2005 07 12 PCT44t 4 4Qulata
Planning Commission Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-guinta.org
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
JULY 12, 2005
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2005-031
Beginning Minute Motion 2005-010
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 June 28, 2005.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\AgendaMdoc
V. PUBLIC HEARING:
For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must
be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission
consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested
the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time.
Any person may submit written comments to the La Quinta Planning Commission
before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to,
the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any
project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City
at, or prior to the public hearing.
A. Item ................ CONTINUED - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
Applicant.......... Stamko Development Co.
Location........... Southwest corner of Highway 111 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 and a
monument sign and building -mounted signs.
Action .............. Resolution 2005-
VI. BUSINESS ITEM: None.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Discussion regarding the tentative tract map application process
B. Review of City Council meeting of July 5, 2005.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular
Meeting to be held on July 26, 2005, at 7:00 p.m.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\AgendaMdoc
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare
that the foregoing agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of
Tuesday, July 12, 2005, was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber,
78-495 Calle Tampico, the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office,
Chamber of Commerce, and Stater Bros. 78-630 Highway 111, on Friday, July 8,
2005.
DATED: July 8, 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\AgendaW.doc
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
June 28, 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 Kirk.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, Assistant
City Attorney Michael Houston, Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer,
Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer
II. PUBLIC COMMENT:
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
A. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of June
14, 2005. There being none, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioner Daniels/Alderson to approve the minutes as submitted.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS: None.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 2005-827; a request of Colbourn -Currier -Noll
Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort Communities for consideration of
architectural and conceptual landscaping plans for four prototypical
residential plans and clubhouse for use in Tract 31732, located at the
southeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 60.
1. Staff informed the Commission the applicant had sold the property
and withdrawn his application. No action is required by the
Commission.
B. Site Development Permit 2005-828; a request of Colbourn -Currier -Noll
Architecture, Inc. for Innovative Resort Communities for consideration of
architectural and conceptual landscaping plans for four prototypical
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-28-05.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
June 28, 2005
residential plans and clubhouse for use in Tract 31733, located at the
northeast corner of Monroe Street and Avenue 61.
1. Staff informed the Commission the applicant had sold the property
and withdrawn his application. No action is required by the
Commission.
C. Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment No. 4; a request of Stamko
Development Co. for consideration of a new driveway access on Adams
Street and a design change to the internal circulation pattern, access, a
retention basin, high density housing with an affordable component, for
the property located on the east side of Adams Street, south of Auto
Centre Drive.
1. Chairman Kirk noted the applicant had requested a continuance of
the project. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Daniels/Alderson to continue Specific Plan 97-027, Amendment
No. 4 to July 26, 2005, as requested by the applicant.
Unanimously approved.
D. Environmental Assessment 2005-535 and Tentative Tract map 33336; a
request of GLC/Duc La Quinta, LLC for consideration of a request to
certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact and
development plans for the subdivision of eight acres into 23 single-family
lots and miscellaneous lots, located on the north side of Avenue 58,
1,950 feet west of Madison Street.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which was on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked the intent of the common lot. Staff
stated it was a landscape entry area, no recreational uses are
proposed.
3. Commissioner Daniels asked the purpose of Lot B. Staff stated it
was intended to be a landscaped lot. The applicant has not
submitted any landscape plans at this stage. They will be
submitted to the Architecture and Landscape Review Commission
for approval. Commissioner Daniels asked if the street
improvements will be able to be completed along Avenue 58 in
front of the "not a part" parcel. Assistant City Engineer Steve
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-28-05.doc 2
Planning Commission Minutes
June 28, 2005
Speer stated a parcel map was approved and dedications were
made for the Avenue 58 right-of-way, but not on the parcel map.
Commissioner Daniels asked if segregation off the existing lot will
cause them to avoid street improvements in front of the lot. Staff
stated that was not the intent. The City does not want 50 feet of
unimproved pavement. This tract should finish the improvements
to the eastern boundary.
4. Commissioner Ladner asked if the retention basin will be
landscaped. Staff stated it will be partially landscaped, but will be
required to meet C.V.W.D. and City landscape requirements.
5. Commissioner Alderson asked if the traffic calming bulbs would
have landscaping in the center. Staff stated yes.
6. Commissioner Daniels asked what the affect would be to shorten
the cul-de-sac bubble and extending it to 27 feet of the end of the
property. That would reduce the amount of pavement; would they
lose a lot? Staff stated it would depend on how far it would be
reduced.
7. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Shawn Milligan, representing the applicant,
stated that the landscaping plans will be submitted to staff for
approval. Lot B will be a landscape lot to create an entry
statement; the lot will be behind the gate with no public access.
Lot D, the retention basin, will have decomposed granite and rock
to break up the retention basin. Mr. Steve Kleeman, P & D
Consultants, stated that in regard to reducing the cul-de-sac, there
is a medium curb radius and in shortening it, it would reduce the
driveway area. The landscape area at the end of the cul-de-sac is
to break up the end lots and create a landscaped area.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of the applicant.
Commissioner Daniels asked if the property in the front will be
subdivided at a future date. Mr. Milligan stated, to his knowledge,
the owner, Mr. Richard Baker, does not intend to sell the property.
He will have access to enter his property through this project.
9. Chairman Kirk asked if the cul-de-sac were shortened, how would
it affect the setbacks. Mr. Kleeman explained how the house
would sit on the lot and the problems that it would cause.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-28-05.doc 3
Planning Commission Minutes
June 28, 2005
10. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer noted a phrase would need to
be added to Condition 53.A.1.a. add after "tentative map
boundary" add "and Parcel Map 33609". Commissioner Quill
asked that the landscaping against the Parcel Map be added to
that condition as well.
11. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment, there
being none, the public participation portion of the hearing was
closed and open for Commission discussion.
12. It was moved by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-029, recommending
certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental
impact for Environmental Assessment 2005-535, as
recommended:
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Daniels, Ladner, Quill and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
13. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Alderson/Ladner to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-030, recommending
approval of Tentative Tract Map 33336, as recommended and
amended:
a. Condition 53.A.1.a. add after "tentative map boundary" add
"and Parcel Map 33609" and landscaping requirements.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Daniels, Ladner, Quill and
Chairman Kirk. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Sign Application 2005-892; a request of Imperial Sign Company for
Lamppost Pizza and Backstreet Brewery for consideration of a sign for a
5,0000 square foot restaurant/brewery, located on the north side of
Highway 1 1 1, east of Washington, within the One -Eleven La Quinta
Shopping Center.
1. Chairman Kirk opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-28-05.doc 4
Planning Commission Minutes
June 28, 2005
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Kirk asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked staff to clarify what signs the
applicant was requesting. Staff clarified one sign on each
elevation and an extra sign on the east and west elevations.
Commissioner Alderson asked if the signs were two dimensional.
Staff stated it was recommended they be modified to give some
dimension.
3. Commissioner Quill asked if these were two separate operating
businesses within one building. Staff stated the brewery is
separate from the dining, but in one building.
4. Commissioner Daniels asked if there was a door between the two
businesses. Staff stated the applicant would need to answer that
question.
5. Chairman Kirk asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Jim Engle, Imperial Sign Company, spoke on
behalf of the applicant. In regard to the operation of the business,
he is not familiar with it. It is his understanding they are different
businesses, but operate separately. Staff displayed the building
plans and discussed the building layout. Community Development
Director Doug Evans stated this is becoming a common practice to
share facilities.
6. Commissioner Daniels asked if either company had three
dimensional signs on other facilities they own. Mr. Engle stated he
did not know. He would suggest pushing the letters out1 /2 to 3/4
of an inch on the cam sign to give the sign more body.
7. Chairman Kirk asked if the brewery icon was moved from the
building to the silo. Mr. Engle stated the silo already has a design
on it. It is not a sign that identifies the business.
8. Chairman Kirk asked if there was any other public comment.
There being none, the public participation was closed and open for
Commission discussion.
9. Commissioner Daniels questioned the "initials" on the silo being a
part of the signage. Staff stated it is a decoration to make it
appear to be an old silo. It is not intended to advertise the
business.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-28-05.doc 5
Planning Commission Minutes
June 28, 2005
10. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-009, approve Sign Application 2005-
892, as recommended and amended:
a. The sign letters shall be pushed out 1 /2 to 3/4 of an inch to
give the sign more body
Unanimously approved.
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Review of City Council meeting of June 7, 2005.
B. Department report: Community Development Director Doug Evans
introduced a new member of the staff, Andrew Mogensen, Associate
Planner.
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Ladner/Daniels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on July 12, 2005, at 7:00 p.m. This
meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:47 p.m. on June 28, 2005.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\6-28-05.doc 6
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JULY 12, 2005
CASE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A MULTI -TENANT RETAIL
STORE CONSISTING OF 23,000 SQUARE FEET AND A
MONUMENT SIGN AND BUILDING MOUNTED SIGNS
LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 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 A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR THE
CENTRE AT LA QUINTA COMMERCIAL CENTER, SPECIFIC
PLAN 97-029, AMENDMENT NO. 3. NO CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS EXIST, NOR ANY NEW
INFORMATION IS PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER
THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE
SECTION 21166
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH:
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
SOUTH:
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
EAST:
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
WEST:
REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (RC)
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
Property Description
The currently vacant project site, located at the southwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and
Dune Palms Road, consists of 2.01 acres (Attachment 1). The project site is within
the Centre at La Quinta Specific Plan 87-029, Amendment No. 3 adopted by the City
Council on December 21, 2004.
Applications Under Consideration
The request is for approval of a Site Development Permit to construct a multi -tenant
retail building consisting of 23,000 square feet and building -mounted signs and a
monument sign (Parcels 1 of Parcel Map 33588) within the commercial center.
E,SUMWMA
The "L" shaped building takes access from Dunes Palms Road with vehicle access
being a right -in only on the east side of the property to a driveway leading to the
parking lot (Attachment 2). The parking lot has a driveway connection with the
buildings and parking lot to the west. The buildings are proposed to have storefront
entrances oriented generally towards Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road. The parking
lot, with a total of 128 spaces, is located to the north and east of the building.
Parking lot lighting is proposed to match the pole heights (24 feet) and fixtures with
the adjacent parking lot for the existing multi -tenant buildings. Staff has added a
Condition of Approval that requires the location, access and orientation of the trash
enclosure to be oriented towards the driveway and not to the parcel to the south
which will be a high traffic volume driveway (Sam's Club fueling station). In addition,
this condition requires the design of the gate and enclosure wall to be submitted for
approval by the Community Development Director.
With the City's Highway 1 1 1 Improvement Project, the City bears the cost of widening
Highway 111 from the centerline to the curb face; the applicant is responsible for
payment of a pro rated share to the developer of Parcels 2 and 3 of Parcel Map No.
33588 (Sam's Club), for Dune Palms Road street improvements along the easterly
edge of this proposal (Parcel 1).
If development of this Site Development Permit precedes the City's Highway 111
Improvement Project and/or the Dune Palms Road improvements by the developer of
Parcels 2 and 3, the applicant shall modify the existing traffic signal at the Highway
1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road intersection for a dual left turn lane for northbound Dune
Palms Road traffic to westbound Highway 1 1 1 and any street improvements required
by Caltrans. The traffic signal modification shall be performed concurrently with street
improvements and may be multi -staged depending on the timing of the improvements.
P:\Reports - M2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC staff prt SDP 2005-835.doc
Architectural Design
The proposed architectural design, reviewed by the ALRC is the same architectural
style as the multi -tenant retail shops to the west of this property. The proposed
building is a flat roof with slight variations in the parapet roof heights from 24 to 27
feet. The proposed building utilizes anodized aluminum store fronts with a stone
veneer, blue metal accent beams, and "Sky Blue" fabric awnings that rise to 34 feet.
The plaster colors include light tans and off-whites.
Landscape Plan
The proposed landscaping plan identifies a palette of plant material consisting of
shrubs, groundcover, and trees for the on -site parking planters and the building
planters along Highway 1 1 1. The proposed landscaping plan is consistent with the
landscape concept in the Specific Plan and the Highway 111 Design Guidelines. Water
efficient landscaping materials, including native plants are provided.
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW:
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of May 4, 2005 (Attachment 3). The
Committee agreed with the staff report that architectural variety within the Center,
without substantially changing the project floor plans and building structure, should be
achieved. Increasing the size of canopies and columns, additional wainscoting, and
other accent enhancements will not change the building footprint or the tenant space
options. The Committee adopted Minute Motion 2005-014 recommending approval of
the project subject to the following conditions which have been incorporated into this
review:
• Eliminate the architectural blue metal accent beams.
• Provide architectural detailing including deeper window recesses and more
substantial canopies/ trellises, and a trim detail along the edge of the parapet.
• Add a wainscot of stacked stone to add interest to the elevations.
After the ALRC meeting, staff received modified elevations from the applicant
responding to the ALRC comments and conditions. The modified elevations, in your
attachments, are in addition to the elevations reviewed by the ALRC. The applicant is
proposing to change colors to be consistent with the new Goodyear building color
palette providing deeper richer colors. In addition, the applicant has added green metal
horizontal cross beams matching the color and accent treatment for the Goodyear
store. Three architectural green metal accent beams, 34 feet in height, remain on the
building. Canopy colors match the proposed color of the metal beams and provide
some relief to a flat front elevation. More substantial canopies have not been
addressed. The proposed building facade is flat with the horizontal metal beams
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC staff prt SDP 2005-835.doc
extending out four feet; columns extend out two feet, and canopies extending out four
feet. Sidewalks adjacent to the building are proposed to be13 feet wide.
Staff has added a Condition of Approval requiring a redesign of the front elevations to
create a pedestrian arcade by bringing all the store front columns out by at least three
feet and extending the canopies over the sidewalk by at least seven feet to create a
pedestrian walkway arcade. Stacked stone is proposed for the columns at three
locations on the building (the largest tenant spaces which also have the higher
parapets) which addresses, in part, the ALRC wainscoting condition. Staff has added
a Condition of Approval to require stacked stone wainscoting on all columns on the
building.
Sign Program
The proposed Sign Program is the same as the Sign Program for the existing adjacent
multi -tenant buildings in the commercial Center. Sign length for each tenant is
proposed to be 70% of the lineal store front; sign size is proposed to be one and one
half (1 %2) square feet of the lineal frontage not to exceed 100 square feet. Letters are
proposed to be individual internally illuminated.
The proposed style of the monument sign structure will match the existing monument
structure for Super Wal-Mart. The structure, with a rock like appearance, is proposed
to be eight feet in height and approximately 16 feet in length. Proposed are six tenant
(double faced) signs, with each sign area/panel proposed at 19" X 63" or 8.31 square
feet for a total sign area of 49.86 square feet (99.72 square feet double faced).
Letters are proposed to be internally illuminated sign cabinets with push through letters
which give the appearance of individual letters.
The existing monument sign identifies the two major tenants, Super Wal-mart and
Marshall's in the Centre. The proposed monument sign is not in scale with the project
size; staff has added a Condition of Approval to redesign the monument structure,
proposed at 8' x16', by reducing the overall size by 40% and limit the number of sign
panels to three tenants.
COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES:
The applicant's request was sent to City departments and affected public agencies on
April 29, 2005, requesting comments be returned by May 13, 2003. All applicable
comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on May 14, 2005.
All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice.
A
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC staff prt SDP 2005-835.doc
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The findings necessary to approve the Site Development Permit can be made provided
the recommended Conditions of Approval are imposed per Section 9.210.010 and
Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Code as noted in the attached Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2005-_, approving Site Development
Permit 2005- 835 for development plans of a 23,000 square foot multi- tenant
retail building, subject to conditions.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Project Location Exhibit
2. Site Plan and Elevations (with proposed modified elevations)
3. Minutes of the ALRC meeting of May 4, 2005
Prepared by:
Fred Baker, AIC157'_..._
Principal Planner
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC staff prt SDP 2005-835.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A MULTI -TENANT RETAIL
STORE OF 23,000 SQUARE FEET
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
APPLICANT: STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
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 and continued
said hearing to the 14th day of June, 2005, and again to the 121h day of July, 2005 to
review building elevations, site and landscape plans for a multi -tenant retail store of
23,000 square feet on 2.01 acres; generally located at the southwest corner of
Highway 111, and Dune Palms Road, more particularly described as:
PARCEL 1 OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 33588
WHEREAS, the Architectural 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 building elevations, site and landscape plans for a multi -tenant retail store
23,000 square feet in size on 2.01 acres, and approved the plans by adoption of
Minute Motion 2005-014.
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 Mitigated Negative
Declaration of environmental impact for the Centre at La Quinta Commercial Center,
Specific Plan 97-029, Amendment No. 3 on December 21, 2004. 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 2005-835.
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 (Chapter 2), provided conditions are met.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC RESO SDP 2005-835.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-835
Stamko Development Co.
Adopted: July 12, 2005
2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Centre
at La Quinta Specific Plan, 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. supplements, replaces, or are consistent with
those in the City's Zoning Code.
4. The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the commercial
development in the area, and accommodates site generated traffic at area
intersections.
5 The landscape design of the proposed project, as conditioned by the ALRC,
complements the building and the surrounding commercial area in that it
enhances the aesthetic and visual quality of the area and uses a high quality of
materials.
6. The architectural design of the project, as conditioned by the ALRC, is
compatible with surrounding commercial buildings and development in the
general vicinity in that it is similar in scale; the building materials provided are a
durable, aesthetically pleasing, low maintenance, with a blend of surfaces and
textures.
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 2005-835 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 12' day of July, 2005, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC RESO SDP 2005-835.doc
Planning Commission Resolution 2005-
Site Development Permit 2005-835
Stamko Development Co.
Adopted: July 12, 2005
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
TOM KIRK, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
DOUGLAS R. EVANS
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC RESO SDP 2005-835.doc
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL — RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
GENERAL
1. The developer 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, or any Final Map recorded hereunder. 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.
2. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City,
the developer shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the
following agencies:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
• SunLine Transit Agency
• SCAQMD Coachella Valley
• Caltrans
The developer 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 developer 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
developer; and who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality
Control Board's ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the developer's Notice of Intent
(" NOI"), prior to the issuance of a grading or site construction permit by the
City.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC 1
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
3. The developer shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater
Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water),
LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources
Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ.
A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of
land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than
one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that
encompasses more than one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be
required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP").
The developer or design professional can obtain the California
Stormwater Quality Association SWPPP template at
www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation.
B. The developer'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 developer 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 developer'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 developer 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.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
4. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at
the time of issuance of building permit(s).
PROPERTY RIGHTS
5. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the developer shall acquire or confer
easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper
functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include
irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for
emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of
essential improvements.
6. The developer shall offer for dedication on the Final Map all public street right-
of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code,
applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer.
7. No public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development.
8. The developer shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-
of-ways as follows:
A. Highway 1 1 1 (Major Arterial - State Highway) - 50-foot from the R/W-
P/L.
B. Dune Palms Road (Primary Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L.
The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited
to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks,
the developer shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on
the Final Map.
9. Direct vehicular access to Dune Palms Road along the Site Development Permit
boundary is restricted, except for those access points identified on the approved
Site Development Permit site plan, or as otherwise conditioned in these
conditions of approval. The vehicular access restriction shall be shown on the
recorded final parcel map.
4
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC ;
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
10. Direct vehicular access to Highway 1 1 1 is prohibited. Ancillary vehicular access
to Highway 1 1 1 from this Site Development Permit site shall be through the
signalized intersection at La Quinta Drive and existing access driveways for
Parcel Map No. 30420.
11. The developer 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 developer shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any
portion of the subject property between the date of approval of the Site
Development Permit and the date of recording of any Final Map, unless such
easement is approved by the City Engineer.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as
"engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refers to persons currently certified or licensed
to practice their respective professions in the State of California.
13. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the
provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC.
14. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review
and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for each
line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum
scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing.
Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is
desired. Note, the developer may be required to prepare other improvement
plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and
utility purveyors.
A.
On -Site Rough Grading Plan
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
B.
PM 10 Plan
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
C.
SWPPP
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
D. Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan
1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
E. Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan 1 " = 40' Horizontal
The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan sheet(s) (drawn
at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design
in the combined parkway and landscape setback area.
F.
Traffic Signal Modification Plan
1 "
= 20'
Horizontal
G.
Off -Site Median Landscaping Plans
1 "
= 40'
Horizontal
NOTE: D through F to be submitted concurrently. Caltrans approval required for
all work within Highway 1 1 1 right of way.
H. Precise Grading Non -Residential Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal
Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not
listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to
commencing plan preparation.
All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show
all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project
limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions.
All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit
Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue
RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public Works Standard Plans
and/or as approved by the Engineering Department.
"Rough Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall
& Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-
foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions.
The developer 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
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
the Engineering Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan
when it is submitted for plan checking.
"Precise Grading Non -Residential" 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.
15. The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for
elements of construction which can be accessed via the Online Engineering
Library at the City website (www.la-quinta.org). Navigate to the Public Works
Department home page and look for the Online Engineering Library hyperlink.
16. The developer 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 developer shall update the AutoCAD files in order
to reflect the as -built conditions.
Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD
format, or a file format that can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City
Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
17. Depending on the timing of the development of the Site Development Permit,
and the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the developer may be
required to:
A. Construct certain off -site improvements.
B. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement
of its costs by others.
C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously constructed that are
considered to be an obligation of this site development permit.
D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others.
E. To agree to any combination of these means, as the City may require.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The
developer shall complete Off -Site Improvements in the first phase of
construction.
In the event that any of the improvements on Dune Palms Road required for this
development are constructed by the City or other developer of Tentative Parcel
Map No. 33588, the developer shall, prior to the approval of the issuance of
any permit related thereto, reimburse the City or other developer of Tentative
Parcel Map No. 33588, for the costs of such improvements.
18. Should the developer 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, and/or withhold other approvals related to the development of the
project.
GRADING
19. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading
Improvements), LQMC.
20. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes,
the developer shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer.
21. To obtain an approved grading permit, the developer 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.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
The developer 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 developer 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. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating
terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F)
except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum
slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for
the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not
exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first
six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of
sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within
the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to
the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen
inches (18") behind the curb.
24. The developer shall abandon any existing wells within the Site Development
Permit boundaries as approved by CVWD and the City Engineer.
25. 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, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in
these Conditions of Approval.
26. 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, the developer shall submit the
proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance
finding review.
27. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the developer shall
provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or
surveyor.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved
grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if
any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad
soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if
submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
28. Stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the
development or transported to an off -site facility as approved by the City
Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent
public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour
event producing the greatest total run off.
The developer shall design to contain all stormwater in reinforced concrete
underground retention storage within the parking area as approved by the City
Engineer. Additionally, the developer's design professional shall design the
underground retention storage with special consideration to the proposed Gas
Station's underground gasoline storage tanks (Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No.
33588) per Riverside Flood Control and Water Conservation District guidelines
and incorporate necessary BMPs in each design to ensure that gasoline leakage
and spillages do not become entrapped in the underground retention storage.
29. If above ground retention is directed by the City for the site development, the
developer shall design for the retention basins to comply with the provisions of
Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More
specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be
retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer. Additionally, the 100 year stormwater shall be retained within the
interior street right of way. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the
centerline of adjacent public streets and include any resulting uncaptured
tributary stormwater flows. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour
or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off.
In design of retention basins, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches
per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the developer
provides site specific data indicating otherwise.
Nuisance water shall be retained on site and shall be disposed of in a trickling
sand filter and leach field or equivalent system approved by the City Engineer.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain surges of up to 3
gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. The sand
filter and leach field shall be designed to contain nuisance water surges from
landscape area, residential unit, and off -site street nuisance water. Flow from
adjacent well sites shall be designed for retention area percolation by separate
infiltration system approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter design shall be
per La Quinta Standard 370 with the equivalent of 137.2 gph of water feed per
sand filter to accept the abovementioned nuisance water requirements. Leach
line requirements are 1.108 feet of leach line per gph of flow.
30. 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.
31. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries,
levels or frequencies in any area outside the development.
32. 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.
33. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received
and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief
route.
UTILITIES
34. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities),
LQMC.
35. The developer 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.
36. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development,
and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles
are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground.
37. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For
installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the developer shall comply
with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City
Engineer.
The developer shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for
approval by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
38. The developer 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.
39. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
11 Highway 1 1 1 (Major Arterial - State Highway; 140' R/W):
Per proposed Street Improvement Plans for Highway 111, the City
of La Quinta will widen the south side of the street along all
frontage adjacent to the Site Development Permit boundary to its
ultimate width on the south side as specified in the General Plan
and as approved by CALTRANS. The south curb face shall be
located fifty eight feet (58') south of the centerline, except at
locations where additional street width is needed to accommodate:
a) A deceleration/right turn only lane on Highway 1 1 1 at the
Dune Palms Road intersection per CALTRANS requirements.
Required improvements of this site development permit in the
Highway 1 1 1 right or way and/or adjacent landscape setback area
include:
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
b) Eight -foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering
sidewalk shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that
utilizes concave and convex curves with respect to the curb
line that either touches the back of curb or approaches
within five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250
feet. The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50
and 300 feet, and at each point of reverse curvature, the
radius should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic
layout. The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape
setback lot and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall
at intervals not to exceed 250 feet.
C) If development of this Site Development Permit precedes
the City's Highway 111 Improvement project and/or the
Dune Palms Road improvements by the developer of Parcels
2 and 3, the applicant shall modify the existing traffic signal
at the Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road intersection for a
dual left turn for northbound Dune Palms Road traffic to
westbound Highway 111 and any street improvements
required by Caltrans. The traffic signal modification shall be
performed concurrently with street improvements and may
be multi -staged depending on the timing of said
improvements.
2► Dune Palms Road (Primary Arterial; 1 10' R/W option):
The applicant shall pay its pro rated share to the developer of
Parcels 2 and 3 of Parcel Map No. 33588 for street improvements
along the Parcel 1 easterly boundary to include widening the west
side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Site
Development Permit boundary to its ultimate width on the west
side as specified in the General Plan and the requirements of these
conditions. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway
pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural
county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design
standard. The west curb face shall be located forty three feet
(431 west of the centerline, except at locations where additional
street width is needed to accommodate:
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
a) A 250-foot long dual left turn lane for northbound Dune
Palms Road at the Highway 1 1 1 intersection. The west curb
face shall be located forty four feet (44') west of the
centerline with a variable transition of 200 feet.
b) A deceleration/right turn only lane on Dune Palms Road at
the Parcel 1 driveway (Driveway #5). The west curb face
shall be located of fifty one (51') west of the centerline and
length to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the
developer by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering
Bulletin # 03-08 however at a minimum 100 feet long plus
a variable dedication of an additional 50 feet.
c) An 18 - foot wide raised landscaped median along the entire
boundary of the Site Development Permit plus variable
width as needed to accommodate a dual left turn for the
north bound Dune Palms Road traffic turning left to
westbound Highway 1 1 1. The length shall be 250 feet with
a 100-foot (50 to 1) taper.
Required improvements of this site development permit in
the Dune Palms Road right or way and/or adjacent
landscape setback area include:
d) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk
shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes
concave and convex curves with respect to the curb line
that either touches the back of curb or approaches within
five feet of the curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet.
The sidewalk curvature radii should vary between 50 and
300 feet and at each point of reverse curvature, the radius
should change to assist in creating the arrhythmic layout.
The sidewalk shall meander into the landscape setback lot
and approach within 5 feet of the perimeter wall at intervals
not to exceed 250 feet.
The developer shall extend improvements beyond the a� boundaries
to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading;
traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or
dimensions of streets and sidewalks).
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus
turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved
construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be
determined by the City Engineer.
The developer 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 (Low Traffic Areas)
3.0"
a.c./4.5"
c.a.b.
Parking Lot (High Traffic Areas)
4.5"
a.c /5.5"
c.a.b.
Primary Arterial
4.5"
a.c./6.0"
c.a.b.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
40. The developer 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 developer shall not schedule construction operations until mix
designs are approved.
41. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. The driveway to this Site Development Permit to Dune Palms Road
(approximately 310' south of Highway 1 1 1): Right turn in and right turn
out movements are permitted. Left turn in and left turn movements
prohibited.
42. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs,
markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and
sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required.
P:\Reports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
43. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by
the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking
areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS
44. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and in
particular the following:
A. The parking stall and aisle widths and the double hairpin stripe parking
stall design.
B. ADA accessibility routes shall be a minimum of 4 feet and shall be at 90
and 180 degree angles to adjacent buildings in Parcel Map No. 30420
and public streets.
C. Cross slopes should be a maximum of 2% where ADA accessibility is
required including accessibility routes between buildings.
D. Building access points shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans to
better evaluate ADA accessibility issues.
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.
CONSTRUCTION
45. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the
buildings have access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall
include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and signage.
LANDSCAPING
46. The developer shall comply with Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) &
13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans), LQMC.
47. The developer shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention
basins, common lots and parking areas.
PARepons - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
48. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape
architect.
49. The developer 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 developer
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.
50. 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.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
51. The developer shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet
with the approval of the City Engineer.
52. The developer shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such
other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with
which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate
construction supervision.
53. The developer shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements,
sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program,
but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction
materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and
other applicable regulations.
54. Upon completion of construction, the developer 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 developer
shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City,
revised to reflect the as -built conditions.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
MAINTENANCE
55. The developer shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance), LQMC.
56. The developer shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual
maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access
drives, and sidewalks.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
57. The developer 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 developer makes application for plan check and
permits.
58. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the
Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at
the time of issuance of building permit(s).
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPE COMMITTEE
59. Building plans shall eliminate the horizontal (blue / blue green) metal accent
beams.
60. Provide architectural detailing that includes deeper window recesses and more
substantial canopies/ trellises, and a trim detail along the edge of the parapet.
61. Add a wainscot of stacked stone to add interest to the front elevations.
FIRE MARSHALL
62. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be spaced every 330 feet and shall be
located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the
buildings as measured along outside travel ways.
63. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the
side that the fire hydrant is on, to identify fire hydrant locations.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
64. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 2500 gpm
and the actual fire flow from any two adjacent hydrants shall be 1500 gpm for
a 2-hour duration at 20-psi residual operating pressure.
65. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or
larger to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 Standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be
submitted to the Fire Department.
66. Fire Department connections (FDC) shall be not less than 25 feet nor more than
50 feet from a fire hydrant and shall be located on the front side of the
buildings. FDC's and PIV's may not be located at the rear of buildings. Note,
also that FDC's must be at least 25 feet from the building and may not be
blocked by landscaping, parking stalls or anything that may restrict immediate
access.
67. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run
concurrent with the City plan check.
68. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, fdc, etc.) shall be
submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building
permit.
69. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and
accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building
material being placed on an individual lot.
70. Fire Department street access shall come to within 150 feet of all portions of
the 1 st. floor of all buildings, by path of exterior travel. Turning radiuses shall
be no less than 38 feet outside.
71. Any commercial operations that produce grease -laden vapors will require a
Hood/duct system for fire protection (restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.).
72. 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.
73. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial building and/or suite. (Contact the
Fire Department for an application.)
74. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stemko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2005-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-835
STAMKO DEVELOPMENT CO.
ADOPTED: JULY 12, 2005
75. Any submissions to the fire department are the responsibility of the applicant.
SHERIFF DEPARTMENT
76. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. Prior to
issuance of a building permit, applicant shall review building plans with the
Sheriff's Department regarding Vehicle Code requirements, defensible space,
and other law enforcement and public safety concerns. All questions regarding
the Sheriff's Department should be directed to the Deputy at (760) 863-895.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
77. The Community Development Director shall approve the final location and
access orientation to trash enclosures as well as the gate/enclosure wall design.
78. The applicant shall submit for Community Development Director approval, a
revised design of the monument structure, proposed at 8' x16', by reducing the
overall size by 40% and limiting the number of signs panels to three tenants.
79. The applicant shall submit for Community Development Director approval,
revised elevations showing stacked stone wainscoting on all columns of the
building. In addition the applicant shall redesign the front elevations to create a
pedestrian walkway adding columns and canopies, increase awning depth, or a
combination of architectural elements to create minimum architectural relief
three to seven feet in depth.
PAReports - PC\2005\7-12-05\Stamko SDP 05-835\cond PC COA SDP2005-835.DOC
ATTACHMENT #1
►r ,,, SITE
AVENUE '8
PROJECT LOCATION MAP
ATTACHMENT #3
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
May 4, 2005 10:00 a.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee
was called to order at 10:10 a.m. by Principal Planner Fred Baker.
B. Committee Members present: Frank Christopher, Bill Bobbitt, and
David Thorns.
C. Staff present: Principal Planners Stan Sawa and Fred Baker, Associate
Planner Wallace Nesbit and Exedutive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of April 6, 2005.
There being no changes, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members Chris�'pher/Bobbitt to approve the Minutes as submitted.
Unanimously approved.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Site Development Permit 2005-835; a request of Stamko
Development Co. for consideration of architectural and conceptual
landscaping plans for a multi -tenant retail store consisting of 23,000
square feet for the property located at the southwest corner of
Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road within the Centre at La Quinta
commercial development.
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 Chris Clarke, Russ
Beckner, and Dave Street, the architect, who gave a
presentation on the project.
GAMDOMALM54-05 ALRC.doc
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
May 4, 2005
2. Committee Member Thorns stated he was concerned about this
type of building at this corner. The building at this corner
should have a lot of attention. The "spoilers" that stick up need
to be removed. Ms. Clarke stated it was an element that was
carried throughout the Center; however, it could be removed.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he does not like the boxy
look of the entire Center as well as the steel element. He does
agree however, they cannot change the theme in midstream.
4. Committee Member Christopher stated that as far as
streetscape, it is a poor design. The question is whether or not
to carry on a bad design or change it. He suggested stack
stone or something be added to give it character. The design
criteria have been established with a design this Committee
does not like, but staff's suggestions for this building are good.
He is not opposed to the colors on the accent steel element, but
the streetscape of the building needs to be enhanced. He
agrees with staff's recommendations.
5. Committee Member Thorns agreed the horizontal blue spoilers
should be eliminated.
6. Committee Member Bobbitt agreed with the addition of
wainscot or stack stone. Staff stated it was not their intention
to change the footprint, just to add some detail.
7. Ms. Clarke gave a description of the proposed landscaping to
enhance the east, west, and south elevations.
8. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about Figure #13 on the
landscape plans. There appear to be three tree wells; why was
the fourth left out? Ms. Clarke stated she didn't know, but
would ask the landscape architect.
9. There being no further questions of the applicant, it was moved
and seconded by Committee Member Christopher//Thoms to
adopt Minute Motion 2005-014 recommending approval of Site
Development Permit 2005-835, as recommended by staff and
amended:
a. Deeper window recesses, bringing out the awnings;
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 2
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.
Unanimously approved.
B. site Development Permit 2005-827; 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 front- the curb. Mr. Kellogg stated CVWD requires
them to use a header board to keep the water from running into
the street. Commit ee Member Bobbitt recommended the pits
be eliminated. Also, he Buxus Microphilla Japonica will not do
well. The date palm should not be used in any pedestrian
traffic area. The Jacaranda and Ulmus parriflora will be
deciduous and he would not recommend them.
ti
3. Committee Member Thom* asked that the Jacaranda be
eliminated. Also, the frond yard 18-inch strip should be
redesigned to be meandering an`c' widened if they are required to
keep it with DG and some grouncvover in the widened areas.
4. Committee Member Christopher com%nended the redesign of the
units. He has no problem with the tw,t story street front on the
one-story, because the garage takes up too much of the
elevation. He would suggest radiusing ' ie top of the garage
door sill on every third one-story unit. \
5. Committee Member Thorns noted the one plaq is very weak
from the street. The applicant gave a descripti6o of the unit
G:\WPDOCS\ALRC\5-4-05 ALRC.doc 3