 -
MINUTE MOTION 2005-
SIGN APPLICATION 2005-579 - THOMAS ENTERPRISES
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
ADOPTED: MAY 24, 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 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. The "Best Buy" signs shall be reduced in size by 40% to the satisfaction of the
Community Development Department.
3. On the east facing Best Buy tower the "blue background" shall be eliminated on the
side returns with minimum 12" tan stucco bands provided on each side of the east
facing blue background. The blue shall not be painted stucco, but blue on an
alternative material as approved by the Community Development Department.
4. The Best Buy mobile installation sign shall be four feet long with the height
proportionate (based on original sign submitted).
5. Signs for tenants other than Best Buy are not approved and are subject to separate
approval.
n�w
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\Thomas - Pavillions\sdp 2005-831 pc coa for sa 05-879.doc
ATTACHMENT #3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
a. The sprinkl heads shall be 18 inches from the curb with
turf betty en heads and curbs. If the 18 inch gravel
border i required by CVWD, the 18 inch strip shall be
meand ng with some plant material in widened areas.
b. Reco ended the Pinus Eldarica, Buxus Microphilla
I, ica, Jacaranda and Ulmus parriflora shall be
elim' ated from the plant list.
C. 0 'the front loaded one-story units, for every third unit
t garage door appearance shall be varied.
D. Site Development Permit 2005-831; a request of Thomas Enterprises
for consideration of development plans for Phase 2 of the Pavilion at
La Quinta project consisting of 72,700 square feet for the property
located the northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Adams Street.
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 Norm
Barrett representing Smith Consulting Architects, who gave a
presentation on the project.
2. Committee Member Christopher asked if the blue color would
be confined to the Best Buy building only. Mr. Barrett stated
yes and showed the location. Committee Member Christopher
stated the sign size should be consistent. Mr. Barrett stated
both signs are the same size and will be 179 square feet.
Committee Member Christopher noted the amount of flat roof
and stated one of the buildings should have a gable roof added.
Mr. Barrett stated they were designed to meet the tenant's
request.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about staff's
recommendation to add the trellis between the buildings. Mr.
Barrett stated they could add it back on. Committee Member
Bobbitt asked about staff's recommendation on the front facade
to pull the roof back another ten feet. Mr. Barrett stated they
could do that. Staff stated the rear elevations need some
additional detail if the downspouts are removed. Mr. Barrett
explained the detail they had added and noted it backs up to the
Post Office parking lot.
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 5
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
4. Committee Member Christopher asked that some stacked stone
be added to towers to match the other end of the Center. Mr.
Barrett suggested it be added to the columns.
5. Committee Member Thoms asked that the Drexel building add a
gable roof. Discussion followed regarding the concern of the
tenants. Committee Members suggested adding the stone to
the front of the Drexel building as well.
6. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Christopher to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-017 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2005-831, as recommended by staff and
as amended:
a. Stack stone shall be added to the columns of the Office
Max and Drexel buildings.
b. Eliminate the recommendation for the trellis work.
C. The east elevation sign for the Best Buy building, the blue
area on the lower portion shall be reduced.
d. Landscape planters shall be provided in front of the
building in non -pedestrian areas.
e. Lengthen all tower structures at the top rear where they
meet the roof towards the rear of the building and
provide with a finished solid back to ensure they are not
visible and provide adequate bulk to the towers.
E. Sit Development Permit 2005-830; a request of GSR Andrade
Arc 'tects for consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for
a 2 st ry, 31,212 square foot medical office building on a 2.85 acre
site loc ed on the east side of Washington Street, on the south side
of the La uinta Professional Plaza.
1. Comm tee Member Thoms withdrew from discussion due to a
potentia conflict of interest due to the location of his residence.
2. Associate\Fern
r Wally Nesbit presented the information
containedstaff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Communilopment Department. Staff introduced the
applicant,do Andrade, who gavea presentation on the
project.
r' 4
r•
GAWPD0CS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 6
PH G
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: MAY 24, 2005
CASE NOS.: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2005-082
APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA
LOCATION: CITY-WIDE
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT TO TITLE 9 OF THE LA
QUINTA CHARTER AND MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDING
CHAPTERS 9.60 AND 9.210 RELATING TO HOME
OCCUPATIONS
ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW: THE SECTION TO BE AMENDED IS EXEMPT PURSUANT TO
SECTION 15061(13)(3), OF THE GUIDELINES FOR
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT.
BACKGROUND:
Currently the zoning regulations pertaining to home occupation permits do not
allow clients or customers to come to the residence of the person having a home
occupation permit to receive goods or services. The proposed Amendment to the
Ordinance would make an exception to this requirement for musical instructors and
academic tutors. It would limit the number of students receiving instruction at the
residence at the same time to two.
Staff has determined that this type of use is common within most communities and
that in discussing this with various Code Enforcement officials, most communities
do not enforce home occupation restrictions on such activities. Additionally, staff
believes there is a significant benefit to allowing this type of limited instruction
within single-family residential areas.
Staff has received a number of letters supporting the idea of allowing instruction in
the home of the instructor which have been included collectively as Attachment 1.
A redline version of the Ordinance is included as Attachment 2.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\5-24-05\zoa Home Occ\ZOA Home Occupations.doc
FINDINGS:
The findings to support Zoning Code Amendment 2005-082 are contained in the
attached Planning Commission Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005- approving Zoning Text
Amendment 2005-082, as recommended.
Attachments:
1. Letters of support
Prepared by:
Douglas RF. Evans
Community Development Director
PAReports - PC\2005\5-24-05\zoa Home Occ\ZOA Home Occupations.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTIONS
9.60.110 AND 9.210.060 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO HOME OCCUPATIONS
CASE NO.: ZCA 2005-082
APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 26th of May, 2005, hold duly noticed Public Hearings to make certain
Amendments to Sections 9.210.060 and 9.220.020 of the Municipal Code, to address
regulations pertaining to home occupations to increase the number of students
receiving instruction from musical instructors and academic tutors to two; and
WHEREAS, the Text Amendment is exempt pursuant to Chapter 2.6,
Section 21080 of the Public Resources Code, California Environmental Quality Act
statutes, and Section 15268, Ministerial Projects, of the CEQA Guidelines; 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 recommending
approval of said Zoning Code Amendment:
1. The proposed Amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the La
Quinta General Plan, and the Land Use Map for the General Plan and
surrounding development and land use designations, ensuring land use
compatibility.
2. The proposed Amendment will not be detrimental to the public health, safety
and welfare, as they have been designed to be compatible with surrounding
development, and conform to, the City's standards and requirements.
3. The proposed Amendment support the orderly development of the City.
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 confirm the conclusion that the Zoning Code Amendment is
exempt from CEQA, pursuant to Chapter 2.6, Section 21080 of the Public
Resources Code, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Statutes, and
Section 15268, Ministerial Projects, of the CEQA Guidelines.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005
Zoning Code Amendment 2005082
Adopted: May 2005
3. That it does recommend approval of Zoning Code Amendment 2005-082 to the
City Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as contained in
Exhibit "A" attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 24" day of May, 2005, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
Planning Commission Resolution 2005
Zoning Code Amendment 2005082
Adopted: May 2005
Section 9.60.110. Home Occupations EXHIBIT "A"
A. Purpose. The regulations set forth in this section are provided so that certain
incidental and accessory uses may be established in residential neighborhoods
under conditions that will ensure their compatibility with the neighborhood.
B. Permit Required. Establishment and operation of a home occupation shall
require approval of a home occupation permit processed by the Director of
Building and Safety in accordance with Section 9.210.060. Information shall be
provided to ensure that the proposed home occupation complies with the
requirements of this Section. Additional information necessary to make the
findings required for approval may be required by the City.
C. Use and Development Standards. In addition to the requirements for each
residential district, the following standards shall apply to the establishment and
operation of home occupations:
1. The establishment and conduct of a home occupation shall be an
incidental and accessory use and shall not change the principal character
or use of the dwelling unit involved.
2. Only residents of the dwelling unit may be engaged in the home
occupation.
3. A home occupation shall be conducted only within the enclosed living
area of the principal dwelling unit or within the garage provided no garage
space required for off-street parking is used. The home occupation shall
not occupy more than twenty-five percent of the combined floor area of
the house and garage.
4. A home occupation shall not be conducted within a detached accessory
structure, although materials may be stored in such a structure.
5. There shall be no signs, outdoor storage, parked vehicles or other exterior
evidence of the conduct of the home occupation. Neither the dwelling,
nor the lot shall be altered in appearance so that it appears other than a
residence, either by color, materials, construction, lighting, sounds,
vibrations or other characteristics.
6. Electrical or mechanical equipment which creates interference in radio,
television or telephone receivers or causes fluctuations in line voltage
outside the dwelling unit shall be prohibited.
Planning Commission Resolution 2005
Zoning Code Amendment 2005082
Adopted: May 2005
7. The home occupation shall not create dust, noise or odors in excess of
that normally associated with residential use.
8. No sales activity shall be conducted from the dwelling except for mail
order sales. The dwelling unit shall not be the point of customer pickup or
delivery of products or services, nor shall a home occupation create
greater vehicular or pedestrian traffic than normal for the district in which
it is located.
Exception: Musical instruction and academic tutoring where not more
than two students are present at the residence at the same time shall be
permitted.
9. Medical, dental or similar occupations in which patients are seen in the
home are prohibited.
10. All conditions attached to the home occupation permit shall be fully
complied with at all times.
D. Revocation or Suspension of Permit. The Director of Building and Safety may
revoke or suspend any permit for a home occupation if the Director determines
that any of the performance and development standards listed in Subsection C
of this Section have been, or are being violated that the occupation authorized
by the permit is, or has been conducted in violation of any State statute or City
law, or that the home occupation has changed or is different from that
authorized when the permit was issued.
E. Permit Nontransferable. No permit issued for a home occupation shall be
transferred or assigned, nor shall the permit authorize any person other than
that named in the permit, to commence or carry on the home occupation for
which the permit was issued.
from the studio of ATTACHMENT 1
KATHRYN B. HULL
77-260 Calie Chilton • la Qulnto • (760)771 -1041
March 29, 2005
Mr. Tom Genovese, City Manager
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta CA 92247
Dear Tom:
As a result of a notice received from the City of La Quinta, I am requesting a variance be granted
to me and other music teachers who have a home -based studio. Music teaching in the home is a
long -held tradition spanning several centuries. The one-on-one relationship between a teacher
and the student is best developed and maintained in the personal atmosphere of the home
environment, and so has become the norm for the modern music education for people of all ages.
In addition, there are neighborhood advantages of having a home -based studio. We provide a
constant in the community so the neighborhood is not deserted. We provide a safe house for
young children. We maintain an on -going neighborhood watch. We are conveniently accessible
to families. Music teachers are part of the fabric of the community. Local schools benefit from
our private instruction of their students since schools no longer offer a substantial music
program.
As to my qualifications, I am a state and nationally certified teacher of piano and music theory. I
hold a B.A. in Music. I have been teaching piano since I was in college when I became an
assistant to my teacher. I have taught music in elementary school and in college, but my primary
teaching career has been as an independent piano teacher. For more than half a century I have
had a home studio first in Palo Alto, CA, then in New Jersey for two years, and in Glendale, CA,
for more than 30 years and now in La Quinta since 1992.
The plans for my La Quints custom-built home, which clearly included studio space for teaching,
were approved by the City Planning Department.
Teaching piano is my sole source of income.
The value of a studio located in a neighborhood is the accessibility to families, the convenience
of location, the safety of young children not entering or exiting an active commercial area, and
the friendly, relaxed atmosphere which is conducive to learning. Families of modest means
benefit from having affordable lessons available, which would not be possible in a commercial
establishment.
Mail: P.O. Box 947 - La Quinta, CA 92253-0947
Mr. Tom Genovese
March 29, 2005
Page =2=
The operation of my studio does not intrude on the neighborhood. There were no external
modifications to my home; there is no exterior signage, there is no commercial traffic, I have no
employees, and external sound is minimal because of extra thick walls with soundproofing and
double paned windows. Students arrive one by one by appointment so there is no parking
congestion, and they may park in my driveway. Students are always accompanied by a parent or
responsible adult so there is constant supervision. Teaching hours are available to adults and
home -schooled students in the morning, and after school hours for the majority of the students.
No lessons are given past 8:00 p.m. Summer schedule is limited to three days a week.
My immediate neighbors like having me here finding no problem with sound, traffic or parking.
They appreciate having someone at home during the day to maintain a watchful eye, and show a
visible presence in the neighborhood.
As an educational service, not a commercial business, we believe it is in the best interest of the
City to grant a variance for educators to maintain a home -based service. In addition, since the
Municipal Code for Business License was written in 1982-83, hundreds of home -based services
were established in these 20 or more years. Times have changed with the onset of computer
communication. We respectfully request that consideration be given to revising the Code and
Zoning Ordinance to accommodate these businesses and services that currently exist in our
community. My educational service, and that of other music teachers, only benefits the
community. There is no detrimental effect to La Quinta.
Thank you for your time, attention and serious consideration of this request. I, and the other
local La Quinta music teachers, will be happy to meet with you to answer questions or to provide
additional information. I am enclosing letters from neighbors, students' parents, and other very
interested citizens of the City of La Quinta to attest to the value and support of my studio and to
the tradition of music education in a home -based studio.
Sincerely,
thryn V..11
P.S. You have received a letter from Gary Ingle, the Executive Director of the Music Teachers
National Association. Obviously, over 24,000 teachers country wide are not working in an
illegal system. We encourage La Quinta to consider updating their codes and zoning ordinances
to meet the impact and contributions of the independent music teacher.
cc: Tom Hartung,
Code Enforcement
CK
Deanne Hernandez 7
77-450 Calle Chillon
La Quinta, CA 92253 C
760-771-2559 �►��I
30 March 2005
Mr. Donald Adolph
Mayor
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Mr. Adolph:
I was asked by Judith Trimble, my childrens' piano teacher to write you about current
zoning restrictions as they relate to independent music teachers in our city.
As a parent and resident of La Quinta, I know that zoning ordinances exist to protect our
neighborhood from excessive noise and traffic. These ordinances exist to keep our city
safe and clean.
As a business person with a licensed in -home office, I observe many licensed home
office, in home day care facilities and even residential senior care facilities with our fine
city. These all provide services for the community with an impact on traffic equal or
greater than that of an in -home piano studio.
As a former piano student in my youth, I can personally attest to the great benefit
children receive with the home studio of the teacher. It is free from distractions, devoted
solely to the cultivation of the Childs talent. Not having a home based studio could be a
detriment to the teacher. He/she would have to travel from home to home without the
benefit of the fine instruments and in some cases, acoustics, available with the studio.
I urge you to look a the benefits and positive impact that home based piano instructors
give the city of La Quinta and consider changing the current city ordinance.
F
I
Cc:
Kathyn Hull, Judith Trimble
MUSIC TEACHERS NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
March 15, 2005
Mr. Tom Genovese
City Manager
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92247
Dear Mr. Genovese:
Gary L Ingle
Executive Director
I was asked by Kathryn Hull, a member of Music Teachers National Association (MTNA) and
resident of La Quinta, to write you concerning zoning problems related to independent music
teachers in your city. While I know that there are zoning ordinances to protect neighborhoods
from unnecessary noise and traffic issues and that zoning ordinances exist to keep neighborhoods
safe and clean, I do think there are substantial reasons why an independent music teacher running
a home -based studio should be given careful consideration as an "exception" to zoning
ordinances.
As a matter of background, MTNA is a non-profit organization of 24,000 independent music
teachers across the country. Every state of the Union as well as the District of Columbia has an
affiliated organization. Our purpose is to advance the value of music study and music making to
society and to promote the professional development of our membership. Zoning issues, of
course, have a profound effect upon our members' ability to conduct their profession. For this
reason, we are concerned whenever we hear of restrictions, local or national, which might not
fairly serve independent music teachers. Conversely, we are supportive of initiatives that
positively impact the in -home teaching of music.
Today's home -studio teachers are well-educated, usually with advanced degrees in music, and
they provide a fine instrument for the student (especially true of piano teachers) and a library of
pedagogical materials and repertoire for study and reference. They often have the latest
technological tools to provide quality instruction as well.
It is a long -held tradition that private music instruction be given in the home. The one-on-one
relationship between teacher and student usually lasts for many years and is a nurturing
experience for the student. In addition, the warm personal atmosphere of the home setting is
very conducive to creative learning. There are very few times outside of their own homes that
children are taught individually. Most teachers create programs tailored to the student's specific
needs, a benefit that cannot be matched in our schools.
The Carew Tower • 441 Vine Street, Suite 505 • Cincinnati, Ohio 45202-2814
Phone: (513) 421-1420 • Fax: (513) 421-2503 • E-mail: gingle@mtna.org
March 15, 2005
Page 2
Private music lessons are an educational activity. In addition to the obvious pleasures of making
music, music education assists learning in many non -music areas. National media has, in the
last few years, reported on research indicating that music instruction is better than computer
instruction for developing abstract and critical reasoning skills. Other recent research points to
the fact those students with music performance experiences score better on standardized tests
than that of students without such experiences.
Income for most independent music teachers is low. Nevertheless, teaching music is not a
frivolous pursuit for any of our members. While some earn essential secondary income for their
families, for the majority of our members, the income from teaching is their primary income.
For piano teachers especially, home studios are fundamental. It is not economically feasible to
rent commercial space and supply the studio with instruments. If piano teachers are deprived of
the right to work at home, the entire music making community will be jeopardized.
We believe the home -music studio enhances the character of neighborhoods. The home studio is
not an overtly visible business — teachers are careful not to disrupt the residential areas.
Typically students arrive one by one. Some students bicycle or walk to their lessons. Many
teachers conduct group classes, but parents do not attend these classes and have no need to park
for any length of time. If recitals are held in the studio, they are "social" in nature and the cars
parked are no different than cars parked for any other types of social occasions.
In the final analysis, independent music teaching in a home setting is a positive, enriching
activity for any and every community. For that reason, most municipalities and states have made
exceptions in their zoning ordinances for home -based music instruction. The members of
MTNA would encourage you to adopt this approach. In doing so, you will keep music alive in
your community through the impact and contributions of independent music teachers. Our desire
is that independent music teachers will be able to continue making their unique contributions to
the life and spirit of the communities.
On behalf of the 24,000 members of Music Teachers National Association, I thank you for the
opportunity to address this important matter on behalf of Kathryn Hull and the music teachers of
La Quinta.
Sinc rely,
Gary L. I le
Executive Director
cc: Kathryn Hull, NCTMY-I"
City of La Quinta
PO Box 1504
La Quinta, Ca 92253
Attn: City Manager
Dear Mr. Genovese:
We are writing you on behalf of our neighbor, Ms. Kathyrn Hull, who for
many years has been performing a valuable service to our community by
instructing our youth in the art of piano in her home studio. It is our
observation that she provides a comfortable and safe learning
environment in her home with no adverse noise or parking issues. We
feel that her studio is a positive part of our neighborhood.
Ms. Hull informed us that the city of La Quinta is impressing upon her a
cease and desist order regarding her studio as a home business.
Teaching music in private homes is a tradition that extends worldwide
and has for centuries. We believe that the city ordinance banning home
teaching is flawed and needs to be reexamined. At the very least, Ms.
Hull, who has been teaching in her studio for many years should be
permitted to continue her valuable community service.
Sincerely
Jack and Jan Blakleyy
54015 Avenida Juare
La Quinta, Ca 92253
760.771.9732
42-100 Yucca Lane
Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201
h 23, 2005
Whom It May Concern:
James Monroe Elementary School
A California Distinguished School
Telephone (760) 772-4130
Fax (760) 772-4135
As a parent and educator, I am very appalled that you would consider
the ability for my child to receive musical instruction in the home of Ms.
Rowley — or any other home teacher, for that matter.
This type of instruction is not only beneficial to the minds and hearts of our
but also due to the convenience of the teaching locations, it makes it
for hard working parents to transport their children to and from classes in
that are close to home and convenient for the families.
It would also be unfair to take away the livelihood of fine teadws who work
to bring beautiful music to our children, making them fine and well-rounded
and students.
Please reconsider this initiative, and do not take further action to remove
well -needed courses that benefit all, and hurt no one.
Thank you very much for your attention to this matter.
%rely,
�iaHema dez
Teacher
-oe Elementary
March 29, 2005
To whom it may concern,
My friend and colleague, Kathryn Hull, apprised me of her notification regarding
teaching piano in her home.
Many educators work with students in their homes. Private tutoring is a great asset
to a community. Often public school teachers encourage their students to get extra
help in order to be successful, whether in music or any other subject in their
curriculum. When students are taught at a private home there is no traffic problem
since there is only one student a time.
I am a professional musician performing on the flute and have a Master of Music
degree from U.S.C. Also I have taught music at Pomona College, Redlands
University, Idyllwild School Music and the Arts, and the College of the Desert, as
well as in the following school districts: the Coachella Valley Unified School
District, the Desert Sands Unified School District and the Palm Springs Unified
School District.
Those who give children this special opportunity in music education are passing
on a legacy of learning and experience in the performing arts which is invaluable
to our community.
Sincerely,
()� &PaO4
Joanne E. Bourquin
13
4" JUDY ROWLEY PIANO STUDIV
79-886 Dandelion Drive La Quinta, Ca. 92253 Phone: 760-345-4433
March 21, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Judy Rowley and I teach private piano lessons in
my home in the city of La Quinta. I am one of several
educated teachers who is applying for a variance to the current
zoning laws which disallow piano teachers such as myself from
organizing a home based instructional business.
I have a BA in Education and a Minor degree in Music from
Fairmont State University in Fairmont, West Virginia. I also
have 6 credits toward my Master's Degree from Central
Michigan University. I am a member of the Music
Teachers National Association. While teaching private piano
lessons in the state of Virginia for many years I also judged
students who played in various competitions within the state.
In college I directed choir for my sorority for 4 years and in
2004 I worked for the Coachella Valley School District as an
independent employee teaching choir at Mountain Vista
Elementary School in addition to my private piano instruction
jn my home.
My quiet studio is located in my home and is not visible to
anyone from the street. My neighbors are extremely
supportive of my piano teaching and many of my neighbors
are also my students. Each of my 6 to 7 students per day
enter my home by appointment only —most are neighborhood
children who walk to lessons. There is parking available in my
driveway and directly in front of my home for parents to drop
off and pick up their child and thus no cars line the street at
anytime in front of any other residence. My neighbors will
attest that they are not inconvenienced in any way from my
home teaching. My hours of appointments vary from Monday
14
through Friday and lessons end between the hours of 6:00 and
7:00 p.m. Students are supervised by me or a parent when
here for their weekly lesson.
I provide the neighborhood with a "safe house" --- a place for
the students to go in my neighborhood. I am home during the
day and enjoy providing the instructional service and creating
a loving environment for learning. There are no external
changes or signs on my property regarding my business so I do
not impact the community with my studio -- nor do I have any
employees.
I have been teaching for over 30 years and am always amazed
when I see the results of my teaching touching the lives of
students. Parents relate to me that as a result of learning to
read music their children's grades improve and learning
becomes easier for them in all areas of their school curriculum.
Another visible benefit is a boost of self esteem that the
students experience as a result of learning to play music that
resulted from learning to read during time spent in my studio.
I also teach senior citizens who want to keep their minds active
and alert through the study of music education.
I feel that I am a benefit to my community with the service
that I provide... my neighbors are aware of what I do and are
totally supportive. I implore you to consider my request to
exempt music instruction in the home environment based on
your current zoning laws. Banishing our small businesses
would be devastating to so many people but mostly to the
students who would not have the opportunity to receive
instruction unless provided by the private music teachers in
our homes. It would be cost prohibitive for us to rent
commercial space... none of us could afford to do so or to drive
from one home to another and not be able to take materials,
our piano, ect. with us. It would not serve the students well to
51
be taught in any other environment other than the private
studio in our homes. In addition, I believe that I am helping to
stimulate the local economy through music education and
appreciation. My students purchase their teaching materials
from local music retail stores and many have purchased pianos
and other musical instruments for practice and enjoyment at
their homes. Private instruction helps to generate interest in
this small market.
Again ... your consideration of our request is of utmost
importance....and I am sure that after hearing our reasons for
continuing to provide for others in the manner that we do so
well would be an inevitable just cause for a variance in our
behalf.
F
March 29, 2005
Judith Trimble
47-850 Via Jardin
La Quinta, CA 92253
Mr. Tom Genovese
City Manager
P.O.Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92247
Dear Mr. Genovese:
I ant writing you in regard to a letter I received from the city of La Quinta. The letter stated that I
was not allowed to maintain a home -based piano studio because this particular activity is
considered a violation of current zoning ordinances.
Recently, I retired, after twenty years, from teaching in the California public schools. I have a
B.Ed. in music education and hold a valid California teaching credential which authorizes me to
teach music through high school. Because I am so highly skilled in my field, I was recruited by
Coachella Valley High School to teach in their Visual and Performing Arts Academy. I am
currently teaching choir and piano, and also accompany the high school show choir.
My husband and I own a home in La Quinta, and, when I first retired, I began teaching a few
piano students, mainly the children of friends and neighbors. I teach three days a week in the
afternoon only. Students are taught one on one though occasionally I teach a partner lesson. My
students are always supervised by an adult, and they are well-mannered. If parents need a place
to park, they may use my driveway. There have been no changes to the outside of my home since
I started teaching piano.
My students enjoy coming to my home as they can choose from three different instruments to
play on. I have a concert grand piano, a studio upright, and a Roland digital piano with all the
bells and whistles (which is the favorite).
If the City of La Quinta forces home -based piano studios to shut down, I will be forced out of
business. Even if I were able to find a commercial space to rent, I would not be able to afford to
provide quality instruments and pay the overhead costs. I simply do not make very much money
teaching piano. My students would have to go out of the area to find quality teachers. The public
schools certainly do not provide for private instrumental educational services.
It is my sincere desire that the City of La Quinta , which considers itself a supporter of the Arts,
will do what is beneficial for all its citizens and find a way to allow piano teachers to continue to
do what they do best, and that is to teach in their home -based studios.
Sincerely,,J.
Judith True le
David Stephen Essex
74-401 Santolina Drive
Palm Desert, CA. 92260
Cell--(760)-285-1873
essex1ent@aol.com
March 23, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
It has recently come to my attention that the City of La Quinta is trying to
interfere with the outside education of our children, or at least make it more
difficult and cumbersome, if you will, for both teachers and students alike, by
moving forward in their desire, to pass legislation, through the zoning committee,
which would ban teachers to practice their craft and teach, for monetary
compensation, within the confines of their personal home studios. That the
teacher must either travel to the client's home or they must rent some office
space in a commercially zoned area. My sincere reaction to this demand is
"You have got to be kidding !" The passing of this ordinance would not only
effect my daughter's piano teacher, but other gifted and talented educators, who
teach, and tutor in their homes such subjects as math, history, English, art,
science, or run such in -home based "businesses" as home day care/nursery.
Since when has it become a tort to teach our children the arts in one's
home studio? Since when does the control of where and how our children are
taught outside the school environment become an issue of such importance that
the "City of La Quinta" feels it necessary to address this issue specifically and
attempt to place a wedge in one's livelihood as well as our children's education.
It is not as though these teachers are causing a burden on the City or the
neighborhoods or are taking away from the well being of the surrounding
environment. We are not talking about putting up a commercial storefront or an
industrial plant for monetary gains in an R-1 or R-2 zoned residential area. We
are talking, plain and simple, the operation of a small "in -home" based business,
run not by corporate entrepreneurs, but by those who teach primarily for the love
and passion of their subjects such as piano. These artisans/educators give from
their heart and soul not so much for the small wages they earn in the process,
but rather by the driving passion burning within, to share these wonderful gifts
such as the knowledge of how to physically play a musical instruments and the
appreciation of music as well as the arts with children and adults alike.
To initiate a city business tax is one thing. To have these teachers
practice teaching in the home under the umbrella of a city business license is
still an acceptable request. But to out and out condemn in -home businesses of
this nature and force these teachers to stop their livelihood and in the process
deny our children education, is another thing, a horrible choice, a Gestapo tactic
and not conducive with the practices of free enterprise and freedom of choice. I
feel that the City of La Quinta should truly be ashamed of themselves for
harboring such a boorish proposal and wasting time, energy, and money trying
to get this foolish and sophomoric initiative passed. This very idea is as wrong
as censorship or the banning of books. It is a discriminatory practice singling
out a specific sector of citizens --teachers— and denying them the ability to earn
a livelihood.
I pray that this letter stirs continued rethinking of the City's proposal and
challenges those in power to sponsor other solutions, to discuss their values
both pros and cons and agree upon an alternative solution to the satisfaction of
all those concerned.
--Mortgage Advisor—
March 22, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
I can not believe this is happening to us. I have just learned that my son is not going to
be able to take piano lessons from Ms. Judy Rowley if the City of La Quinta does not
change the zoning laws.
My son Austin, who is 11, has been taking piano lessons for over a year. He is an
extremely shy young man. Piano has brought him out of his shell and made him more
confident. He has a natural talent that Ms. Rowley has recognized and nurtured
I think you need to make an exception to the zoning laws that would allow piano lessons
to take place in the home of the instructor. Not all families are fortunate enough to have
a piano in there own home and rely on Ms. Rowley for her piano.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter,
AAyotte-es
2
'Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change
the world. Indeed it's the only thing that ever has.,' Margaret Mead
March 25, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Christine Preston and I am a teacher at James Monroe in
Bermuda Dunes. I am currently in my 30"" year of teaching. I am also a
Mom. I have 4 children who have all gone through the Desert Sands School
District. 2 of my children are currently in college, I is teaching at La Quinta
High School and 1 is in 8"' grade. My husband is Henry Preston, a sheriff for
Riverside County.
As a family, we feel very strongly about the outside activities that our
children participate in. We feel that music, sports, and drama help to build a
well rounded child. We feel that raising children to be responsible, caring
adults is our job as parents.
Our youngest daughter, Sarah has taken piano lessons from Ms. Judy
Rowley for the last 7 years. She has learned to not only play the piano but to
read music as well. We have nothing but praise for the kindness, talent and
exceptional role model that Judy has played in the life of Sarah and our
family. She is gracious and patient beyond belief. There is a weekly one-on-
one connection with another adult from the community that is an added
benefit to every child that she encounters.
Life is hard on kids. There are tough breaks everywhere. As a teacher,
I see kids that have been handed some very tough blows by the time they are
10. I feel that any amount of Lifeskills, such as music, that we can give
them will only provide them more joy and discipline as they grow older.
Music is an added bonus to life. It is a necessary component to enhance our
daily lives. Music teachers provide a skill that will carry over in to the adult
lives of children, but more importantly the kindness and patience of these
caring adults day in and day out. We all know how difficult parenting is. To
have another great role model for my children, is an added bonus.
Sincerely,
(V-L� I Agi�
Christine Preston
79790 Camelback Dr.
Bermuda Dunes, Ca 92203
KWEE K. ONG, M.D.
March 21, 2005
City of La Quinta
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Sir or Madam:
I am a adult piano student of Judy Rowley. It has come to ray attention that the City of La Quinta is
attempting to end her piano teaching at her home. Judy Rowley has a gift in teaching music and to bring a little
of the arts to La Quinta is a blessing. As a resident of La Quinta, it is clear that her lessons will bring myself a
lifetime of enjoyment of music.
It has been a pleasure to take lessons from her home. The environment is both pleasing and provides a
great experience. Her home is equipped with beautiful piano that has been properly tuned and placed. It is
doubtful that novice students would otherwise have a chance to use such a fine piano. Her lessons are a asset
to La Quinta , I wish to extend my support for my teacher.
Sincerely,
v ,J
K ee K. Ong
54695 WINGED FOOT • LA QUINTA, CA • 92253
PHONE: 760.771.9254
K
Shahriyar Tavakoli, M.D., FCCP
39535 Desert Sun Drive
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
March 21, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
I have been informed that all piano instructors providing private lessons from their homes
will no longer be able to conduct business out of their homes.
My 5 year -old daughter, Alexis, takes private piano lessons from Judy Rowley. She has
been taking lessons from Judy for the past year. Alexis is a very bright and active child
who needs gentle guidance to keep her focused. My wife and I chose private lessons for
Alexis because we feel that having individualized attention during this age would help
keep her focused.
However, in order to continue teaching piano, Ms. Rowley would have to either provide
lessons in our home or in a studio. In our experience with our daughter, these options
would not be conducive to our child's learning style. First of all, if lessons were held in
our home, Alexis would not be able to concentrate for the entire lesson in this
environment because she would have too many distractions, such as her toys, pet, etc. By
going to Ms. Rowley's home, Alexis takes the lesson seriously and she is better able to
stay focused. Secondly, if Ms. Rowley held lessons in a studio, Alexis surely would not
have the opportunity to learn to play piano on a Steinway & Sons piano. By learning on
such a quality instrument, my daughter is developing an awareness of the nuances in
music and the caliber of musical instruments.
Additionally, since Ms. Rowley teaches out of her home, she affords us the opportunity
to be very flexible regarding scheduling. Like most children this age, Alexis often picks
up different illnesses from her classmates. Therefore, we are easily able to reschedule a
missed class. Unfortunately, this would not be the case if Ms. Rowley had to provide
lessons to students in their homes, for she would have to allocate time for the lesson in
addition to the commute.
Furthermore, if piano instructors are not allowed to provide lessons from their homes, the
cost of lessons will increase significantly because the overhead and/or transportation
costs will have to be imposed on the students. This will be a travesty because it will
become unreasonable for parents to provide piano lessons for their children. Not only
will many children (as well as adults) not benefit from the cognitive advantages that
learning to play piano provides, but they will be denied the chance to learn the discipline
and the appreciation for this particular musical instrument.
Another issue involved is the availability of teaching materials. Ms. Rowley has a variety
of teaching materials in her home, which she would not be able to provide spontaneously
011
if she had to teach in our home. It is important to have as many teaching tools as
possible, especially when teaching very young children.
In conclusion, I feel that Judy Rowley is the right match for my daughter's learning style.
If Ms. Rowley is not allowed to continue teaching from her home, she will no longer be
able to stay in business. This will be a disservice to all her students! Therefore, I implore
you to consider these circumstances and allow private piano instructors to teach from
their homes. Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Yours truly,
Shahriyar Tavakoli, M.D., FCCP
2
Mixel Ventura, MSW
39535 Desert Sun Drive
Rancho Mirage, CA 92270
March 21, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is being sent to provide you with information on the personal
ramifications that may occur if Judy Rowley is not allowed to provide piano lessons out
of her home.
I have been a student of Ms. Rowley's for nine months. I began with no
knowledge of music to my current status of intermediate level. Additionally, I have a
child of preschool age; thus, it does not allow me too much time to dedicate to taking
extended courses elsewhere. My private lessons with Judy are a way for me to keep my
mind stimulated in an enjoyable manner.
Because Judy provides lessons from her home, she is able to offer me flexibility
regarding scheduling. Oftentimes, I am forced to change my regularly scheduled lesson
either due to an illness on my part or my child's, or other situations that occur in life. If
Judy had to come to my home, she would certainly not have that flexibility.
Furthermore, since I live 30 minutes' driving distance from Ms. Rowley's home,
it would not be cost-effective for Judy to drive to my home to provide me a lesson.
Therefore, she would either have to increase her fees and I would thus not be able to take
private piano lessons, or she might not be able to provide lessons at all to students who
live a certain distance away from her home. This would be unjust to both Judy and her
students.
Another important issue is the fact that Judy has a variety of teaching materials
readily available in her home, which she would not be able to transport on a regular basis
to each of her students' homes. I have personally benefited from the availability of her
instructional resources.
Additionally, when I sought out a piano tea , met with several instructors,
including a couple of instructors who taught lessons out of a studio. However, I chose
Judy Rowley as my piano instructor not just because she knows how to play the piano,
but because she is a well -trained teacher, well -organized, and an enthusiastically
motivating instructor. I need someone who will encourage my music endeavors without
putting unnecessary pressure on me. Judy provides gentle encouragement to me.
Finally, if Judy Rowley is not allowed to teach piano out of her home, she will
surely be put out of business. This will be a travesty to all her students who flourish from
her style of teaching.
Respectfully, I ask that you consider my concerns and please allow Judy Rowley
to continue to offer private piano lessons from her home.
Sincerely,
Mixel Ventura, MSW
3-23-05
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN:
IT HAS COME TO MY ATTENTION THAT THE CITY OF LA QUINTA IS
TRYING TO SHUT DOWN THE PIANO TEACHERS WHO ARE TEACHING
LESSONS OUT OF THEIR HOME. THIS IS AN ISSUE OF GREAT CONCERN
AS WELL AS FRUSTRATION. I HAVE 2 DAUGHTERS WHO HAVE TAKEN
PIANO LESSONS FROM JUDY ROWLEY FOR JUST ABOUT 6 YEARS NOW.
HER HOME IS A QUIET, SAFE ENVIRONMENT FOR MY DAUGHTERS TO
STUDY PIANO. HER HOME IS LOCATED JUST ACROSS THE STREET
FROM MY DAUGHTER'S MIDDLE SCHOOL WHERE SHE CAN SAFELY
WALK TO HER PIANO LESSON. TUESDAY IS HER EARLY DISMISSAL
DAY AND I WOULD MUCH RATHER HAVE HER WALK TO HER PIANO
TEACHER'S HOME FOR A LESSON THAN HER WANDERING AROUND
WAITING FOR ME TO PICK HER UP. SHE WOULD BE UNSUPERVISED
SINCE I WORK AND AM NOT ALWAYS ABLE TO PICK HER UP EARLY ON
TUESDAYS.
I AM UNCLEAR OF THE ISSUES REGARDING THIS FINE WOMAN
SHARING HER TALENTS WITH OUR CHILDREN. FRANKLY, I MUST TELL
YOU THAT JUDY ROWLEY HAS BEEN A TREMENDOUS BLESSING TO MY
DAUGHTERS. I AM SO THANKFUL FOR HER. THE FACT THAT SHE AND
OTHERS TEACH OUT OF THEIR HOME SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE. IT IS
A MUCH SAFER AND MORE CONVENIENT OPTION THAN HER BEING
FORCED TO RENT COMMERCIAL SPACE IN A BUSINESS PARK OR THE
LIKE. THE FACT THAT SHE IS MAKING MONEY IN RETURN FOR THE
LESSONS IS IRRELEVANT AND SHOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE. HOW ABOUT
THE REST OF US WHO HAVE OFFICES IN OUR HOME? ARE YOU
PLANNING TO SHUT DOWN THE ENTIRE CITY OF QUINTA ?
TO EVEN CONDISER HAVING JUDY TRAVEL TO OUR HOMES IS
REDICULOUS AND ENTIRELY IMPRACTICAL. SHE WOULD NEED TO
DOUBLE THE HOURS IN HER DAY JUST FOR TRAVEL TIME ALONE.
SECONDLY, FOR HER TO TRY TO TEACH IN MY BUSY HOME WOULD
NOT EVEN BE POSSIBLE. WITH 4 CHILDREN, 3 DOGS AND A CAT, THERE
WOULD BOT BE A PEACEFUL ENVIRONMENT CONDUCIVE TO
LEARNING.
I TOOK PIANO LESSONS SINCE I WAS 4 YEARS OLD ... ALL OF MY
LESSONS TOOK PLACE IN THE TEACHER'S HOME. I WENT ON TO
COLLEGE AND MAJORED IN MUSIC AND RECEIVED A DEGREE IN MUSIC
PERFORMANCE AS WELL AS EDUCATION. THAT WOULD NOT HAVE
OCCURRED IF I WERE UNABLE TO TAKE PRIVATE LESSONS FROM
TEACHERS IN A QUIET, SAFE ENVIRONMENT.,
TEACHING PIANO LESSONS IN THE HOMES OF THE TEACHERS IS THE
PERFECT AND ONLY SOLUTION TO THIS SITUATION. IN NO WAY ARE
THESE TEACHERS A DISTURBANCE TO THE CITY. WHATEVER THE
CITY IS LOOKING TO ACCOMPLISH WITH THIS NEGATIVE IMPACT OF
THE DECISION, NEEDS TO BE RETHOUGHT AND A VARIANCE MADE IN
BEHALF OF PIANO TEACHERS WORKING IN THEIR HOMES.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME IN THIS IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION.
PLEASE REDO THE CURRENT ZONING LAWS IN ORDER TO ELIMINATE
THE ALREADY SUCCESSFUL TEACHER/STUDENT STUDY IN PRIVATE
HOMES.
I URGE THAT YOU DO NOT SHUT DOWN PIANO LESSONS IN JURY
ROWLEY'S HOME ... HER INCOME WOULD CEASE ... AND THUS HER
QUALITY OF LIVELIHOOD WOULD BE NO MORE. SHE IS AN
UPSTANDING MEMBER OF YOUR CITY.
March 23, 2005
To whom it may concern,
My name is Arlene Helapaz. I am a nurse at JFK hospital in Indio. I have 3 Children ages
10, 9, and 7. We love music and we all take piano lessons. Judy Rowley is the best thing
that has happened to us. She is patient and kind. She is always positive and encouraging.
It is beautiful to hear music flowing out of my children's fingertips.
We are happy going to her home to take piano lessons. We feel safe in her area. There is
no traffic or congestion. Her driveway is not crowded with cars. There are no solicitors
asking for donations. The neighborhood is conducive to learning because it is quiet.
We prefer to take lessons in her home versus our home because there are too many
distractions in our home. It would be too easy for the children to choose to play with their
own toys, watch TV, eat and drink instead of concentrating on the piano lesson. It would
be a waste of time and more importantly a waste of money.
I believe that not allowing piano teachers to teach in their homes in the City of La Quinta
is ridiculous. It can have an avalanche effect that can potentially hurt many people. It
starts with the talented piano teachers who will lose their primary means of income. It
will also hurt the City of La Quinta in many ways. The city would lose income revenue
from the piano teachers. The city would lose musically talented children. These same
children, without music to focus on, could be out in the streets of the city causing (who
knows what kind of) trouble. The residents of La Quinta will also feel the effect. Many of
these piano teachers may have to go on welfare and surely this will affect taxes. The
residents of the city will also be exposed to the children gone wild because they don't
have music to focus on. Not allowing piano teachers to teach in La Quinta can be
potentially disastrous.
P11
March 22, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
It has come to my attention that my children are in jeopardy of losing their piano teacher.
I can not imagine what this will mean for them. They have learned so much in their
lessons with Ms. Judy Rowley.
I have three children who take lessons from Ms. Rowley. My daughters, ages 7 and 8,
have been with her for over a year and a half and love piano. My son, age 16, has just
begun to take lessons and it would be such a shame if he had to stop now. My children
enjoy going to Ms. Rowley's house for lessons. It would not be the same sort of learning
environment at all if she were to travel to our house. They feel comfortable at her piano.
At the same time it makes them feel special that they get to play on Ms. Judy's piano.
I have no doubt that piano lessons with Ms. Rowley have helped all of my children in
their school work. My son especially has benefited from his piano lessons. He is a very
bright young man, but lacks focus and concentration. I truly believe that piano is
beginning to help in him in these areas. I would like the opportunity to see how much he
can improve with continued instruction with Ms. Rowley.
Please consider the ramifications to my family when making a decision about this matter.
Thank you,
C-
Kimberly C. Jenkin
K
Michele T. Sarna
67 E Sutton Place
Palm Desert, CA 92211
760-674-8422
March 21, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
It has come to my attention that our beloved piano teacher -Judy Rowley -is in jeopardy of
her trade, due to the proposed ruling of no in home businesses. My two children (ages 6
and 7) would be deeply impacted if she would not be able to continue teaching them in
the manner they are accustomed to. Since they have begun piano lessons, their school
work, home life and general well being have improved I know they could take in a
studio environment, however, I have been spoiled by the flexibility and comfort a home
setting has provided. I wouldn't want it any other way.
Please take into consideration all the lives that would be affected by this decision.
California is already suffering from the mass amounts of unemployment. Are you willing
to significantly add to that number?
I thank you for your time and consideration. If you have any questions, please feel free
to contact me at the above number.
Sincerely,
Michele T. Sarna
Very Concerned Parent.
March 24, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing this letter in support of Judy Rowley Piano Studios and other piano
home studios. Ms. Rowley's home is more than just a piano studio. It is an inviting and
comfortable atmosphere where learning can take place. Our daughter, Sarah, has been
instructed in piano by Ms. Rowley since late May of 2004.
Sarah has truly blossomed under Ms. Rowley's teaching in more ways than one.
Our daughter is nine -years old. As our oldest she has struggled with self-confidence at
times. Trying to fit in or discover talents is common among these age groups. Ms.
Rowley has helped Sarah find her talent, and since then she has excelled in piano. Ms.
Rowley has also brought a special friendship to Sarah, and I can see it each time I pick
her up. Ms. Rowley has encouraged our daughter with self-confidence, with assurance,
and with hope. All these characteristics are strengthening our daughter in ways that will
carry on throughout her lifetime. So we are very thankful to Ms. Rowley for not only
opening her home to us, but also her heart to our daughter. All this success is due in part
to the lessons being taught in Ms. Rowley's home.
I would encourage the city of La Quinta to reconsider the option of removing the
wonderful environment of home studios which people, like Ms. Rowley and others chose
to create. It is these people who help better the lives of others and their communities.
Sincerely,
Damon Juarez
Youth for Christ, Eas rn V ector
Estella Juarez
Para educator, Dese Sands Uni ed
50-120 JACKSON • COACHELLA, CA • 92236
PHONE: 760-342-8118
3
March 25, 2005
To whom it may concern,
I would like to request an exception to the current zoning Laws regarding piano teachers.
Judy Rowley has been teaching piano in the City of La Quinta for the past 30 years.
Teaching piano is her livelihood. She does not teach piano to be rich, she teaches
because she knows how important it is to a child. If a child learns piano he/she will do
better in school. I know this to be a proven fact. Judy would not be able to afford to live
in La Quinta if she was not allowed to teach out of her home. That would be unfortunate
for the people who live in her neighborhood because she is an upstanding person in her
community.
I would agree with any new City rules, but I think they should apply to someone trying to
start a new business out of their home, not to someone who has been doing something
great for our community for the past 30 years.
The City of La Quints may think that she can just go to her student's homes to teach, but
that is not true. Many of her beginning students do not own a piano. They practice on a
keyboard. The only time they get the full effect of a piano is in Judy's home, or once a
year at a recital. When the students go to Judy's home, they get a one on one teaching. If
it were in their own home (if they had a piano), there would be distractions. If Judy had
to travel to each of her student's homes, she would be forced to teach fewer students due
to time issues. The children of La Quinta would lose!
Judy is not trying to sell retail products out of her home; she is providing a much -needed
service in our community.
I am sure the City has more important issues to deal with than concentrating on piano
teachers! Let's look out for our children of La Quinta, and good people we want to reside
in our neighborhood.
Thank yyo� f r your consi eration.
YAi el a Goodwin
3
March 25, 2005
To whom it may concern:
We have been taking our daughter to Judy Rowley for well over ten years. She is a
wonderful Piano teacher. It is amazing to listen to Shelby play. Our daughter does very
well in school and we attribute a lot of that success to Judy. There are many studies that
confirm the correlation between music and other academics.
At the very least, all current piano teachers should be grandfathered, and be allowed to
continue providing a much needed service to our community.
To pull the plug on the livelihood of someone who has, for so long contributed much to
the children of this community is just not right.
Your consideration to the matter would be appreciated.
Sincer
Todd Goodwin
3
Christine Frye -Gamer
79-755 Westward Ho Drive
La Quinta, California 92253
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Christine Camer; I am a piano student of piano/music teacher Judy Rowley
as well as an educator. I am in total support of a variance to the current zoning laws that
prohibit professional teachers such as Judy from running a home based instructional
business from the privacy of their individual homes.
Judy provides an instructional service in a safe, loving, nurturing environment that fosters
social and academic development for students of all ages as well as developing the love
of music for an individual's life long enrichment and enjoyment.
As an educator the magnitude of music's importance that enriches student's lives in all
areas of curricular study cannot be minimized. Unfortunately in today's educational
system, music has had to take a "back seat" to the rigorous academic curriculum and
curricular standards that our students and children must master. Judy Rowley, as a private
music/piano instructor has been able to provide the opportunity for students to enhance
their academic abilities and bring joy into the learning environment via instruction in her
private studio, located in her home.
Banishing private piano/music teachers from practicing their craft in their private homes
would be devastating to students of all ages in our community, as the opportunity to
receive one on one musical instruction would now become extinct , commercialized and
cost prohibitive to students as teachers would be forced to procure a music studio housed
in a commercial area.
I implore you to consider the request of the private music/piano teachers that reside here
in our community, the city of La Quinta, to grant a variance allowing them to continue to
provide this most valuable and viable community service, a private learning environment
in their homes, which affords the opportunity to students of all ages to foster, appreciate
and develop a life long love of music.
Thank you for your consideration of a variance to allow this viable and valuable learning
environment to continue to build and enrich the lives of our community members.
Thy you,
Christine Frye-Camer
3
March 24, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
I was recently informed about the possibility of having to end piano
lessons. When I heard this news 1 was completely shocked and could not
understand why anyone would want to stop the instructional teaching of
piano. Piano teaching should be an exception to the current zoning law.
I am proud to say that I am Judy Rowley's longest student. I started
taking lessons from Ms. Rowley at the young age of four years old. I am
now almost fifteen years old and have been taking lessons ever since I
started.
Study after study has proved the fact that children who take piano
lessons learn, or improve, their study habits, and become a better learner.
University studies have concluded that middle school and high school
students, who play an instrument score significantly better on standardized
tests. Since I have been taking lessons before I started school, I strongly
believe that my success in my academics is based on the ability of playing
piano. I have been in gifted and talented academic classes in all my years
up to high school, and now attending La Quinta High I am able to say that I
am succeeding in the vigorous International Baccalaureate program. Piano
lessons have also improved my skills in memorization, concentration, and
discipline. I have had the opportunity to play at recitals once, and even
twice a year. Being able to perform music in front of an audience has
raised my level of self esteem and confidence. Without my ability to play
piano, I honestly do not know what kind of all around person I would be,
socially as well as academically.
My teacher's home environment is exceptional for teaching. There
are absolutely no disruptions in the community around Judy's household.
There are no signs, or any kind of advertisement, on or in her home.
Students only arrive to Judy's house by appointment which completely
eliminates the problem of having over populated, congested streets by her
home. Oven her closest neighbors do no have a problem with her
profession. I do not believe that I would have the same level of education
if Judy came to my house to teach piano, there are rarely times when my
household is completely quite, and at Judy's house I am able to focus on
piano and learn to the best of my ability. Judy's house is located close to
my school, so it is very convenient for me to walk there at my scheduled
piano time. My parents work during my piano time and walking is the only
way I can get there. Judy's location is accessible and perfect!
Judy received a letter about the unfortunate fact that her "home
business" would need to be ended. Instead, I believe that Judy should be
sincerely thanked for her hard work and patience with teaching people of
all ages. Judy is truly a beneficial member of our society and should be
recognized as one. Judy teaches people of all ages starting from four
years old to retired elders.
Ms. Rowley is not only my piano teacher; she is my friend and
mentor. Judy does not do her job for the wealth, but to bring joy to her
students through music, which they can cherish throughout their lifetime.
These zoning laws are starting with La Quinta, but pretty soon the
art of piano teaching is going to be erased. This law is ruining the
possibility of having music touch the lives of other people. Please take this
letter into consideration, and make piano teaching an exception to the
current zoning law!
W/i
Shelby ...
Deborah Westerhoff
52-313 Madero
La Quinta, California 92253
To Whom It May Concern:
My name is Deborah Westerhoff; I am an educator and my daughter, Cristi has been a
piano/music student of Judy Rowley's. I am in total support of the variance to the current
zoning laws that prohibit professional teachers such as Judy from running a home based
instructional business from the privacy of their individual homes.
Judy provides an invaluable instructional service in a safe, loving and nurturing
environment that fosters social and academic development for students of all ages as well
as developing the love of music for an individual's life long enrichment and enjoyment.
As a parent of a very shy girl, piano lessons for my daughter helped to bring her out of
her "shell" and today, I am very proud to say that she is member of her school's
Marching and Jazz Bands. Without the ministrations of Judy's loving and nurturing
musical instruction, I believe my daughter would not be the successful student both
academically and socially that she has become. As a parent with a very busy household,
having the opportunity to give my daughter private piano/music lessons in a safe and
loving home environment away from our home has been an invaluable
resource/commodity for our family. Banishing private piano/music teachers from
practicing their craft in their private homes and forcing them into commercialized
studio's would be devastating to the students of all ages in our community as the
opportunity to receive one/one musical instruction would then be cost prohibitive.
I implore you to consider the request of the private music/piano teachers that reside here
in our community, the city of La Quinta, to grant a variance allowing them to continue to
provide this most valuable and viable community service, a private nurturing learning
environment free from familial distractions, which affords the opportunity to students of
all ages to foster, appreciate and develop a life long love of music.
Thank you for your consideration of a variance to allow Judy and her fellow music/piano
teachers here in our city of La Quinta to continue to provide this valuable service that
enriches the lives of our community members.
7,:;
,
L, I ��
Deborah Westerhoff
31
March 26, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing on behalf of Mrs. Judy Rowley and all piano teachers in the Coachella
Valley, affected by this ridiculous and archaic law on the books in the city of La
Quints It came as a total shock and surprise to me that a growing prosperous, on
the move city like La Quinta,, could or would have such a law as this on its books,
and then in this day and age, when people are always expanding their knowledge,
skills, and talents in all areas, you pull it out, dust it off; and try to enforce it!!!
I am a public school teacher at one of our local schools and I know the value of
music in a student's life. It has been show►wtatistically that students who
participate in music and sports, are 10 times more h*kL*Iy to have higher grades and
not become a drop out in school or society! I know the value music has played in
my own life, that by taking music lessons from Judy that it has not only taught me
discipline in my personal life, but it has taught me to be more tolerant and patient
in teaching reading; math, and other important skills to my own students!!!
If this law is enforced first on piano teachers, then it should go right on down the
line to pool cleaners, house cleaners, painters, WxIscaping companies, etc eta
Where do you draw the line??? Money is exchanged at our homes for all of these
services. This law is utterly ridiculous and should be looked at long and hard by
the La Quinta City Council and taken off of the books.
These people are performing a wonderful service for your community and its
citizens. Your children and/or grandchildren have probably taken lessons from
one or more of these dedicated people and could you in all good consciousness, tell
them that they can no longer take piano lessons because the city you serve has an
archaic law on its books that is now being enforced and they can no longer take
lessons??? I think not
Please consider the impact this law has on thousands of people in this community,
the livelihood of these dedicated people and consider revoking it or pass a variance
on their behalf
Thank you for your consideration,
Bobbi McCue
3
SHERWYN M. WOODS, M.D., Ph.D.
Professor Emeritus
Keck School of Medicine
University of Southern California
Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Science
March 28, 2005
Tom Genovese, City Manager
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92247-1504
Dear Mr. Genovese:
50-815 Nispero
La Quinta, CA 92253-4566
760-771-9795
760-771-5766 (Fax)
I was dismayed to learned that the City of La Quinta has begun to disallow independent
music teaching in the teacher's home. In my opinion, this is extremely short-sighted
and a disservice to the community.
In addition to the long history of such teaching in both ours and most communities,
there are major benefits that accrue from the practice. It is a far safer location for
children, it helps to keep fees low and therefore benefits the lower income levels, and
it is much less intimidating to both children and adolescents as opposed to having to
go into a commercial neighborhood and building. As an experienced educator, I can
assure you that a residence location is by far the most conducive to good learning.
Since the vast majority of such teaching is on an individual basis, there are no problems
with respect to parking or undue activity. Because of my interest in music, I have
known many such teachers, in several cities. None have experienced problems with
neighbors or the city government. A variance has always been allowed so as to not
interfere with residential zoning.
I have been impressed with the efficient and thoughtful management of the City of La
Quinta, and I trust that a similar variance or exception can be made so as to encourage
this activity that is so beneficial to the community.
Sincerely,
Sherwyn M. Woods, M.D., Ph.D.
cc: Donald Adolph, Mayor
4(
Judith B. Zacher, M.D., F.A.C.S.
43-585 Monterey Avenue, Suite 7 vti Palm Desert, California 92260
Telephone (619) 773-6616 Fax (619 773-6618
March 24, 2005
City Manager
City of La Quinta, California
Dear Sir or Madam,
It has come to my attention that you are attempting to stop my
piano teacher, Mrs. Katherine Hull, from continuing to give
instruction in her home based on an antiquated and
inappropriately applied city code prohibiting home based
businesses. when I started piano lessons 55 years ago all my
teachers, and those of my own children, have given lessons in
their own homes. It is a VERY old tradition and the only
setting that provides the quiet intimacy required for the
student to make progress. What about those giving violin,
guitar, harp, horn or even painting or knitting lessons?? Are
they to be banned from the community?
I was under the impression that La Quinta, as a community
has tried to support "The Arts" but this makes the city look
ridiculous and must be changed by whatever means as soon as
possible.
Sincerely, — a, 7�
udith B. Zac r, M.D. and Neil Hauft
4
Member
AMERICAN SOCIETY OF PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGEONS, INC.
NANCY BRICARD
EMERITUS PROFESSOR OF KEYBOARD STUDIES
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
FLORA L. THORNTON SCHOOL OF MUSIC
March 28, 2005
Tom Genovese, City Manager
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92247-1504
Dear Mr. Genovese:
P.O. Box 1 41 7
LA QUINTA, CA 92247-1417
760-567-71 47
By way of introduction, I was Professor and Chair of the Keyboard Studies Department
at the University of Southern California for many years. My husband and I retired in
1998 and moved to our new home in La Quinta.
I am active in many of the piano related activities and charities in the desert, and know
many of the independent piano teachers. From them I have learned that the City is
planning to stop these teachers from teaching in their homes.
I believe this to be very short-sighted and definitely not in the best interest of the
community. There is a long history in this country of home teaching of music, and it has
persisted because it benefits both teacher and student. The residential setting helps to
form the personal bond that is so critical in working with children, teens and adults. It
is a far safer and more congenial setting to send ones children as compared with a
professional building in a commercial area of the city.
To prohibit such teaching will also be a blow to the minority and lower -income families
who will be unable to afford the necessary raise in fees if teachers are forced to rent
commercial space.
I hope that you can do something so as not to destroy this long-time practice which
benefits all concerned, including the City of La Quinta.
Sincerely,
Nancy Bricard
4:
"The ultimate challenge for American education is to place all children on
pathways toward success in school and in life. Through engagement with the
arts, young people can better begin lifelong journeys of deyeloping their
capabilities and contributing to the world around them. `Champions of Change:
The Impact of the Arts on Learning' also shows that the arts can play a vital
role in learning how to learn, an essential ability forfostering achievement and
growth throughout their lives...R provides new and important findings of actual
learning experiences involving the am ... It presents these research findings,
complete with ground -breaking... data and analysis, as articulated by leading
American educational researchers... Perhaps what makes theirfindings so
significant is that they all address ways that our nation's educational goals may
be realized through enhanced arts learning ... As these researchers have confirmed,
young people can be better prepared for the 21' century through quality learning
experiences in and through the arxs. "
-Richard Riley, Secretary of Education
The Impact of the Arts on Learning
Copyright @2000 Norman M. Weinberger and the Regents of the University of
Calif.
www.musica.uci.edu
4
Deanne Hernandez
77450 Calle Chillon
La Quinta, CA 92253
760-771-2559
30 March 2005
Mr. Donald Adolph
Mayor
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Mr. Adolph:
I was asked by Judith Trimble, my childrens' piano teacher to write you about current
zoning restrictions as they relate to independent music teachers in our city.
As a parent and resident of La Quinta, I know that zoning ordinances exist to protect our
neighborhood from excessive noise and traffic. These ordinances exist to keep our city
safe and clean.
As a business person with a licensed in -home office, I observe many licensed home
office, in home day care facilities and eveon�u�enria�l�se� mp � facilitieswith u� our
city. These all provide services for the community
greater than that of an in -home piano studio.
I can personally attest to the great benefit
As a former piano student in my youth,
children receive with the home studio of the No haven 'a home basefree from d studio could be ad
solely to the cultivation of the childs talent. g
detriment to the teacher. He/she would have to travel from home to home without the
benefit of the fine instruments and in some cases, acoustics, available with the studio.
I urge you to look a the benefits and positive impact that home based piano instructors
give the city of La Quinta and consider changing the current city ordinance.
Respectfully,
Deanne Hernandez
Cc: Kathyn Hull, Judith Trimble
4
Prosser PianoJOrgan
STEINWAY GALLERY®
March 23, 2005 4
City of LaQuinta
Attn. LaQuinta City Manager
LaQuinta, CA
Dear Sir,
It has come to my attention that at least one (if not more) private piano
teacher is in jeopardy of losing their ability to teach out of their home. As a
private business owner in Coachella Valley and an advocate for the arts you
need to know how devastating a decision like this would have on "active"
music makers in our community.
The local private music teacher is the backbone of music education in
every community in the United States. It is so important that we do
everything possible to support their efforts, and at the very least allow them
to teach out of their home. Without a doubt these teachers teach because of
their love for music and what they are doing for society, not for some terrific
financial reward.
The Coachella Valley is doing so many wonderful things to support
active music makers including the recent Virginia Waring International
Piano Competition, let's not take a huge step backward and make it
impossible for our local private music teacher to exist.
If you have any questions of me, please call me at 760-3414550.
Again, I am a local business owner and a LaQuinta resident.
Sincerely,
Kevin A. Prosser
47-720 Via Florence 1
LaQuinta, CA 92253
74-040 Highway 111 - Palm Desert, CA 92260 - Tel. 760.341.4550 - Fax 760.341.5455 4
www. prosserp i ano. com
PIANO WORKS
44489 MT6Y509
4�O 7460
60) 341
March 24, 2005
To Whom It May Concern:
This letter is in support of the piano teachers in La Quinta who are being forced out of
their Home Teaching Studios. These teachers provide a valuable service to the
community through their efforts in music education.
Studies have shown that learning to play the piano provides benefits beyond the simple
joy of music, such as improved self-esteem, poise, as well as enhanced math and
scholastic skills. Most of these piano students are the children of younger parents who
can ill afford the cost of instruction in commercial piano studios. Forcing these teachers
out of their home studios will almost certainly raise the cost of tuition above what most
families can afford.
In light of the negative impact this policy would have on these families and the
community at large, we would ask that you reverse this policy. Let these teachers get
back to providing the valuable service they provide the community.
Sincerely,
Ste . Salmacia
President
A440 Piano Works, Inc.
41
Laurea Schneider
41800 Petersfield Rd
Bermuda Dunes, CA 92203
March 28, 2005
To the La Quinta City Manager:
I am writing this letter to voice my displeasure about the recent notice my son's
piano teacher received which orders her to cease the musical instruction she offers in her
home. As an elementary school teacher in a local school district, I understand the value
of being able to teach one on one in a comfortable environment. Unfortunately due to
budget reasons, that is simply not possible in the public school system, but now I feel like
this ability is being taken away from my son in his private lessons as well. My son has
been a student of Mrs. Hull's for three years and she has been teaching him piano out of
her studio (which just happens to be her home); please do not take that piece of his life
away.
Our children need one on one instruction to help them learn more efficiently,
develop strong interpersonal skills and to encourage them to grow up to be productive
members of society. Mrs. Hull has been a tremendous mentor to our son and has helped
him to explore and develop his creativity through music as opposed to other more
destructive means. My husband and I are extremely concerned that you are telling Mrs.
Hull and other members of the La Quinta community that they can no longer tutor out of
their homes. By taking this privilege away, you are causing a great deal of hurt to your
community and the ramifications of this action will be felt for a long time. People like
Mrs. Hull add more to a community than you can imagine, and if you take that away, you
will not only be hurting the children of your community, you will also be hurting
yourself. Please reconsider your request to stop the in home teaching that works to better
your community each and every day. Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Laurea Schneider
n
March 26, 2005
To Whom it may concern,
My name is Carol Woodward & I am a La Quinta resident. I am writing this today because I am
hoping & praying that Kathryn Hull be able to continue teaching from her home. My daughter is
currently taking piano classes from her. I feel that teaching from the home is a wonderful way for
students to obtain one on one learning at an affordable price. There is not a place in the City of
La Quinta for my daughter to learn music one on one, nor a place anywhere in the valley that I
can afford.
I do understand why the City would not want residents to do business out of there homes, but I
feel there should be an exception for teachers. They are a necessity to our community and to our
children and I feel they should have a right to provide instruction out of their home to anyone
eager to learn. Teaching from the home saves costs for teachers, which in turn helps students and
parents both.
1. I believe there are more reasons why a teacher should be able to teach out of their home than
there are reasons why they shouldn't. Please take teachers into consideration when determining
an exception to the city ordinance.
Thanks for your consideration..
Sincerely,
Carol L. Woodward
45-455 Deerbrook Circle
La Quinta CA 92253
4
To: La Quinta City Manager
I'm writing on behalf of Mrs. Hull who teaches piano to my children. She
has a very nice studio set up in her house which makes for a nice
atmosphere. My children have taken piano for ten years with three different
teachers, all located in La Quinta. They all have had studios in their home,
with most lessons given in the afternoon, with no complaints from
neighbors. I also grew up taking lessons out of a home, which I feel makes
for a comfortable environment. I'd hate to see the city take away such a
great lifetime learning experience of music away from the children.
Sincerely,
Mary Shepardson
Deanne Hernandez
77-450 Calle Chillon
La Quinta, CA 92253
760-771-2559
30 March 2005
Mr. Tom Genovese
City Manager
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Mr. Genovese:
I was asked by Judith Trimble, my childrens' piano teacher to write you about current
zoning restrictions as they relate to independent music teachers in our city.
As a parent and resident of La Quinta, I know that zoning ordinances exist to protect our
neighborhood from excessive noise and traffic. These ordinances exist to keep our city
safe and clean.
As a business person with a licensed in -home office, I observe many licensed home
office, in home day care facilities and even residential senior care facilities with our fine
city. These all provide services for the community with an impact on traffic equal or
greater than that of an in -home piano studio.
As a former piano student in my youth, I can personally attest to the great benefit
children receive with the home studio of the teacher. It is free from distractions, devoted
solely to the cultivation of the childs talent. Not having a home based studio could be a
detriment to the teacher. He/she would have to travel from home to home without the
benefit of the fine instruments and in some cases, acoustics, available with the studio.
I urge you to look a the benefits and positive impact that home based piano instructors
give the city of La Quinta and consider changing the current city ordinance.
Respectfully,
Deanne Hernandez
Cc: Kathyn Hull, Judith Trimble
51
-I5-500 I k erbrook Circ /e
La Oninia (A 92253
...............................................................
March 29, 2005
Tom Genovese
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92247
Dear Sir,
1 am writing this letter in regard to our music teachers not being able to
teach music from their homes. As a resident and parent of La Quintq I
think this would be a great disservice to our great community. Our music
teachers provide a needed service to our children that is lacking in our
schools. My daughter has benefited from taking piano lessons from one of
these music teachers, that other wise she would not receive. Not only has
she benefited from learning how to read music and play the piano, but we
have notice that it goes beyond that. It has helped her improve in her
math lessons, and it provides a great after school activity. Someday, we
hope that she will be able to be of service to our church in worship and
music. So, I am asking that you would reconsider allowing our music
teachers to continue teaching from their homes. I believe as a community,
we all benefit from their services.
Sincerely,
Katherine Arias
5
March 28, 2005
Georgia Demarbiex
78730 Avenida La Fonda
La Quinta, CA 92253
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing this letter to express concern regarding the City of La Quinta's plan to not
allow piano lessons in private homes in our city. This is especially disconcerting as I
was a member of a team of individuals who obtained signatures and petitioned for the
Cityhood of La Quinta to become reality.
When I moved to La Quints in 1982 it was a rural community and one of the benefits
that the founding fathers of La Quinta envisioned was the focus on the arts. I attended
and volunteered at the First La Quints Arts Festival. I am a Registered Nurse at
Eisenhower Medical Center and I have offered my services eagerly to help the
community.
My daughter, Come is now twelve years of age and has taken piano lessons at a private
home this past year. Piano has benefited her both intellectually and artistically. She has
performed at several recitals that were held in the City of La Quinta at a beautiful private
home that was specifically designed and built for the purpose of piano lessons/recitals.
With so much focus on improving our community with the Old Town image how can the
art of music not be in the forefront of the community leaders? My daughter will no
longer be able to attend piano lessons if you proceed with banning lessons in private
homes.
I strongly implore that you reconsider your stand and hold true to the found father's
commitment to the Arts in the City of La Quints and exhibit your commitment by not
banning piano lessons in private homes.
Sincerely,
Georgia Demarbiex
Law Offices of
HINDEN, GRUESKIN, RoNDEAU & BRESLAVSKY
ATTORNEYS
IY HARRIS HINDEN
LAWRENCE S. HOFFING'-
�LD J. GRVESKIN
DIANE S. FINSTON
ILES R. RONDEAU•
RANDY S. LEVY
SRESLAVSKV
STEPHEN M. HINDEN
DIANA L. MARSTEMER
ZLATAN MUMINOVIC
EN H. EKERLING
•Aho admitted In New Yark
VIE M. IAGORIO
••Admitted la Laddem
HEARING REPRESENTATIVES
LYN K. HINDEN
JUANI MARTINEZ
Y G. FERNANDEZ
MAUREEN T. SLAW
� of LaQuinta
�uinta, CA
a Professional Corporation
81-840 Avenue 46, #201
Indio, CA 92201
(760) 342-3600
(760) 342-3371 (Fax)
March 21, 2005
Re: Zoning Ordinance/Regulation for In -Home Piano Instructors
Whom it May Concern:
OFFICE MANAGER
BETTY HERNANDEZ
OF COUNSEL
MAURY D GENTILE
RETIRED JUDGE
E-Mail: Hinden@Hinden.net
Los Angeles Office
4661 Pico Boulevard
Los Angeles, CA 90019
(323)954-1900
Kern County Office
2920'T' Street, #F-I 1
Bakersfield, CA 93301
(661)716-5555
I am a student of a piano instructor in LaQuinta who provides me with instruction in her home. I
erstand that there is a zoning ordinance/regulation which requires piano instruction to be given in students'
ies, as opposed to in the home of the instructor. I am writing this letter to support the request that piano
ructors in the City of LaQuinta be provided with the opportunity to give piano instruction in their home. As
1 a student of piano, as well as a mother who provided piano instruction to her daughter, through an
ructor who gave lessons in her own home, I can unequivocally state that instruction would not have been
Bible if the instruction had to be held in our home as opposed to the home of the instructor. The
rruptions and distractions that would have existed in our home during the time of instruction would have
le it impossible. The atmosphere provided in an instructors home is much more conducive for instruction.
only is the student guaranteed the proper equipment necessary for instruction (a piano), but the quite
ironment provided in an instructor's home make learning easier. As a side note, some students do not have
r own piano, rather practice on a keyboard. It is important in the learning process for the student to
erience playing a piano rather than a small practice keyboard.
We live in a community where the performing arts are an extremely important part of our society.
rder for our young children and adults to take advantage of instruction available for learning such arts, it is
;ssary that an appropriate learning environment be provided. If our instructors are forced to give instruction
,udent's homes, there will be a substantial decrease in instructors available. Providing piano instruction is
a very lucrative business and instructors do not make an outstanding living at the prices they must charge in
;r to teach students. If they are forced to incur the expense of driving to each and every student's home to
tide instruction, the expense will literally make it impossible for most instructors to continue in the
ession. Lessons held in instructors' homes in no way creates an imposition on anybody. As for the parking
ie home of the instructor, only one student at a time is taught. Therefore, not even neighbors are effected by
in the neighborhood.
5
Because of the convenience and appropriate learning environment created, and the ability of
actors to maintain a business in providing piano instruction in their homes,'I am a strong advocate for the
lementation of a regulation allowing piano instruction to be provided in the°homes of the instructors. It is
>lutely necessary to protect the performing arts and the ability of our young people to take advantage of
ling about the importance of music. Additionally, for me personally, it would be impossible for me to
:inue piano lessons if they were no longer held in my instructors home. Both for selfish reasons, and for my
-ern about the continuing growth in the community in the area of performing arts, I respectfully submit this
test that consideration be given to allow instructors to provide piano lessons in their homes.
truly yours,
Lagorio
54
To whom it may concern,
We as parents and students of Ms. Judy Rowley's personalized and outstanding
piano instruction are writing on behalf of our children, and requesting the continuation of
piano instruction be given strictly from Ms. Rowley's home. Our daughter, Arianna has
been a student of Ms.Rowley's for approximately six years now and has benefited
immensely from the one-on-one instruction, environment, and learning conducted from
her home; as it is an extremely conducive environment and atmosphere for the
individualized approach given to my daughter as well as the many students she serves,
both young and old alike. We believe that this top-notch instruction would be severely
impaired with a requirement to uproot the convenient and comfortable location provided
us at this time, and hopefully into the far future. In conclusion, the request of us -parents,
students,drivers etc. -is for you to grant Ms. Rowley a variance from the city zoning hall.
Please take this matter into consideration, as this affects a great many people.
Sincerely,
Danielle Lee
55