2001 10 09 PCT4ht °F 4Qum&
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
OCTOBER 9, 2001
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2001-125
Beginning Minute Motion 2001-017
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
11. 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 of the regular meeting on September 25,
2001.
B. Department Report
V. PRESENTATIONS: None
PC/AGIENDA
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Item ...................
CONTINUED - SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-048 AND
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29858 (PHASE 2)
AMENDMENTS - PALMILLA
Applicant...........
Forrest K. Haag for RJT Homes, Inc.
Location............
Southwest corner of Avenue 50 and Jefferson
Street
Request .............
To modify development standards for building
setbacks and on -site retention basins for a private
residential development on approximately 73 acres.
Action ...............
Resolution 2001- , Resolution 2001-
B. Item ................... CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-063
Applicant........... Sprint PCS
Location............ 46-600 Adams Street, Storage USA
Request ............. Installation of a 68-foot high wireless antenna
camouflaged as a palm tree (Monopalm prototype
design) and related ground mounted equipment for
cellular telephone service within a self -storage
facility on 3.77 acres
Action ............... Resolution 2001-
C. Item ................... VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-010
Applicant........... Edwin G. Cosek (Andrew's Bar and Grill)
Location............ 78-121 Avenida La Fonda (formerly Chez Monique)
Request ............. Review of exterior remodeling plans for an existing
one story commercial building to include outdoor
patio dining, landscaping, signs and vehicle parking
areas on 0.17 acres
Action ............... Resolution 2001-
D. Item ................... VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-012
Applicant........... Santa Rosa Plaza, LLC
Location............ The north side of Calle Tampico, between Desert
Club Drive and Avenida Bermudas
Request ............. Review of development plans for 18 buildings
("Casitas" units) on a portion of the 14 acre
Embassy Suites site.
Action ............... Resolution 2001-
PC/AGENDA
E. Item ................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
Applicant........... Madison Development LLC
Location............ Northwest corner of Washington Street and
Highway 1 1 1, within Point Happy Commercial
Center
Request ............. Review of development plans for one retail building
Action ............... Resolution 2001-
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Item ...................
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-671,
AMENDMENT #1
Applicant...........
Toll Brothers (Gary Lemon)
Location............
In the Norman Golf Course, on the north side of
Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street
Request .............
Review of architectural plans for one new
prototype residential unit
Action ...............
Minute Motion 2001-
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
X. ADJOURNMENT
PC/AGENDA
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
September 25, 2001 7:00 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Kirk to lead the flag
salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, Robert
Tyler, and Chairman Jacques Abels.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant
City Attorney John Ramirez, Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Senior
Engineer Steve Speer, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, and Executive
Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT:
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
September 11, 2001. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 3, Item 10
be corrected to read, "....for Plan 1..."; Item 11, "...reduce the height of
Plan 2... "; Page 8, Item 3, "...to match up with the Stater Bros.
Market."; Page 11, Item 18, "...requiring Mr. Shovlin to change..."; Page
14, Item 2, "...asked if the existing abandoned two story house..."; Page
19, Item 26.a. "With the removal of the 40 acre parcel at the southwest
corner of Madison Street and Avenue 60 from the application." There
being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Robbins/Butler to approve the minutes as corrected.
Unanimously approved.
B. Department Report: None.
V. PRESENTATIONS: None.
G:\WPDOCS\PC9-25-01.wpd 1
Planning Commission Minutes
September 25, 2001
VI. PUBLIC HEARING:
It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to reorganize the Agenda
to take Public Hearing Item "C" and Business Item "A" before Public Hearing Item "B".
Unanimously approved.
A. Capital Improvement Project 2001-694; a request of the City for review
of building elevations and landscape plans for the La Quinta Community
Park to be located at the northwest corner of Westward Ho Drive and
Adams Street.
1. Staff requested this item be continued to October 23, 2001.
2. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Tyler/Robbins to continue this application to
October 23, 2001. Unanimously approved.
B. Specific Plan 2000-048. Amendment #1: a request of Forrest K. Haag for
RJT Homes, Inc. to modify development standards and text information
for a private residential development on no more than 178 houses on
approximately 73 acres located at the southwest corner of Avenue 50
and Jefferson Street.
1. Staff informed the Commission that a request had been received
from the applicant requesting this item be continued to October 9,
2001.
2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to
continue this application to October 9, 2001. Unanimously
approved.
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Street Name Change 2001-012; a request of Lake La Quinta
Communities to set a public hearing date to initiate a street name change
for Via Trieste within Lake La Quinta.
1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Planning Manager
Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff
report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
GAWPD0CS\PC9-25-01.wpd 2
Planning Commission Minutes
September 25, 2001
2. There being no questions of staff or public comment, it was
moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to adopt
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-121 declaring the Planning
Commission's intention to hold a public hearing on Street Name
Change 2001-012 on November 13, 2001.
VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS - CONTINUED
B. Environmental Assessment 96-328 Addendum Specific Plan 96-028
Amendment #2 and Site Development Permit 2001-709; a request of
Bart Rinker for certification of an Addendum to Environmental
Assessment 96-328; Specific Plan Amendment to allow 23,184 square
feet of retail space on 1.88 acres currently approved for 1 1,010 square
feet of retail space and revising the total Specific Plan building area to
118,884 square feet; and consideration of development plans for a
23,184 square foot retail building.
1. Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Associate Planner Wally Nesbit presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Kirk stated he could not find where turf was
identified on the conceptual plan, but did find it in the text and he
assumes all the green on the conceptual plan is turf. Staff stated
the turf was not denoted on the conceptual plan, but they are
requesting to place their retention in the two areas identified.
There would be minimal retention in the Dune Palms Road area.
The majority of the retention would be to the east side retention
basin to comply with the Zoning Code standards. Any further
explanation could be given by the application. Commissioner Kirk
asked about the Mitigation Monitoring Plan as to whether staff had
the Mitigation Monitoring Plan with the compliance check marks
for this project and the dates it was checked. Staff stated it
would be in the file. Commissioner Kirk asked who was
responsible for retaining the record and who was monitoring the
Mitigation Monitoring Plan. Staff noted it was the responsibility
of the case planner. It is not done on the forms, but the
information is kept in the case file. Planning Manager Christine di
G:\WPD0CS\PC9-25-01.wpd 3
Planning Commission Minutes
September 25, 2001
lorio stated they are used to monitor the project. Since 1996,
staff has simplified them and removed the standard Uniform
Building Code and Zoning Code conditions so they are specific to
the project.
3. Commissioner Butler asked what the difference was between the
two Specific Plans they received. Staff stated the updated
Specific Plan was in a legislative format to note the changes
made. Commissioner Butler asked if the parapet was to cover the
issue of the height and if they reduce the height of the building
and expose the mechanical equipment, is it being done by
structure or parapet? If it is being done by the parapet, then the
inside of the building roof will not have to be lowered and create
additional problems. He doesn't want to make an issue of one
foot if it means the building itself has to change to accommodate
this issue. Staff stated the applicant would address this issue.
4. Commissioner Tyler questioned whether this project would have
any impact on the empty gas station at the corner. Staff stated
it had no bearing. Commissioner Tyler stated that when this
project was originally reviewed, a lot of time was spent on the
internal circulation pattern between the gas station and the other
retail buildings, plus access through the project site. He does not
see any of those issues being discussed at this time. Staff stated
the building layout is fairly simple. Other than having north/south
access at the driveways on either side of the buildings, there is no
other access. Staff showed the circulation pattern on the site
plan. Commissioner Tyler asked if area that appears to be a
retention basin would be graded out and the retention basin moved
to the landscape areas as shown. Staff stated the applicant could
better define what would be relocated and how the drainage
would be handled. Commissioner Tyler asked how many parking
spaces are required versus what is proposed. Staff stated they
were required to have 87 and the original use required 36 and they
had 56. They are required to supply 87 and they have 89 parking
spaces.
5. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the
Commission. Mr. Bart Rinker, applicant, stated he has read the
staff report and conditions and concurs with all, but has a
question on two of them. The first issue is the height of the
building as they want it to remain at 23 feet. The storage unit to
G:\WPDOCS\PC9-25-01.wpd 4
Planning Commission Minutes
September 25, 2001
the south seems to have a height of 28 feet and the fuel bays of
the service station are equal to 20-25 feet. In trying to stay in
conformity with their neighbors they are trying to hide the
mechanical equipment. Second, is the lighting plan. Their initial
lighting plans had pole lights at 31 feet which is quite high. They
would like to have another light study completed and resubmit it
to staff and have the light standards come up to 22 feet.
6. Chairman Abels asked if anyone else would like to speak on this
item. There being no further discussion, the public participation
portion of the hearing was closed and open for Commission
discussion.
7. Commissioner Butler asked the height of the originally proposed
building. Staff stated there was nothing in the Specific Plan text
and staff did not know what the original conceptual elevation
height.
8. Commissioner Kirk stated he had question on two of the
conditions. First, is the lighting where staff is suggesting the
lighting be no greater than 18 feet. If he reads the Zoning Code
correctly, he would be allowed to have 22 foot high light pole.
Staff stated the Parking regulations does allow up to 25 feet.
Staff wanted to make it as low as possible because most of the
lighting is on the perimeter, especially along Dune Palms Road
where it is within 20-30 feet of the roadway and staff was trying
to prevent any light spillage onto the roadway. The applicant is
looking for some type of compromise in the height. Commissioner
Kirk stated the staff report states the Zoning Code requires the
lights to be no more than 18 feet in height or the maximum
building height of the zoning district, which he assumes is 22 feet
of the setback. Staff stated the 18 feet comes from the section
concerning lighting. There is also a standard that will allows them
to go up to 25 feet. Staff's concern was the spillage, not the
height.
9. Mr. Robert Ricciardi, landscape architect for the project, stated
that in regard to the amount of turf to be used, the drawings
before the Commission are presentation drawings only. The green
area represents planters only. The landscaping plans has been
submitted to the Commission. The landscape strip in front of
Dune Palms Road will have no retention. All the water will drain
G:\WPCiOCS\PC9-25-01.wpd 5
Planning Commission Minutes
September 25, 2001
to the strip in the rear of the property. In regard to the parking,
they do meet the requirements for Mixed Regional Commercial.
Where the parking is needed will depend upon what type of uses
go in.
10. Commissioner Tyler asked if the business would have open bays
or only open in the back. Mr. Ricciardi stated only in the back; no
overhead doors would be in the front. On the rear elevations, the
stepping out treatment along the edge will be added to carry it
throughout the building. All garage doors will be on the east side.
The amount of car parking is substantial.
11. Commissioner Butler asked if there would be any security fencing
in the rear. Mr. Ricciardi stated there are no plans at this time.
12. Mr. Rinker stated the uses proposed will be auto related retail
uses. There are no plans to have mechanical shops.
13. Ms. Lydia R. Shinohara, from Pacific Engineering, civil engineer for
the project, stated she has a question regarding Condition #32 to
comply with NPDES provisions as it was her understanding this
was completed for the entire project for the storm water pollution
plan. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated he would request the
condition remain. If it is a mute issue, they would not require it to
be done.
14. Commissioner Kirk asked if the words "if applicable" could be
added. Staff stated there was no problem with adding the words.
15. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the
public hearing and open the project for Commission discussion.
Commissioner Tyler noted corrections that needed to be made in
the Specific Plan document.
16. Commissioner Butler stated his only issue was the height. He
would prefer they go to 23 feet and not have to reduce the roof
line in order to hide the mechanical equipment.
17. Commissioner Kirk stated it was a good project and his only issue
is that he did not want light standards higher than the building.
As long as the new study shows no spillage he has no issue.
G:\WPDOCS\PC9-25-01.wpd 6
Planning Commission Minutes
September 25, 2001
18. Commissioner Robbins stated the rear or east side of the building
will be visible and is in need of something to break the building up
due to the length of the building. He would like to see some
architectural detail added to break it up. Mr. Ricciardi stated they
had a similar problem on another building in a different complex
and they solved this by alternating the height. The colors could go
darker to give the relief. They did add tile at the ends to bring
some detail around to the rear. They could pop out the bays six
inches. Commissioner Robbins stated that on the sign program
the letters appear to be hugely out of proportion. Staff stated the
sign program was integrated into what was approved last year.
There are some size standards. Commissioner Robbins stated that
if the size is limited to 50 square feet he is comfortable with the
proposal.
19. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2001-122 certifying an Addendum to Environmental
Assessment 96-328, as submitted:
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman
Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk.
ABSTAIN: None.
20. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-123, approving
Specific Plan 96-028 Amendment #2, subject to the findings and
Conditions of Approval as submitted.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman
Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk.
ABSTAIN: None.
21. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Robbins to
adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-124, approving Site
Development Permit 2001-709, subject to the findings and
Conditions of Approval as amended:
a. Condition #56: All pole mounted light standards shall be
limited in height to 20 feet.
b. Condition #59: The building height shall not exceed 23 feet.
C. Condition 60: Add "Staff to work with the applicant to
increase the articulation on the east side of the facade."
G:\WPDOCS\PC9-25-01.wpd 7
Planning Commission Minutes
Septernber 25, 2001
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Robbins, Tyler, and Chairman
Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk.
ABSTAIN: None.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of
September 18, 2001.
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Butler/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held October 9, 2001, at 7:00 p.m.
This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:00 p.m. on September
25, 2001.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPCOCS\PC9-25-01.wpd 8
PH #A
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 9, 2001 (CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 25,
2001)
CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-048 AND TENTATIVE TRACT MAP
29858 (PHASE 2) AMENDMENTS
APPLICANT: FORREST K. HAAG FOR RJT HOMES, INC.
REQUEST: TO MODIFY DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR BUILDING
SETBACKS AND ON -SITE RETENTION BASINS FOR A
PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (PALMILLA) OF NO
MORE THAN 178 HOUSES ON APPROXIMATELY 73
ACRES
LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF AVENUE 50 AND JEFFERSON
STREET
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (EA 2000-401)
WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON NOVEMBER
21, 2000 (RESOLUTION 2000-150) FOR THE 73 ACRE
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. NO CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS AND NO NEW
INFORMATION HAS BEEN PROVIDED THAT WOULD
TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT
NEGATIVE DECLARATION.
GENERAL
PLAN/ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE); RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH: ACROSS AVENUE 50, VACANT AND THE UNDER
CONSTRUCTION TALANTE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
OF 78 HOUSES
SR PC PalmillaMerger- Greg/52 - Printed: October 5, 2001
Ro 9/25; Eng 10/5 Page 1 of 4
SOUTH: CITRUS RESORT AND CLUB
EAST: ACROSS JEFFERSON STREET, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN
INDIO
WEST: THE ESTANCIAS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
BACKGROUND:
Planning Commission Action:
On September 25, 2001, the Planning Commission, on a 5-0 vote, continued
discussion of the applicant's setback changes to October 9, so that the applicant's
retention basin design changes could be considered at the same public hearing.
Project History:
The Palmilla development, located at the southwest corner of Avenue 50 and
Jefferson Street, is under construction. The development approvals for the 73-acre
site are noted below:
Specific Plan 2000-048 (City Council Resolution 2000-152) - The adopted Specific
Plan provides the design guidelines and standards for 178 single family houses. The
project is designed around a series of open space water features (Attachment 1).
Tentative Tract Map 29858 - City Council Resolution 2000-153 allows a mix of 90
single family attached residences and 72 detached single family homes on lots ranging
from 8,208 square feet to 21,136 square feet. The average lot size for the attached
product is 10,446 square feet and 15,534 square feet for the detached product.
Recordation of Tract 29858 (Phase 1), consisting of 141 residential lots on
approximately 65.36 acres, occurred on July 13, 2001.
On June 19, 2001, the City Council, on a 5-0 vote, adopted Resolution 2001-82,
approving design changes to Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2) consisting of a
reduction in the number of lots, cul-de-sac streets, and reconfiguring of the rear yard
common open space areas on seven acres. Recordation of Phase 2 of Tract 29858
is pending.
Site Development Permit 2001-694 - On March 27, 2001, the Planning Commission
adopted Minute Motion 2001-008 approving six prototype houses ranging in size from
2,894 square feet to over 4,000 square feet in one and two story plan types.
The Building and Safety Department issued construction permits for some of the
developer's model houses in July. Based on tract map approvals, the developer is
planning to build only 159 houses.
SR PC PalmillaMerger- Greg/52 - Printed: October 5, 2001
Ro 9/25; Eng 10/5 Page 2 of 4
Project Request:
The applicant has requested changes to the Palmilla development standards as follows:
• Rear yard setbacks of 10 feet instead of 20 feet per Condition 56 of City
Council Resolution 2000-152 for lots that do not back up to common
open space areas. This setback change would match lots backing up to
open space areas within the project.
• Architectural projections are being requested to be allowed into front
yards. However, no specific encroachment distance is noted and
architectural projection is not defined.
Project changes are proposed because the developer is having difficulty plotting their
prototype units on lots that do not back onto common open space areas when lot
depths are less than 120 feet and irregularly shaped.
The applicant is also requesting changes to the Specific Plan document and conditions
to allow their retention basin depths to be 10'-0" instead of 6'-0" as required by
Condition #26 of City Council Resolution 2000-152 (Specific Plan) and Condition #27
of City Council Resolution 2001-62 (Tentative Tract Map) pursuant to Section
13.24.120(L1) of the Subdivision Ordinance. This modification will allow the
developer's proposed 1.6 acre basin at the southeast corner of the development
(Comrnon Lot "D" of TTM 29858, Phase 2) to be deeper than normal to account for
the loss of open space areas to internal lake features (Attachment 2). Under this
design proposal, approximately 8.7 acre-feet of stormwater will be detained in this
primary, private on -site basin.
Public Notice: These Amendment requests were advertised in the Desert Sun
newspaper on September 15 and 27, 2001, and mailed to all property owners within
500-feet of the site. To date, no comments have been received from adjacent
property owners. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting.
Public; Agency Review: Only City Departments were asked to comment on this
Amendment request. All comments have been incorporated into the attached draft
Conditions of Approval, as appropriate.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Regarding the developer's request to deepen the retention basin depth, the Public
Works Department has prepared a document (Attachment 3) which allows for a basin
to be deeper than six foot when the size of the basin is larger than 20,000 square
feet, provided certain design standards are met including a maximum percolation time
period of 240 hours and creation of terraced side slopes. To protect the 3:1 side
slopes from erosion, the Community Development Department supports using turf as
SR PC PalmillaMerger- Greg/52 - Printed: October 5, 2001
Ro 9/25; Eng 10/5 Page 3 of 4
a soil stabilizer while areas for non -turf use should be benched areas and the bottom
of the; basin to conserve water usage pursuant to Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient
Landscaping) of the Municipal Code. See Specific Plan Conditions 26 and 48 and
Tract Conditions 27 and 49. Another planning issue that arises is whether deeper
basins should require additional landscape enhancements and pedestrian access
facilities with safety lighting. Staff supports basic enhancements such as additional
perimeter trees and concrete sidewalk access to certain areas of the basin, but not
necessarily to the bottom of the basin. In essence, large basins become lakes during
100-year storm incidents and playground equipment should not be encouraged in the
bottom of the basin(s) for safety reasons. Changes to City Ordinance design standards
to allow deep retention basins should only be done in conjunction with a specific plan
document to insure basins are an integral part of the project's open space elements as
it is for this project.
The findings needed to approve this request can be made, and are contained in the
attached Resolution. Changes requested by the developer and staff to the existing
conditions are highlighted in the attached material. By allowing deeper basins, the
developer benefits by devoting less land area to retention basin areas and more area
to other private open space features.
RECOMMENDATION:
1 . Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, approving Specific Plan 2000-
048 (Amendment #1), subject to the attached findings and conditions; and
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, approving Amendment #2 to
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), subject to the attached findings and
conditions.
Attachments:
1. Specific Plan 2000-048 Exhibit
2. Phase 2 Retention Basin
3. Public Works Department Memo
by:
G�641rdusdeII
Associate Planner
SR PC PalmillaMerger- Greg/52 - Printed: October 5, 2001
Ro 9/25; Eng 10/5
Submitted by:
Christine di I o r i o
Planning Manager
Page 4 of 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TEXT AND CONDITION
CHANGES FOR A PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-048, AMENDMENT #1 (PALMILLA)
APPLICANT: FORREST K. HAAG FOR RJT HOMES, INC.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 251h day of September and 91h day of October, 2001, hold duly noticed
Public Hearings for an amendment to the retention basin and setback design standards
for a master planned community of no more than 178 housing units on approximately
73 acres, generally located on the southwest corner of Avenue 50 and Jefferson
Street:, more particularly described as:
Portion of the NE 1 /4 of Section 5, Township 6S, Range 7E, S.B.B.M.
APN: 772-050-007 and -008; Tract 29858
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 251h day of September, 2001, continue Amendment #1 to Specific Plan
2000-048 to October 9, 2001.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on
the 21 st day of November, 2000, approve Specific Plan 2000-048 establishing design
guidelines and development standards for a master planned community of 178 housing
units on approximately 73 acres by adoption of Resolution 2000-152.
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2000-401) was certified
by the City Council on November 21, 2000, under Resolution 2000-150 for the
Palmilla development. No changed circumstances or conditions and no new
information has been provided that would trigger the preparation of a subsequent
Negative Declaration; 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 of approval to justify
a recommendation for approval of said Specific Plan Amendments:
1. That the proposed Amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the
La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Low Density
Residential which permits the uses proposed for the property and is consistent
RESOPC SMPalmillaMerger - Greg52
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Specific Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1 - Palmilla
October 9, 2001
Page 2
with the goals, policies and intent of the General Plan Land Use Element
(Chapter 2) provided conditions are met. Under this Plan, the project density
is roughly 2.4 units per acre which is within the density range for this low
density residential area. Development of the site with 159 units reduces the
project density to 2.17 units/acre.
The Amendment provides design standard changes for building setbacks and
on -site retention basins that will not impact off -site developments, nor adversely
affect the development standards of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage) of the
Subdivision Ordinance.
2. That the Specific Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially
detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare in that original
development objectives are being met through extensive public improvements
and good land use practices of encouraging common open space corridors,
varied setbacks, unique housing designs, and retention basin sizes based on
hydrology reports, etc. Large retention basins shall be an integral part of the
development's open space and include areas for walking and picnicking in a
park -like setting. Basin slopes shall be gradually sloping and be sculpted to
enhance their aesthetic appeal while limiting the amount of turf to accomplish
this end.
3. The mitigation measures of EA 2000-401 are binding on this development for
such issues as noise, archaeological monitoring and on -site water retention.
4. The Specific Plan Amendment is suitable and appropriate provided the
recommended Conditions of Approval are met.
5. That the proposed Specific Plan Amendment is an update to the original plan for
development of a private residential development of not more than 178 houses
on a 73-acre site.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby require compliance with those mitigation measures required
in Environmental Assessment 2000-401 (City Council Resolution 2000-150);
and
RESOPC SMPalmillaMerger - Greg52
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Specific Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1 - Palmilla
October 9, 2001
Page 3
3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of Specific Plan
2000-048 (Amendment #1) 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 911 day of October, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
RESOPC SNUalmi11aMerger - Greg52
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-048, AMENDMENT #1 (PALMILLA)
OCTOBER 9, 2001
GENERAL
1. The applicant and/or developer 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 Amendment. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense
counsel and any other challenge pertaining to this project. This indemnification
shall include any award toward attorney's fees.
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 permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies and
departments:
• Fire Marshal
• Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
• Community Development Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD)
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
The applicant/developer 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.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES
construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB
acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a
grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required
Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project
site.
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 2
PROPERTY RIGHTS
3. Prior to approval of any future final tract map(s), the applicant shall acquire or
confer easements and other property rights required of future tentative map(s)
or otherwise 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.
4. 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.
5. Right-of-way dedications required of this development include:
B. PRIVATE STREETS - Residential: 31-foot width. On -street parking is
prohibited and provisions shall be made for adequate off-street parking
for residents and visitors. The CC&R's shall contain language requiring
the Homeowner's Association to provide for ongoing enforcement of the
restrictions.
C. CULS DE SAC - Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A
(offset) with 39.5-foot radius, or larger.
6. Right-of-way geometry for knuckle turns and corner cutbacks shall conform with
Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 unless otherwise approved
by the City Engineer.
7. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and
left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans.
8. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with
and along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to
five feet with the express concurrence of IID.
AACondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 3
9. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as
follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is
approved):
A. 50th Avenue and Jefferson Street - 20 feet
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.
10. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access
to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and
common areas.
11. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and
properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access
points shown on the approved Specific Plan.
12. 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.
13. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way
or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned
by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access
easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property
owners.
GRADING
14. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard
Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is
or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood
Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors
and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year)
flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in
Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a)(6). Prior to
issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Mergermpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 4
furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been
met.
15. Prior to issuance of any grading permit(s), the applicant shall furnish a
preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared
by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the
recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils
engineer or engineering geologist.
16. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape
areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
17. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting
properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development.
Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three
feet except for lots within a tract or parcel map, but not sharing common street
frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet.
The limits given in this condition and the previous condition are not entitlements
and more restrictive limits may be imposed in the map approval or plan checking
process. If compliance with the limits is impractical, however, the City will
consider alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties
and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
18. 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.
19. 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.
20. 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. The data shall be
organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
A:\CoridPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 5
DRAINAGE
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and
the following:
21. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm
(the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the
centerline of adjacent public streets.
22. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual -
lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for
lots 2.5 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is
impracticable. If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet
the individual -lot retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC.
23. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated,
unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route.
24. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on
site or passed through to the overflow outlet.
25. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which
shall be submitted for checking with the retention facility plans. The design
percolation rate shall not exceed two inches per hour.
26. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. Maximum retention depth shall be
six feet for common basins and two feet for individual -lot retention. Basins over
20,000 square feet in size may be up deeper than six feet, subject to approval
by the City Engineer pursuant to the design guidelines addressed in Exhibit "A".
Large basins shall have sculpted sides in varying heights and allow concrete
pedestrian access (4' wide) into portions of the basin from adjacent private
streets.
27. Nuisance water shall be retained on -site. In residential developments, nuisance
water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield approved by
the City Engineer. The sand filter and leechfield shall be designed to contain
surges of three gallons per hour per 1,000 sq. ft. (of landscape area) and
infiltrate five gallons per day per 1,000 square feet.
28.
,
the La Quinte Safety Department or the Riverside Gounty Sherif
.,
Department), retention basins she" be visible from adjeeent gtreet(g). No fence
A:\CoridPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific: Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 6
or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community
Development Director and City Engineer.
29. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the
Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City
from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage
discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City -
or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or
expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be
executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction
or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators,
assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative 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 CC&R's for meeting these potential obligations.
30. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blow -off water from
any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility
authority as a requirement for development of this property.
UTILITIES
31. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of
all utility lines within the right of way and all aboveground 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.
32. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all
proposed utilities shall be installed underground, unless otherwise allowed by
General Plan Amendment 2000-073. Power lines exceeding 34.5 Kv are
exempt from this requirement.
33. 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.
A:\CoridPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 7
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
34. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements
shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1. 50th Avenue (Primary Arterial) - Construct 38-foot half of 76-foot
improvement (travel width, excluding curbs) plus 6-foot sidewalk.
2. Jefferson Street (Major Arterial) - applicant shall pay cash fee to
reimburse City for street improvements made to applicant's
frontage through the City's Capital Improvement Program.
Reimbursement amount shall cover all costs related to installing
curb, gutter and outside 20 feet of roadway paving; the
reimbursement amount shall be reduced by the percentage of non -
City funds expended on the Jefferson Street Widening project.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1. On -site streets:
a. Two -Way Traffic: construct 28-foot wide full -width
improvements (measured from gutter flowline to gutter
flowline) within the 31-foot right of way. All on -site streets
shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as
approved by the City Engineer.
b. One -Way Traffic: the following streets shall be designated
as one-way travel only:
Lot D: construct minimum 20-foot wide full -width
improvements (measured from gutter flowline to
gutter flowline) within a minimum 23-foot right of
way. Street shall be constructed with "wedge" type
curb design as approved by the City Engineer.
ii. Lots C and G: construct minimum 16-foot wide full -
width improvements (measured from gutter flowline
to gutter flowline) within a minimum 19-foot right of
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 8
way. Street shall be constructed with "wedge" type
curb design as approved by the City Engineer.
C. Cul-de-Sacs: All cul-de-sac bulbs which contain raised
landscaped islands shall be designated as "One -Way" and
applicant shall construct minimum 20-foot wide full -width
improvements (measured from gutter flowline to gutter
flowline) within a minimum 23-foot right of way. Construct
a "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City
Engineer.
d. Lots S & U: provide for two-way traffic by constructing
minimum 22-foot wide full -width improvements (measured
from gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within a minimum
25-foot right of way. Street shall be constructed with
"wedge" type curb design as approved by the City Engineer.
2. All on -street parking is prohibited with the exception of guest
parking by permit only and enforced by the Homeowners'
Association and the applicant shall be required to provide for the
perpetual enforcement of the restriction by the Homeowners'
Association.
C. CULS DE SAC - Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or
800A (offset), with 38-foot curb radius.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus
turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the
City Engineer.
35. 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.
36. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
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).
A:\Cor,dPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific: Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 9
37. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved
by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking
areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
38. Knuckle turns and corner cutbacks shall conform with Riverside County
Standard Drawings #801 and #805, unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer.
39. Public streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations
which convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust
and residue for street sweeping. Onsite private streets shall have a wedge curb,
the design of which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The lip of the
wedge curb at the flowline shall be vertical (1/8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1'
in height. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior
to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot.
40. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design
procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated
traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall
be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials):
Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
Collector 4.0"/5.00"
Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00"
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
41. 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.
42. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings
only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access
to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic
control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets
are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific: Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 10
complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of
homes within the project or when directed by the City, whichever comes first.
43. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. 50th Avenue - Main project entry, to be located approximately 1,250 feet
west of the centerline of Jefferson Street. No restrictions applied to
turning movements at this location.
B. 501h Avenue - Emergency access entry (20-foot wide) from the end of the
cul-de-sac in "B" Street, to be located approximately 2,400 feet west of
the centerline of Jefferson Street. This point of entry will be restricted
to right -turn movements only.
C. Jefferson Street - Secondary project entry, to be located approximately
600 feet south of the centerline of 50th Avenue. This point of entry will
be restricted to right -turn movements, and a left -turn into the project if
the applicant desires to construct an appropriately designed opening in
the median island.
LANDSCAPING
44. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
45. 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.
46. 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.
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 11
47. A six-foot wide meandering sidewalk shall be constructed along 501h Avenue
and Jefferson Street within the 32'-0" right-of-way and setback.
48. Large retention basins (over 15,000 square feet) shall limit turf use to 40
approximately percent. Large basins shall include a dense planting of shade
trees (one 24" box tree every 30 feet in random pattern) around its perimeter
and adjacent to pedestrian access areas. Turf shall be used to control water
runoff on basin slopes of greater than 4:1, but not be used to cover the bottom
of the basin.
PUBLIC SERVICES
49. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline
Transit and approved by the City Engineer.
MAINTENANCE
50. 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
51. 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.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
52. The Specific Plan shall be amended throughout, wherever appropriate, to clearly
state that the following shall require approval of Site Development Permits:
A. Perimeter wall and landscaping
B. Common area landscaping
C. Model homes, both attached and detached
D. Monument identification signage
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Mergermpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 1:2
53. The Specific Plan Plant List on pages 2.35 through 2.38 shall be amended to
focus on native and non-invasive plant types.
54. The project shall be surrounded on the north and east boundary by a 4-foot
berm topped with a 6-foot wall, as measured from finished grade for all areas
shown in Figure 3 of the Noise Analysis as requiring a 10-foot wall. The project
shall be surrounded on the north and east boundary by a 2-foot berm topped
with a 6'-0" wall, as measured from finished grade for all areas shown in Figure
3 of the Noise Analysis as requiring a 8'-0" wall. Design of the berm and wall
shall be subject to Site Development Permit review.
55. The last paragraph in Section 2.6.3, Recreation, on page 2.11 shall be deleted.
56. The tables on pages 3.4 and 3.5, "Detached Single Family Units" and
"Attached/Zero Lot Line Units," respectively, shall be amended to allow only a
6-foot wall height.
57. The tables on pages 3.4 and 3.5,Units"
and
"Attached/Zero Lot Line Units," respect , shall be amended to allow 10 foot
reaI yard setback to. lots back" psee, and a 20 foot rear y
setback for lots whoeh do not bee7k onto o' as follows:
A. Rear yard setbacks for houses and guest houses shall not be less than
10 feet. Primary dwelling units that do not back onto open space shall
have varied setbacks of 10'-0" to 20'-0", or more.
B. Pop -out design elements can protrude a maximum of two feet into the
front yard setback.
C. Air condition compressor units shall be a minimum distance of four feet
from side yard property lines.
58 Project signage shall
conform to the standards for monument signage contained in the Zoning
Ordinance.
59. The Specific Plan shall be amended to require the location of two story homes
in conformance with the standards of Section 9.60.310 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Mergermpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific; Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 1:3
60. On page 3.3 of the Specific Plan, under "B. Permitted Uses," and anywhere else
it may occur, the word duplex shall be replaced by the word "attached."
61. Five copies of the Final Specific Plan, with all amendments required above
integrated into the document, and with these conditions of approval appended
to the document, shall be submitted to the Community Development
Department prior to the issuance of any permit.
62. The project proponent shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the
Environmental Assessment 2000-401.
DOME=STIC WATER AND SANITARY SEWER
63. Pursuant to the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD),
the project proponent shall annex to Improvement Districts No. 1 for irrigation
service.
64. Landscaping, irrigation and grading plans shall be submitted to CVWD for review
and approval.
65. All plans for domestic water connections to existing CVWD lines shall be
submitted to the District for review and approval.
66. The project proponent shall obtain all necessary approvals from the District for
the well site located at the northeastern corner of the property.
67. The project proponent shall demonstrate, prior to recordation of the final map,
that Bureau of Reclamation facilities on the project site do not conflict with the
proposed project, to the satisfaction of the District.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
68. All water mains and fire hydrants required fire flows shall be constructed in
accordance with the appropriate sections of CVWD Std. W-33, subject to the
approval by the Riverside County Fire Department. Fire hydrants shall be
located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any
lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be
1,000 G.P.M. for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI. Blue dot retro-reflectors shall be
placed in the street eight -inches form centerline to the side that fire hydrant is
on, to identify hydrant locations.
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 14
Public access buildings (i.e., recreation halls, clubhouses, etc.) require Super fire
hydrants to be placed no closer than 25 feet and not more than 165 feet from
any portion of the first floor of said building following approved travel ways
around the exterior of the building. Minimum fire flow for these areas would be
1,500 G.P.M. for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI.
69. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and exiting
this project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet in each
direction and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6
inches. Parking is permitted on one side of roadways with a minimum width of
25 feet. Parking is permitted on both sides of roadways with a minimum width
of 36 feet. 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.
70. All interior fire apparatus access roads shall be a minimum of 20 feet
unobstructed width and an unobstructed vertical clearance of 13'6". Atty
portion of an exterier wall of the first starry of any building shall be leea
within 150 feet f rern fore apparatus --- teasured by an approved route
around the extevier of the buildhi#-. All structures shall be accessible form an
approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first
floor.
71. Gate entrance/exit openings shall be not less than 15 feet in width. Gate
entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the travel lane
serving that gate. All gates shall be located at least 40' from the roadway and
shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road.
Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate
entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used. Gates shall have either a
secondary power supply or an approved manual means (KNOX) to release
mechanical control of the gate in the event of loss of primary power. Automatic
gate pins shall be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates
activated by the rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the rapid
entry system. Gating plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for
approval prior to installation.
72. The maximum dead-end street length is limited to 1,320 feet for areas not
located in a designated high fire hazard zone. A secondary access roadway is
typically provided when such a condition exists.
A:\CoridPC SP48#2 Palmilla Mergermpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Specific: Plan 2000-048, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
Page 15
73. Cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum outside radius of 38 feet to face of curb with
a minimum inside radius of 26 feet to islands or center landscape features. The
entire radius of 38 feet is required to properly turn fire department vehicles.
Vehicle parking along the curb should be prohibited when the minimum radius
is used.
74. Any nonresidential building greater than 5,000 square feet shall have internal
fire sprinkler systems per NFPA 13 Standard, and be approved for use by the
Fire Department.
75. The proposed street bridges shall be designed to handle a live load of 60,000
lbs. over two axles.
76. 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.
SCHOOL FEES
77. The project proponent shall demonstrate their payment of school fees prior to
the issuance of a building permit.
A:\CondPC SP48#2 Palmilla Merger.wpdm - Greg52 Printed October 5, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT #2 TO
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29858 (PHASE #2)
CASE NO.: TTM 29858 (PHASE #2), AMENDMENT #2
APPLICANT: FORREST K. HAAG FOR RJT HOMES, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the gth day of October, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for RJT Homes
to review design changes for on -site retention basins for Tentative Tract Map 29858
(Phase; #2), on property located at the southwest corner of Avenue 50 and Jefferson
Street, more particularly described as:
APN: 772-050-007 and 772-050-008
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the
21 st day of November, 2000, approve Specific Plan 2000-048 establishing design
guidelines and development standards for a master planned community of 178 housing
units on approximately 73 acres by adoption of Resolution 2000-152.
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (EA 2000-401) was certified
by the: City Council on the 21 st day of November, 2000 (Resolution 2000-150), for the
Palmilla development. No changed circumstances or conditions and no new information
has been provided that would trigger the preparation of a subsequent Negative
Declaration; and
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning
Commission did recommend to the City Council mandatory findings for approval of
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Amendment #2) as required by Section 13.12.130 of the
Subdivision Ordinance:
1. That the proposed Amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the
La Quinta General Plan in that the property is designated Low Density Residential
which permits the uses proposed for the property and is consistent with the
goals, policies and intent of the General Plan Land Use Element (Chapter 2)
provided conditions are met. Under this Plan, the project density is roughly 2.4
units per acre which is within the density range for this low density residential
ResoccRJT 29858 Rev2; Greg T.-52
Started 9/19
Planning Commission Resolution 2001 _
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
Forrest K. Haag for RJT Homes, LLC
October 9, 2001
Page 2
area. Development of the site with 159 units reduces the project density to
2.17 units/acre.
The Amendment provides design standard changes for building setbacks and
on -site retention basins that will not impact off -site developments, nor adversely
affect the development standards of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage) of the
Subdivision Ordinance based on design parameters and engineering
requirements.
2. The Tentative Tract Map Amendment will not be detrimental to the public
health, safety and welfare, as the drainage facilities have been designed to
contain on -site stormwater and will be privately maintained by the Palmilla
Homeowner's Association (HOA), as conditioned. Large retention basins shall
be an integral part of the development's open space and include areas for
walking and picnicking in a park -like setting. Basin slopes shall be gradually
sloping and be sculpted to enhance their aesthetic appeal while limiting the
amount of turf to accomplish this end.
3. The Tentative Tract Map Amendment is compatible with the City's Zoning
Ordinance and Specific Plan 2000-048 (Amendment #1) in that common areas
provide open spaces areas for the enjoyment of the Palmilla residents.
4. Development of the Tentative Tract Map Amendment is compatible with the
parcels on which it is proposed, and surrounding land uses as an extension of
existing residential uses in the vicinity.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby require compliance with those mitigation measures required
in Environmental Assessment 2000-401 (City Council Resolution 2000-150);
and
ResoccRJT 29858 Rev2; Greg T.-52
started 9/19
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
Forrest K. Haag for RJT Homes, LLC
October 8�, 2001
Page 3
3. That it does hereby approve Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2) Amendment
#2 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 Planning Commission, held on the 9th day of October, 2001, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
ResoccRJT 29858 Rev2; Greg T.-52
Started 9/19
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 29858 (PHASE #2), AMENDMENT #2
OCTOBER 9, 2001
GENERAL
1. The subdivider 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 tentative
map amendment or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion
in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the subdivider 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 permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies and
departments:
• 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)
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.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES
construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB
acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a
grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required
Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project
site.
A:\CondPC T29858-2 Retention Palmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page i of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 2
3. This Map approval shall expire and become null and void on June 19, 2003,
unless an extension of time is granted according to the requirements of Section
13.12.150 of the Subdivision Ordinance.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
4. Prior to approval of any future final tract map(s), the applicant shall acquire or
confer easements and other property rights required of future tentative map(s)
or otherwise 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. Right of way dedications required of this development include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1. 50th Avenue (Primary Arterial) - no additional dedication required.
2. Jefferson Street (Major Arterial) - no additional dedication required.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
Residential: 31-foot width. On -street parking is prohibited and provisions
shall be made for adequate off-street parking for residents and visitors.
The CC&R's shall contain language requiring the Homeowner's
Association to provide for ongoing enforcement of the restrictions.
C. CULS DE SAC - Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or 800A
(offset) with 39.5-foot radius, or larger.
A:\CondPC T29858-2 RetentionPalmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page 2 of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 3
7. Right of way geometry for knuckle turns and corner cutbacks shall conform with
Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
8. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and
left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans.
9. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with
and along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to
five feet with the express concurrence of IID.
10. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as
follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is
approved):
A. 50' Avenue and Jefferson Street - 20-feet each
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.
11. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access
to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and
common areas.
12. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and
properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access
points shown on the approved Specific Plan.
13. 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.
A:\CondPC T29858-2 Retention Palmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page 3 of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 4
14. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way
or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned
by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access
easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property
owners.
GRADING
15. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard
Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is
or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood
Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors
and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year)
flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in
Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to
issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall
furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been
met.
16. Prior to issuance of any grading permit(s), the applicant shall furnish a
preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared
by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the
recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils
engineer or engineering geologist.
17. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape
areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
18. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting
properties and between separate tracts and lots within this development.
Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three
feet except for lots within a tract or parcel map, but not sharing common street
frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet.
The limits given in this condition and the previous condition are not entitlements
and more restrictive limits may be imposed in the map approval or plan checking
process. If compliance with the limits is impractical, however, the City will
consider alternatives which minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties
and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential.
A:\Cor,dPC T29858-2 Retention PalmiIal. wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page 4 of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 5
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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. The data shall be
organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and
the following:
22. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm
(the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the
centerline of adjacent public streets.
23. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual -
lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for
lots 2.5 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is
impracticable. If individual -lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet
the individual -lot retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC.
24. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated,
unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route.
25. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on
site or passed through to the overflow outlet.
26. Retention facility design shall be based on site -specific percolation data which
shall be submitted for checking with the retention facility plans. The design
percolation rate shall not exceed two inches per hour.
AACordPC T29858-2 RetentionPalmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page s of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 6
27. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. Maximum retention depth shall be
six feet for common basins and two feet for individual -lot retention. Basins over
20,000 square feet in size may be deeper than six feet, subject to approval by
the City Engineer pursuant to the design guidelines addressed in Exhibit "A".
Large basins shall have sculpted sides in varying heights and allow concrete
pedestrian access (4' wide) into portions of the basin from adjacent private
streets.
28. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance
water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield approved by
the City Engineer. The sand filter and leechfield shall be designed to contain
surges of 3 gallons per hour/1,000 square feet (of landscape area) and infiltrate
5 gallon per day/1,000 square feet.
29. In developments for which security will be provided by public safety entities
(e.g., the La Quinta Safety Department or the Riverside County Sheriff's
Department), retention basins shall be visible from adjacent street(s). No fence
or wall shall be constructed around basins unless approved by the Community
Development Director and the City Engineer.
30. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the
Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City
from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage
discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City -
or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or
expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be
executed and furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction
or building permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators,
assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative 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 CC&R's for meeting these potential obligations.
31. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water from
any on -site or adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility
authority as a requirement for development of this property.
UTILITIES
32. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of
all utility lines within the right of way and all aboveground utility structures
A:\CoridPC T29858-2 RetentionPalmiial.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page 6 of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 7
including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water
valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and
aesthetic purposes.
33. 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.
34. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all
proposed utilities shall be installed underground, unless otherwise allowed by
General Plan Amendment 2000-073. Power lines exceeding 34.5 Kv are
exempt from this requirement.
STREI=T AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
35. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements
shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial; 100' R/W option):
Widen south side of street along all frontage adjacent to the tract
boundary. Street widening improvements shall include all
appurtenant components such as, but not limited to, curb, gutter,
traffic control striping, legends, and signs, except for street lights.
Other significant new improvements required for installation in, or
adjacent, to the subject right of way include:
(a) 6-foot wide meandering sidewalk
(b) 12-foot wide landscaped median from west tract boundary
to a point 1,050 feet west of the Jefferson Street
centerline.
(c) Traffic signal at the project's main entry when warrants are
met. Applicant is responsible for 50% of cost to design and
install traffic signal if complementing cost share from
development on other side of street is available at time
signal is required. If complementing share is not available,
Applicant shall pay 100% of cost to design and install
signal at "T" intersection. If, however, the Applicant's
development progress trails that of the developer on the
AACondPC T29858-2 Retention Palmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed': October 5, 2001 Page � of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 8
other side and the other developer has installed a "T"
intersection signal serving the other side, Applicant shall
construct the fourth leg to the intersection and modify the
existing signal at own expense.
The landscape median improvement is eligible for reimbursement
from the City's Development Impact Fee fund in accordance with
policies established for that program.
2. Jefferson Street (Major Arterial):
a. Applicant shall pay cash fee to reimburse City for street
improvements made to applicant's frontage through the
City's Capital Improvement Program. Reimbursement
amount shall cover all costs related to installing curb, gutter
and outside 20 feet of roadway paving; the reimbursement
amount shall be reduced by the percentage of non -City
funds expended on the Jefferson Street Widening project.
b. Applicant shall pay cash fee to reimburse City for traffic
signal at the Jefferson/Avenue 50 intersection. The cash
fee shall cover 6.25% of cost to design and install the
signal (25% of a quarter -signal share was not funded by
Measure A).
C. Applicant shall install 6-foot wide meandering sidewalk
along the property frontage.
B. PRIVATE STREETS
1. On -site streets:
A. Two -Way Traffic: construct 28-foot wide full -width
improvements (measured from gutter flowline to gutter
flowline) within the 31-foot right of way. All on -site streets
shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design as
approved by the City Engineer.
B. One -Way Traffic: the following streets shall be designated
as one-way travel only:
i. Lot D: construct minimum 20-foot wide full -width
A:\CondPC T29858-2 Retention PalmiIal. wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page B of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 9
improvements (measured from gutter flowline to
gutter flowline) within a minimum 23-foot right of
way. Street shall be constructed with "wedge" type
curb design as approved by the City Engineer.
ii. Lots C and G: construct minimum 16-foot wide full -
width improvements (measured from gutter flowline
to gutter flowline) within a minimum 19-foot right of
way. Street shall be constructed with "wedge" type
curb design as approved by the City Engineer.
C. Cul-de-Sacs: All cul-de-sac bulbs which contain raised
landscaped islands shall be designated as "One -Way" and
applicant shall construct minimum 20-foot wide full -width
improvements (measured from gutter flowline to gutter
flowline) within a minimum 23-foot right of way. Construct
a "wedge" type curb design as approved by the City
Engineer.
D. Lot R: provide for two-way traffic by constructing 28-foot
wide full -width improvements (measured from gutter
flowline to gutter flowline) within a 31-foot right of way.
Street shall be constructed with "wedge" type curb design
as approved by the City Engineer. A minimum 25-foot wide
"hammerhead" turn around area shall be constructed
adjacent to Lot 85.
E. Lot U: provide for two-way traffic by constructing minimum
22-foot wide full -width improvements (measured from
gutter flowline to gutter flowline) within a minimum 25-foot
right of way. Street shall be constructed with "wedge"
type curb design as approved by the City Engineer. A
minimum 25-foot wide "hammerhead" turn around area
shall be constructed adjacent to Lot 134 and Lake Lot Z.
2. All on -street parking is prohibited and the applicant shall be
required to provide for the perpetual enforcement of the restriction
by the Homeowners' Association. Guest parking by permit only
and enforced by the Homeowners' Association is allowed only in
designated off-street parking areas.
A:\CondPC T29858-2 Retention Palmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed(: October 5, 2001 Page 9 of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 10
C. CULS DE SAC - Use Riverside County Standard 800 (symmetric) or
800A (offset), with 38-foot curb radius.
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, turn knuckles, corner cutbacks, bus
turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans may warrant additional street widths as determined by the
City Engineer.
36. 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.
37. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
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).
38. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved
by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking
areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
39. Knuckle turns and corner cutbacks shall conform with Riverside County
Standard Drawings #801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by
the City Engineer.
40. Public streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations
which convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust
and residue for street sweeping. On -site private streets shall have a wedge
curb, the design of which shall be approved by the City Engineer. The lip of the
wedge curb at the flowline shall be vertical (1 /8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1 '
in height. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior
to final inspection of permanent buildings► on the lot.
41. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design
procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated
traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall
be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials):
Residential & Parking Areas
Collector
Secondary Arterial
3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
4.0"/5.00"
4.0"/6.00"
AACondPC T29858-2 Retention Palmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001
Page 10 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 11
Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00"
Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50"
42. 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.
43. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings
only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access
to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic
control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets
are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall
complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of
homes within the project or when directed by the City, whichever comes first.
44. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. 501h Avenue - Main project entry, to be located approximately 1,250 feet
west of the centerline of Jefferson Street. No restrictions applied to
turning movements at this location.
B. 50" Avenue - Emergency access entry (20-foot wide) from the end of the
cul-de-sac in "B" Street, to be located approximately 2,400 feet west of
the centerline of Jefferson Street. This point of entry will be restricted
to right -turn movements only.
C. Jefferson Street - Secondary project entry, to be located approximately
600 feet south of the centerline of 50th Avenue. This point of entry will
be restricted to right -turn movements, and a left -turn into the project if
the applicant desires to construct an appropriately designed opening in
the median island.
LANDSCAPING
45. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
AACordPC T29858-2 RetentionPaimilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page 11 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 12
46. 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.
47. 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.
48. A six-foot wide meandering sidewalk shall be constructed along 50th Avenue
and Jefferson Street in the right-of-way and landscape setback.
49. Large retention basins (over 15,000 square feet) shall limit turf use to 40
approximately percent. Large basins shall include a dense planting of shade
trees (one 24" box tree every 30 feet in random pattern) around its perimeter
and adjacent to pedestrian access areas. Turf shall be used to control water
runoff on basin slopes of greater than 4:1, but not be used to cover the bottom
of the basin.
PUBLIC SERVICES
50. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline
Transit and approved by the City Engineer.
MAINTENANCE
51. 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
52. 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.
AACordPC T29858-2 RetentionPalmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page i2 of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 13
MISCELLANEOUS
53. The project proponent shall comply with all mitigation measures contained in the
Environmental Assessment 2000-401.
54. Lot 12 shall have a minimum frontage width of 35 feet to comply with Table 9-
2 of the Zoning Ordinance.
DOMESTIC WATER AND SANITARY SEWER
55. Landscaping, irrigation and grading plans shall be submitted to CVWD for review
and approval.
56. All plans for domestic water connections to existing CVWD lines shall be
submitted to the District for review and approval.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
57. All water mains and fire hydrants required fire flows shall be constructed in
accordance with the appropriate sections of CVWD Std. W-33, subject to the
approval by the Riverside County Fire Department. Fire hydrants shall be
located at each intersection and spaced 330 feet apart with no portion of any
lot frontage more than 165 feet from a hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be
1,000 G.P.M. for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI. Blue dot retro-reflectors shall be
placed in the street eight -inches form centerline to the side that fire hydrant is
on, to identify hydrant locations.
Public access buildings (i.e., recreation halls, clubhouses, etc.) require Super fire
hydrants to be placed no closer than 25 feet and not more than 165 feet from
any portion of the first floor of said building following approved travel ways
around the exterior of the building. Minimum fire flow for these areas would be
1,500 G.P.M. for a 2-hour duration at 20 PSI.
58. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and exiting
this project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet in each
direction and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 1 X-6".
Parking is permitted on one side of roadways with a minimum width of 25 feet.
Parking is permitted on both sides of roadways with a minimum width of 36
feet.
A:\CondPC T29858-2 Retention Palmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page 13 of 15
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 14
59. All interior fire apparatus access roads shall be a minimum of 20 feet
unobstructed width and an unobstructed vertical clearance of 13'-6". Any
paition of an exterier wall of the first stoiy of any building she" be lec
within 150 feet from fire apparatus eeeegs ag measured by an appioved route
around the exterior of the buildiW. All structures shall be accessible form an
approved roadway to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior of the first
floor. 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.
60. Gate entrance/exit openings shall be not less than 15 feet in width. Gate
entrances shall be at least two feet wider than the width of the travel lane
serving that gate. All gates shall be located at least 40' from the roadway and
shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road.
Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate
entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used. Gates shall have either a
secondary power supply or an approved manual means (KNOX) to release
mechanical control of the gate in the event of loss of primary power. Automatic
gate pins shall be rated with a shear pin force, not to exceed 30 pounds. Gates
activated by the rapid entry system shall remain open until closed by the rapid
entry system. Gating plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for
approval prior to installation.
61. The maximum dead-end street length is limited to 1,320 feet for areas not
located in a designated high fire hazard zone. A secondary access roadway is
typically provided when such a condition exists.
62. Cul-de-sacs shall have a minimum outside radius of 38 feet to face of curb with
a minimum inside radius of 26 feet to islands or center landscape features. The
entire radius of 38 feet is required to properly turn fire department vehicles.
Vehicle parking along the curb should be prohibited when the minimum radius
is used.
63. Any nonresidential building greater than 5,000 square feet shall have internal
fire sprinkler systems per NFPA 13 Standard, and be approved for use by the
Fire Department.
64. The proposed street bridges shall be designed to handle a live load of 60,000
lbs. over two axles.
A:\CondPC T29858-2 Retention Palmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page is of is
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Tentative Tract Map 29858 (Phase 2), Amendment #2
October 9, 2001
Page 15
65. 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.
A:\CordPC T29858-2 RetentionPalmilal.wpd -GREG 52
Printed: October 5, 2001 Page is of is
ATTACHMENTS
,ter.
100
--4f -:
116
05 /Attachment 2
101
08 LAKE) 114
1
10 4 8 Cl
102
103
117'
120
121
IN,
91 910,
L
T1 1.
�3
12.7
E
124
128
A 25 A
89
TC7 7
12
6
7
5
130 4
3
!'911111111111111111 2
jjlllj
-A
B.t. E.,
3 1-2.- .... ...
139 10 11 12
9
S.D. UkE
17,3
8
13 13 SEES . 18
137
P�N
RETENTj
14
��'—`135 134 17 16 15
Is 136
01
� ...._ _SEE �H T 2
1, POMELO ST. 71ti
Ar- @7
17
-f R J\ CIT
TRA T NO
29858-2
ENGINEERING BULLETIN 97-03 (Amendment #1)
Attachment 3
RETENTION BASIN SHAPE CRITERIA
for
RETENTION BASINS OVER SIX FEET DEEP
1. Visibility
o One hundred percent (100%) of the retention basin lot shall be visible from a
city -maintained street if security patrol is provided by a public agency.
u In gated communities, if the basin area is not 100% visible from a privately
owned street within the community, the community shall provide and
maintain perpetual unobstructed visibility of the basin from adjoining private
properties.
Security lighting shall be provided in all areas not visible from the street.
• The landscaping trees shall be located and sized in a manner to avoid
creation of hidden areas larger than 100 square feet.
2. Basin Bottom Aspect Ratio - The aspect ratio (length to width) of the basin bottom
shall not exceed 5:1, where length is considered the longer distance and width is
the shorter distance in this calculation. Additionally, the line defining the length is
any straight line of the designer's choice passing through the basin bottom area
centroid, or a free form line of designer's choice that divides the bottom into equal
parts. The width is a straight line measured perpendicularly to the length line.
3. Basin Depth Aspect Ratio - The aspect ratio (narrowest width at basin bottom to
average basin depth) of the basin depth shall be greater than 5:1 [computed as
follows; [(Wn/Da):1 ].
Where Wn = Narrowest Width at Basin Bottom (measured in accordance
with the length/width definitions used in the Basin Bottom
Aspect Ratio calculation)
Da = Average Depth (measured along retention basin lot boundary)
,6(4,4/*r
TAMDEMSTAMSPEEMNotes & Concept9\010824ampd
qF_ rr, ,
OCT �►
CITY OF LAQUINTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Page 1 of 2
ENGINEERING BULLETIN 97-03 (Amendment #1) - continued
4. Maximum Basin Depth - The maximum basin depth in neighborhoods with public
streets where security patrol is provided by a public agency is six (6) feet deep
adjacent to the street. The maximum ponding depth when the 100-year storm is
contained is five (5) feet deep at any location. The maximum basin depth may be
increased in gated communities where security patrol is privately funded provided
the following criteria are met:
• The retention basin lot size exceeds the following minimums for the desired
basin depth.
7 feet deep, area exceeds 20,000 square feet
8 feet deep, area exceeds 22,500 square feet
9 feet deep, area exceeds 25,000 square feet
10 feet deep, area exceeds 30,000 square feet
11 feet deep, area exceeds 40,000 square feet
12 feet deep, area exceeds 50,000 square feet 0.15 ac)
13 feet deep, area exceeds 60,000 square feet 0.38 ac)
14 feet deep, area exceeds 70,000 square feet 0.61 ac)
15 feet deep, area exceeds 80,000 square feet 0.84 ac)
16 feet deep, area exceeds 120,000 square feet (2.75 ac)
17 feet deep, area exceeds 160,000 square feet (3.67 ac)
18 feet deep, area exceeds 200,000 square feet (4.59 ac)
19 feet deep, area exceeds 240,000 square feet (5.51 ac)
20 feet deep, area exceeds 280,000 square feet (6.43 ac)
• The aspect ratio limits defined in the Basin Bottom and Basin Depth criteria
are not exceeded.
• The basin shall have eight (8) feet wide level terraced benches around the
entire perimeter of the basin located at water surface contours where the
water is 5, 10, and 15 feet deep.
• The basin shall have a five (5) feet wide level terraced bench located one (1)
foot above the 100-year water surface level around the entire perimeter.
• In no event shall the maximum water depth exceed ten (19) feet deep at any
location when the 100-year storm is contained.
• In basins over eight (8) feet deep, trees shall be planted in the 8-foot wide
terraces. The number of trees shall be calculated by multiplying the basin lot
boundary length by the number of 8-foot wide terraces in the basin and then
dividing by 100.
• Design consultant shall demonstrate through certified testing that soil in the
retention basin is capable of percolating entire 100-year storm retention
capacity in less than 240 hours.
EC � VE
OCT - 5 ��►
CITY OF LAQUINTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TAMDEMSTAMSPEEMNotes & Concepts\070924a.wpd Page 2 of 2
zo
r
I`
LL
W
0
�Z
vM/
<
MZ
ig
la
N
r
Mi
OCT
�i
CITY OF LAQUINTA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 9, 2001
CASE. NOS: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-063
APPLICANT: SPRINT PCS
PROPERTY
OWNER: LA QUINTA 2-SPC, LLC
REPRESENTATIVE: TELECOM WIRELESS SOLUTIONS
LOCATION: 46-600 ADAMS STREET, STORAGE USA
REQUEST: INSTALLATION OF A 68-FOOT HIGH WIRELESS ANTENNA
CAMOUFLAGED AS A PALM TREE (MONOPALM
PROTOTYPE DESIGN) AND RELATED GROUND MOUNTED
EQUIPMENT FOR CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE
WITHIN A SELF -STORAGE FACILITY (PHASE 2) ON 3.77
ACRES
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS CATEGORICALLY
EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS OF THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO
SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32) IN THAT THIS IS AN IN -FILL
DEVELOPMENT.
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: COMMERCIAL PARK/COMMERCIAL PARK PER SPECIFIC
PLAN NO. 99-036 (PLANNING AREA #1)
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH: REGIONAL STORMWATER CHANNEL
SrPC CUP 63 Sprint - Page 1 Printed: October 5, 2001
Greg - R9/25
SOUTH: ACROSS CORPORATE CENTRE DRIVE, VACANT
EAST: VACANT (FUTURE WELL SITE)
WEST: STORAGE USA (PHASE 1)
BACKGROUND:
The project site is located within the recently completed expansion of the Storage USA
complex (Phase #2) located 400 feet east of Adams Street and north of Corporate Centre
Drive. This self -storage complex, on 3.77 acres, was approved by the Planning
Commission on April 11, 2000. This facility is located within the boundaries of Specific
Plan 99-036, a 36-acre master planned commercial/industrial project, which was approved
by the City Council on September 7, 1999.
Presently, Sprint is installing a 65'-0" high monopalm communication antenna at the La
Quinta Resort and Club (CUP 2001-061) and has received Planning Commission approval
to install communication tower (CUP 2001-062) on Imperial Irrigation District property at
81-600 Avenue 58.
Project Request:
The applicant is requesting approval to install a permanent 68' high digital cellular
telephone antenna in the mini storage facility where the storage of RV vehicles is permitted
(Attachments 1-3). The monopole antenna is designed to replicate a palm tree with the
support pole being covered in brown fiberglass bark and antennas concealed within flexible
resin palm fronds. Including palm fronds, the height of the monopalm is approximately 73'-
0" tall. The height of the antenna is based on radio frequency transmission needs factoring
in changes in topography and man-made structures, ensuring communications with other
local Sprint antennas. Four Sprint antennae, providing wireless communication, are
located within a five -mile radius of this new cellular site. Residentially zoned properties are
a minimum distance of 0.25 miles to the north of this proposed antenna site.
Sprint's lease area is approximately 579 square feet, and located approximately 640 feet
east of Adams Street, 320+ feet north of Corporate Centre Drive, 60+ feet south of a
regional stormwater channel. A 6-foot high masonry wall is proposed to encircle the
monopalm and its related ground -mounted electrical equipment cabinets eliminating two
existing RV parking spaces (Spaces 23 and 24) from the paved storage lot. Ground
mounted electrical cabinets will not be visible from off -site properties. No supplemental
landscaping is proposed.
Public; Notice: The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 28,
2001, and mailed to surrounding property owners within 500 feet as required by Section
SrPC CUP 63 Sprint - Page 2 Printed: October 5, 2001
Greg - R9/25
9.210.020 of the Zoning Ordinance. To date, no written correspondence has been
received. All correspondence received will be forwarded to the Commission prior to the
meeting.
Public Agency Review: The applicant's development request was sent to responsible
agencies and City departments on July 12, 2001, and all pertinent comments received
have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings necessary to approve Conditional Use Permit 2001-063 can be made and are
contained in the attached Resolution with the exception of the following:
A. Landscaping - Since a landscaping plan was not submitted, staff recommends that
the applicant prepare a plan that includes vine attached to security walls and a
minimum of two additional palm trees to complement and accentuate the monopalm
structure (Condition 8).
B. On -site Parking - As designed, no service vehicle parking spaces are proposed as
required by Section 9.170.060(G) of the Zoning Code. Under the Code provisions,
two parking spaces shall be set aside for this communication facility (Condition 9).
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_ approving Conditional Use Permit 2001-
063, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval.
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Site Plan
3. Elevations
P�.repar d by: Submitted by:
r
Gregg. * us�ell Christine di lorio
Associate -Planner Planning Manager
P:\GRE:G\SRPC CUP63SprintAdams 2001.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A 68'
HIGH MONOPALM COMMUNICATION ANTENNA AND
RELATED GROUND MOUNTED EQUIPMENT WITHIN PHASE
#2 OF STORAGE USA LOCATED AT 46-600 ADAMS
STREET
CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-063
APPLICANT: SPRINT PCS
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 9t' day of October, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, at the request
of Sprint PCS, to consider a 68-foot high wireless radio communication antenna and
related ground mounted electrical equipment cabinets and wall enclosure for placement
within Storage USA, more particularly described as:
Assessor's Parcel Number: 649-020-054
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 findings to justify approval of said Conditional Use
Permit:
1 . The design and improvements of the proposed monopalm are consistent with
La Quinta General Plan Policy 7-1.4.10 that requires utilities and communication
facilities to blend in with the desert environment and surrounding improvements.
2. The proposed monopalm communication antenna is consistent with current
standards of the Zoning Code (Section 9.170.010, Commercial Communications
Towers) in that potential adverse visual effects have been mitigated by design
of the palm tree appearance of the structure. Ground mounted mechanical
equipment will not be visible from outside the development.
3. The proposed monopalm communication antenna is consistent with surrounding
commercial land uses and an appropriate use for the CP Zoning District.
4. The installation of the monopalm antenna and related equipment is exempt from
environmental review pursuant to Section 15332 (Class 32) of the California
Environmental Quality Act.
5. The design of the monopalm communication antenna is not likely to cause
serious public health problems, or adversely impact the general public welfare
or safety, in that public agencies have reviewed the project and found no
significant concerns. It has also been determined that the height of the
monopalm antenna will not obstruct air travel based on FAA regulations.
ResoCUP63 Sprint - p/greg
7/16; 9/25; 104
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditional Use Permit 2001-063, Sprint PCS
October 9, 2001
6. The design of the monopalm communication antenna is not likely to cause
substantial environmental damage, or substantially, and unavoidable injure fish
or wildlife, or their habitat, in that urban improvements such as buildings and
landscaping exist at the site to buffer this new improvement. Furthermore, this
area is protected from regional stormwater flows by the C.V. Stormwater
Channel.
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;
2. That it does hereby approve the above described Conditional Use Permit, 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 91h day of October, 2001, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
P:\GRE:G\ResoPC CUP63 No EASprint.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2001-063, SPRINT PCS
OCTOBER 9, 2001
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
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 Conditional
Use Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
This indemnification shall include any award toward attorney's fees.
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 an improvement or building permit, the applicant shall
obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies, or
departments:
• Community Development Department
• Building and Safety Department
• Riverside County Fire Department
• Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
• Federal Communication Commission (FCC)
• Federal Aeronautical Association (FAA)
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. Development of this site shall be in substantial conformance with Exhibits
approved and contained in the file for Conditional Use Permit 2001-063, unless
amended by the following conditions.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
4. The applicant shall pay 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 the plan checks, permits, and
inspections.
CONDCUP63 Sprint @Adams Printed: October 4, 2001
P-Greg/9-25 Page 1 of 2
Planning; Commission Resolution No. 2001-
Conditional Use Permit 2001-063, Sprint PCS
October 9, 2001
FIRE DEPARTMENT
5. Prior to building permit issuance, final construction plans shall be submitted to
the Fire Department for review and approval.
IMPERIAL IRRIGATION DISTRICT
6. Before any cranes, forklifts, or other aerial equipment are raised, please check
for overhead wires pursuant to the provisions of California Title 8 (Electrical
Safety Orders). Non -qualified electrical workers can get no closer than 6 feet
from IID distribution lines and no closer than 10 feet from transmission lines.
People operating boom type lifting or hoisting equipment can get no closer than
10 feet from IID distribution lines and not closer than 17 feet from transmission
lines.
7. If ground excavation is required, even for seemingly benign applications such as
anchoring a tent, please contact Underground Service Alert (USA). This service
is free of charge provided USA is given at least two working days' notice (800-
227-2600).
MISCELLANEOUS
8. A minimum of two 40 foot tall palm trees shall be planted in close proximity to
the monopalm communication tower and vines shall be esplanade on the outside
of the security walls in 15-foot increments. An automatic timer irrigation
system is required.
9. A minimum of two service vehicle parking spaces shall be provided. These
spaces shall be signed to preclude use by other mini storage users.
10. Heavy gauge, opaque metal gates shall be installed. Chain link fencing is not
allowed.
CONDCUP63 Sprint @Adams Printed: October 4, 2001
P-Greg/9-25 Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENTS
rA
Attachment 1
l'+g
T STORM Ffi
tip iY" 4 'f :4 1.
46Ih AVE. - 461h AV -.
1
aSI
Jrc
T4 OAd
j
1
a
Z
N
ORENCE
t
LA
QU I N TA
VICINITY MAPERR
DIRECTIONS FROM SPRINT REGIONAL OFFICE IN IRVINE:
405 FREEWAY NORTH TO 55 FREEWAY NORTH. TO 91 FREEWAY EAST, TO 1-10
FREEWAY EAST, APPROX 100 MILES TO INDIO. CA.. EXIT WASHINGTON ST. TURN
RIGHT. TO HWY 111 TURN LEFT. TO CORPORATE WAY TURN RIGHT.
THOMAS BROS. MAP: RV849-H2
DRIVING DIRECTIONS
THE
MITE
SPEI
TELE
MOU
CABI
P
F.'Pm
SPRI
461K
PLEA
IMPL
PHOI
PROI
PHOI
T
OWNI
AOOF
CON,,
PH01
AP
SITE
TELE
182:
SANT
CON,
PM
AREA
JURk
CURE
ZON1
A.P.h
HANG
Now and rights incidental
Ilion. on the map Of said
Now and rights incidental
riion, an the map of said
alk
K40w and rights incidental
otion, on the map of said
n thereon.
below and rights incidental
municipal
2000-267424. Official Records.
m thereon.
Wow and rights incidental
hr communications.
once by electrical mneons.
No. 2000-396210. Official Records.
rent is not disclosed
,PHIC SCALE
hneh - 100 it
Attachment Z
w6SrwARD NO ltw
I n
I'd- 2- Bross disk
"RCE 26401" per
PM 29351, P.M.B.
I
197/33-36
iq
N
at.
I�
Thence Soutn 73'00.58" Eost 21.08 feet:
Thence South 29'41'07" West 24.75 feel:
Thence North 89.45'34" West 13.50 feel la the POINT OF BEGINNI
Said parcel contains 579 square feet. more or less.
Proposed Sprint Access Easement
Legal Description
Being a strip of land 20.00 feet in width over o portion of Paree
shown by Parcel Mop NO. 29351, in the City Of LO Quints. Count,
Riverside, Slate of Colifornio, On file in Boric 197. Pages 33 to
Parcel Maps. records of Riverside County. California, lying 10.00 I
each side of the following described centerline:
COMMENCING at the southwest comer of said Parcel 1.
Thence along the southerly line of said Parcel 1, North 89'42'27"
20.00 feet to a line 20.00 feel easterly and parallel with meosur
right angles from the westerly lime of said Parcel 1, said point a
the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING:
Thence along said parallel line North 00'04'01" East 279.89 feet:
Thence dep rt'eng said parallel Jim North 89'45'47* East 225.44 1
Thence North 0014'26' East 18.30 feel to the POINT OF TERMIN
The sidelines of said 20.00 fool wide strip of land are to be ssl
shortened so os to begin on the southerly line of said Parcel 1
at all angle points.
Proposed Sprint Utility Easement
Legal Description
Being l�r
a portion of Pairce
wn by PxrMap No. 29351. in the City of L
shown ef a Quintc. COun1
Riverside. State of California. an Me in Book 197. Pages 33 to
Parcel Mops. records of Riverside County, California, lying 4.00 IL
each Side of the following described centerline:
COMMENCING at the southeast corner of said Parcel 1:
Thence along the southerly line Ot sod Parcel 1, South B9'42'27
1.49 feel:
Thence North 0014'13" West 2.32 feet to the TRUE POINT OF 8
Thence South 8945'47' West 40.30 feet:
Thence North 0014'13 West 271.19 feet:
Thence South 89'45'47" Weal 112.85 reek
Thence North 0014*26" East 25.07 feel to the POINT OF TERM6
` The sidelines of said 8.00 loot wide strip of land are to meet I
points and beextendedor%Loose Area. to end an the lout
swlhaoslerly `
I
Lille
�I Proposed Sprint MORopelm� /t�`` J7
t ; posed Sprint
se
4 6 LeaAreas q� 1�
(579 SF.) �.
t �rcei
(.Accen
posed 20' wide Sprint I I
? I; Basirmlrnt I I
Proposed 8wide Sprint I
Utility Basement I
I1. M.-
415.27' _ 210-0' -�
990.90' _� ccRAORAra IAr� /0/8.48'
Ne9•i2 27'B
----------------- . -
---------- - ---
Fd. l incur'
PLS 6697" per I 1
PY 29351, P M.B. 197/33-36
t 11.70' north of PL car.
i A :
^I I c41
i. Fd. S & IN 'LS 5749' t
3 per PM 29351, P M.8 I l�
197/33-36
I I
I
\77i I
Attachment 3
PROPOSED SPRRR "" t E W
IR wlENNS TOT { PER XEtOR.
SECTORS. IT 195'. ]BS. ()t'L K )9Y K I.R'0).
(Ltl)T BRRCItQS TO RE MTA LED OR ALL SECTORS)
PROPOSED SPRINT PwEI wtCxwS
13 wfEMYS TOTAL, [PER SECTOR.
SECTORS, IY. I9Y. Z.T. I)[L
TO -
(YOT BRPCK[I$ RC W.-LEO ON aLL SECTORS)
-
PROPOSED SPROO !)S' LKR10Pt
PROPOSED SPRwI f13' YONOPtLY�
g
g
g
C
PROPOSED SPRMr
a �$
BTS EW.W.,
e
PROPOSED s -O' 0CH
PROPOSED SPRM
CWl RLOCR
STS E
PROPOSED e'-0' x6x
CYO BLOCK Zu
r-
EAST ELEVATION
®
3
SOUTH ELEVATION
PROPOSED SPRM !)S' YWgPR111-,,i
PROPOSED CROPITx
PROPOSED x-CONi1411RlTKRD
PROPOSED SPRmT t)S' xpDPYY
PROPOSED RECT CADDIE)
CRBRICIS (TA)
FOR TELCO (YMOM ON CM
%RW
R/OM XRNCE WITS
PROPOSED PPC CA0KT PROPOSED OPS txIEIRH
R/SERRCE LIOIT
PROPOS(p PAC CRBu4T
z
PROPOSED 6'-0' ISO.
CYY BLOCK RIR1
PROPOSED B'-O' IDCx
CM BLOCK RAIL
.-
PROPOSED PPC CUPW
--
--
A �
R/SERv" Wrt
9
-
PROPOSED ECR RECEPTACLE
-
l
Yq)xfED ON C))11 RILL {E'
M OIC P S
PROPOSED B'
O
I
ROILAROS (TYP)
________ __________________>�__________
_ _____-__--
PROPOSED T
PROPOSED xCX
PRCWC
SLAS
CONCRETE SW
CONCRETE $IP8
SL
EAST EQUIPMENT ELEVATION
4
SOUTH EQUIPMENT ELEVATION
PH #C
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: OCTOBER 9, 2001
CASE: NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-010
APPLICANT: EDWIN G. COSEK (ANDREW'S BAR AND GRILL)
PROPERTY
OWNER: MONIQUE JEAN PIERRE
REQUEST: REVIEW OF EXTERIOR REMODELING PLANS FOR AN EXISTING
ONE STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING (FORMERLY CHEZ
MONIQUE) ON 0.17 ACRES TO INCLUDE OUTDOOR PATIO
DINING, LANDSCAPING, SIGNS AND VEHICLE PARKING AREAS
LOCATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION:
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND
USE:
BACKGROUND:
78-121 AVENIDA LA FONDA (SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
AVENIDA LA FONDA AND DESERT CLUB DRIVE)
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION
15332 (CLASS 32) OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION
OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)
AS AMENDED (CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 83-63).
THE PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED ENTIRELY BY LAND THAT IS
ZONED VC (VILLAGE COMMERCIAL) AND EITHER DEVELOPED
WITH COMMERCIAL LAND USES OR VACANT.
The property is located on the southwest corner of Avenida La Fonda and Desert Club
Drive in the downtown Village area. The existing one story building of 1,920 square
feet (circa 1978) was until recently operated as Chez Monique tavern. Building walls
are clad in white stucco with half -round windows on the north and east building
elevations. Wood roof eaves are painted blue and brown; roof mounted mechanical
equipment is screened by a concrete the mansard roof and low -profile stucco parapet
wall (Attachment 1). From the south elevation, the roof equipment is not screened.
No landscaping exists around the existing building facing the streets.
SRPC VUP2001-10, Greg 53 - Page 1 Printed: October 4, 2001
Fm SS VUP6 - 9/25
The commercial structure is on a rectangular parcel measuring 75' wide by 100' in
depth, backing up to a 20-foot wide paved alley on its south boundary. The westerly
25' of the lot is vacant. Overhead utility lines and poles flank the north side of the
alleyway. Off -site infrastructure improvements are currently being completed by the
City, including new public parking spaces, hardscape, decorative lighting and
landscaping features on Avenida La Fonda (Attachment 2 - The Village). The Desert
Sage Restaurant is located to the west of this site.
Approximately six to eight unmarked parking spaces are located on the north and
south sides of the building. A masonry enclosure for a commercial trash bin also
exists at the southwest corner of the site adjacent to the alley.
An existing internally illuminated cabinet sign, measuring approximately 4'-0" high by
5'-0" long, is mounted on the north building elevation by the front entry door. The
Chez Monique sign panel has been removed from the sign cabinet leaving the
flourescent bulbs exposed.
Project Proposal:
The applicant proposes to remove the northerly parking area and replace it with an
outdoor dining area. Two sets of French doors will be installed on the north side of
the building with new decorative glass lens lanterns and other incandescent lighting
added.
Dining areas are enclosed by a Navajo white stucco wall that includes glass panels
between 5'-0" high pilasters topped with globe lights. A trellis is proposed over the
outdoor dining area using 4" by 6" rough sawn wood joists at 8-inch centers that are
attached to the facade and extend over the patio area to the proposed front yard
stucco wall, a span of approximately 30'-0". Trellis members are supported by two
4" by 12" rough sawn glue laminated wood beams and 4-inch metal structural support
posts spaced 15'-0" apart with vertical clearances of 8'-6" to 9'-6". Metal support
poles are to be covered with rough sawn lumber to match the other trellis elements.
Roof ,joist ends are capped using rough sawn lumber.
The applicant is proposing new landscaping consisting of Mesquite and Palo Verde
trees, Mexican Fan palms and various five gallon shrubs on Avenida La Fonda. The
number of trees is not specified. A combination of five gallon shrubs such as
Bougainvillea, Day Lily, Desert Spoon and Hibiscus are also used in the 10'-6" wide
parkway. Similar plant material is proposed on west side of the outdoor dining area.
Desert Gold gravel in 3/8" size will be used for groundcover along with annual color.
Jasmine vines are proposed to be attached to the pilasters. Oleander shrubs will
screen the 25' wide undeveloped property to the west of the existing building that is
planned to be covered in gravel to reduce blowing dust. Parkway landscaping is also
proposed on Desert Club Drive using wood planter boxes for areas adjacent to the
building planted with Verbena and Lantana shrubs.
SRPC VUP2001-10, Greg 53 - Page 2 Printed: October 4, 2001
Fm SS VUP6 - 9/25
Existing parking spaces on the south side of the building will be expanded to include
an additional parking stall to the west of the existing trash enclosure for a total of six
spaces. Under the proposal, two driveway approaches where the parking area was
will be removed.
The applicant proposes to install a 10 square foot light blue neon sign on the east
elevation between the half -circle windows and copy will read "Andrews" in script
style; behind the neon lighting is a dark blue Plexiglas panel mirroring the sign copy
details up to a letter height of 20-inches. The electric transformer for the sign is to be
mounted inside the building. No other permanent signs are proposed.
Public Notice: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on September
24, 2001, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet around the project
boundaries. To date, no correspondence has been received.
Public; Agency Review: All written comments received are on file with the Community
Development Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made
part of the Conditions of Approval for this case.
Architecture and Landscape Review Committee Action: The Committee reviewed this
request at its meeting of October 3, 2001, and on a 2-0 vote, adopted Minute Motion
2001-042, recommending approval, subject to the attached recommended conditions
(Attachment 3 - Draft Minutes).
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The Findings required in Section 9.65.040 (Village Use Permit Review Process) of the
Zoning Ordinance can be made as noted in the attached Resolution with the following
exceptions:
1. 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 and with the quality of design illustrated in the
Village at La Quinta Guidelines with the exception of the wood joists for the
patio cover shall be able to resist warping (Condition 36C).
2. Site Design - The site design of the project including entries, circulation,
screening, is compatible with the surrounding area, provided 90-degree alleyway
parking is designed to comply with Condition 24 and unused curb cuts are
removed (Condition 18). Staff recommends the reduction in required parking
spaces based on the availability of off -site parking in the Village. However, the
SRPC VUP2001-10, Greg 53 - Page 3 Printed: October 4, 2001
Fm SS VUP6 - 9/25
dining area shall not extend more than 25 feet from the north side of the
building (Condition 36D). Prior to opening the restaurant, the applicant shall
also repair the existing trash enclosure by installing new heavy gauge metal
gates (Condition 36B) and upgrade exterior building lights (Condition 35).
3. Landscape Design - Project landscaping, including but not limited to the
location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials has been
designed so as to provide relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize
prominent design elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a
harmonious transition between adjacent land uses and between development
and open space, and provide an overall unifying influence, and be compatible
with surrounding development and the concepts of the Village at La Quinta
Guidelines in that the plans provide an attractive appearance surrounding the
existing building and new parking areas. To comply with the tree shading
requirements of the Zoning Code Section 9.150.080(M6), one tree shall be
planted at the southwest corner of the property (Condition 37A).
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, approving Village Use Permit 2001-
010, subject to conditions.
Attachments:
1. Existing Site Plan Exhibit
2. Village Improvement Map
3. Draft ALRC Minutes of October 3, 2001
are by:
Greg Tr�u�dell, Associate Planner
Submitted by:
Ch stine di for , Planni g Manager
SRPC VUP2001-10, Greg 53 - Page 4
Fm SS VUP6 - 9/25
Printed: October 4, 2001
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING EXTERIOR REMODELING PLANS AND
PARKING AND LANDSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS FOR
AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL RESTAURANT
(FORMERLY CHEZ MONIQUE)
CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-010
APPLICANT: EDWIN G. COSEK (ANDREW'S BAR AND GRILL)
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 9" day of October, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the
request of Edwin G. Cosek (Andrew's Bar and Grill) for approval of a Village Use
Permit to allow exterior remodeling and construction of new parking areas for a
restaurant located at 78-121 Avenida La Fonda, more particularly described as:
APN: 770-122-001; Lots 1-3 of Desert Club Tr. Unit #1
Southwest corner of Desert Club Drive and Avenida La Fonda
WHEREAS, on October 3, 2001, the Architectural Review Committee, on
a 2-0 vote, recommended approval of the restaurant expansion plan, subject to
conditions requiring landscape and patio cover upgrades.
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 Village Use Permit:
A. The project is consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code in that the use
is permitted in the Village Commercial District and has been designed to comply
with the applicable VC District development standards, guidelines, and
provisions as addressed herein.
B. The project will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health,
safety, and general welfare in that the outdoor dining is a permitted use and
parking is provided both on- and off -site in close proximity. The proposed bar
and grill restaurant will operate in conformance with all applicable City
requirements and the reduced number parking spaces, as required by the Zoning
Code, for this expansion request will not adversely impact continued
development of commercial uses in The Village due to shared off -site parking
arrangements by and between the City of La Quinta, and the applicant. Two
driveway approaches at the intersection of Avenida La Fonda and Desert Club
ResoPC VUP 2001-010.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Village Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin Cosek
October 9, 2001
Drive will be removed by this project in compliance with The Village design
guidelines, enhancing downtown pedestrian safety.
C. This project has been determined to be categorically exempt from the provisions
of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Section 15332
because only outdoor dining is proposed along with development of additional
parking stalls and landscaping improvements for an existing commercial
building. Infrastructure improvements and other urban services exist at this
time to serve this remodel request.
D. The architectural design of the building, with the remodeling, is compatible with
the surrounding uses and quality of design illustrated in the Village at La Quinta
Design Guidelines, provided upgrades are made to the patio trellis and parking
lot design as conditioned. Site lighting shall be shielded when required and low
level for pedestrian activities.
E. The proposed 10 square foot exposed neon building -mounted permanent ID sign
is consistent in size, color and location with Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Code,
provided the lighting does not produce excessive and unwanted glare.
F. The site design of the project including building entries, circulation, screening,
and landscaping is compatible with the surrounding businesses, provided the
parking spaces comply with City design provisions, including shading,
landscaping and lighting, as recommended.
G. The landscaping plans provide an attractive appearance surrounding the existing
building and new outdoor dining area through the uses of varying species of
trees and palms and shrubbery. Groundcover elements provide water retention
for plants and gravel will be used to control dust.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the Findings of the Planning
Commission in this case; and
2. That it does hereby approve Village Use Permit 2001-010 for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached conditions.
ResoPC. VUP 2001-010.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Village: Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin Cosek
October 9, 2001
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9" day of October, 2001, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
p:\stan\vup 2001-006 pc res.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-_
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-010
EDWIN G. COSEK (ANDREW'S BAR AND GRILL)
OCTOBER 9, 2001
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 Village Use
Permit and any other challenge pertaining to this project. This indemnification
shall include any award toward attorney's fees.
'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 permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies and
departments:
O Fire Marshal
O Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit)
O Community Development Department
0 Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD)
Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB)
'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.
'The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES
construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB
acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading
or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm
Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site.
A:\Cond PC VUP10 Andrews Bar.wpd Greg - 53 - Printed October 4, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin G. Cosek
October 9, 2001
Page 2
PROPERTY RIGHTS
3. The applicant shall vacate abutter's rights of access to public streets and
properties from all frontage along the streets and properties except access points
shown on the approved site plan.
4. 'fhe 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.
5. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way
or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned
by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access
easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property
owners.
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.
6. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of
qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be
submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise
Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." Precise grading plans shall
have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building
Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans
are not approved for construction until they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike
paths, entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally
include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments.
"Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
A:\Cond PC VUP10 Andrews Bar.wpd Greg - 53 - Printed October 4, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin G. Cosek
October 9, 2001
Page 3
7. 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.
8. 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
9. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or furnish
an executed, secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy
obligations required by the City prior to approval of a final map or parcel map or
issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured
agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with
Chapter 13, LQMC.
Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing
structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements.
10. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide estimates of
improvement costs for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Estimates
shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or
ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the
approval of the City Engineer.
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be
approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V.
cable improvements. However, development -wide improvements shall not be
agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the
telephone authority that the applicant has met all requirements for telephone
service to lots within the development.
1 1. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely
manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan or in an improvement
A:\Conti PC VUP10 Andrews Bar.wpd Greg - 53 - Printed October 4, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin G. Cosek
October 9, 2001
Page 4
agreement, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or
final building inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of
the project or call upon the surety to complete the improvements.
GRADING
12. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape
areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
13. 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.
14. 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.
DRAINAGE
15. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in an approved manner.
The proposed landscape area within the 25'-0" lot shall retain 100% of the
runoff and nuisance water in this area.
UTILITIES
16. The applicant shall coordinate with Imperial Irrigation District for the removal or
relocation of the existing power if it conflicts with the proposed parking stalls
from the alley.
17. 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.
A:\Cond PC VUP10 Andrews Bar.wpd Greg - 53 - Printed October 4, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin G. Cosek
October 9, 2001
Page 5
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
18. Improvements shall include removal of the existing driveway approaches off of
Avenida La Fonda and Desert Club Drive. The applicant shall complete the
sidewalk improvements along the 25'-0" of vacant property to match the existing
sidewalk to the west. In the areas where the driveway approaches are removed,
standard curb and gutter and sidewalks shall be constructed. New sidewalks
shall match the existing color scheme as used in the recently constructed village
improvements.
19. 'The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
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).
20. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved
by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets and parking areas shall be
stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
21. 'The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design
procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated
traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall
be as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials):
Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
22. '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.
23. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. All parking access shall be restricted to the alley.
A:\Conti PC VUP10 Andrews Bar.wpd Greg - 53 - Printed October 4, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin G. Cosek
October 9, 2001
Page 6
24. Parking requirements for the site are:
A. The first parking stall west of Desert Club Drive (Stall #6) shall
accommodate handicap parking. An ADA accessible handicap ramp shall
be constructed adjacent to the existing sidewalk on Desert Club Drive.
B. The proposed parking spaces off of the alley shall have raised parking blocks
a minimum of 2' south of the existing building.
25. The City will conduct final inspections only when the buildings have improved
street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The
improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings
and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial
pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final
inspections.
QUALITY ASSURANCE
26. 'The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
27. '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.
28. '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.
29. 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.
MAINTENANCE
30. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all
on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. The
A:\Cond PC VUP10 Andrews Bar.wpd Greg - 53 - Printed October 4, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin G. Cosek
October 9, 2001
Page 7
applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released
from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency.
FEES AND DEPOSITS
31. 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.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
32. Prior to opening the restaurant, the applicant shall contact the Fire Department
(863-8886) for a walk-through safety inspection.
COAC;HELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
33. -the District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area in
accordance with the current regulations, provided the payment of certain fees
and charges are obtained. This site shall be annexed to Improvement District
Nos. 55 and 82 for sanitation services.
34. The District requires restaurants to install a grease interceptor, including a sample
box, sanitary tee and running trap with clean -out, prior to any discharge to its
sanitation facilities. The size of the grease interceptor will be determined by the
Riverside County Environmental Health Department and approved by the District.
Installation of the interceptor will be inspected by the District.
MISCELLANEOUS
35. Nonconforming Wal-pak security lighting on the building shall be replaced with
shielded light fixtures in compliance with City requirements, ensuring parking
spaces are also adequately lit. The final lighting plan and fixture specifications
shall be submitted with the remodel plans to the City's Building and Safety
Department. Unshielded exterior incandescent building lights shall not exceed
160 watts. Globe lighting on top of the patio wall shall be frosted to conceal
the light source.
36. Prior to building permit issuance, the following revisions shall be completed:
A. Reconstruction of the south -facing roof parapet to match existing building
textures and colors and materials.
A:\Cond PC VUP10 Andrews Bar.wpd Greg - 53 - Printed October 5, 2001
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Village Use Permit 2001-010, Mr. Edwin G. Cosek
October 9, 2001
Page 8
B. Heavy gauge, opaque metal gates shall be installed on the existing trash
enclosure. The masonry enclosure shall be painted to match the building.
C. Glue laminated joists shall be used to construct the patio cover.
D. Bench seating for patron waiting is required to be installed inside the patio
area along the north side screen wall thereby reducing the dining area to a
depth of 25'-0" from 30'-0".
37. 'The final landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Community
Development Department, including the following revisions:
.A. Parkway trees shall have a minimum caliper size of 1.0" or greater. Palm
trees shall have a minimum brown trunk height of six feet. One tree (24-
inch box size with 1.5 inch caliper) shall be planted to shade Parking Stall
#1 shown on the site plan.
B. Five gallon shrubs shall be planted at 3'-0" intervals.
C. Shrubs shall be irrigated with bubblers or drip emitters from an automatic
irrigation system.
D. Raised wood planter boxes on Desert Club Drive shall be made of concrete
or comparable material.
A:\Cond PC VUP10 Andrews Bar.wpd Greg - 53 - Printed October 5, 2001
ATTACHMENTS
i Attachment 1 V* w
E.., U
O
aNtenV
Ov`
ca goOW �a
r, aaaq¢ a _Q.
0- . , . G
U
RS
00 wz
4UPOPA
p %.- - r
,C
3ARIQ 9f1'ID
'c'
am
z
0
'S S
tt
s
_'APN' ,. ;� •r
DESERT CLUB DR.
.SFF .qidFFT i9
2L
i
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 3, 2001
DRAFTAttachment 3
trying to make any type of a statement, but actually playing it
down. Committee Member Cunningham stated he did t want to
add detail, but that the building seemed out of balanc and should
have something to balance the weight of the tire building.
Discussion followed regarding the roof line.
4. Committee Member Bobbitt stated it was a andard desert plant
pallette. Some of the tree varieties are fas growing and are short
rooted which tends to make them high aintenance. He would
not use as many of this variety be/bbought
hey are high maintenance
and can be a liability if not maintaaddition, the date palms
in front of the building should at a younger stage
because the older ones can beity in high traffic areas
because of crown drop. The 1prrge planting areas for the shade
trees are great as the trees wA be healthier. Mr. Lathrop stated
they were restricted on wha 'plants they could use because of the
Washington Square Specic Plan. Discussion followed on date
palm trees.
5. There being no furthof discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Membef Cunningham/Bobbitt adopt Minute Motion
2001-041 recomfnending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-708, as commended.
a. Prior o issuance of building permit revise the south building
ele at
increasing the size of the portico columns and the
gieatrafoil to match the lower gable on either side of the
,main structure.
E. Village Use Permit 2001-010; a request of Edwin G. Cosek (Andrews Bar
and Grill) for review of exterior remodeling plans for an existing one story
commercial restaurant building (formerly Chez Monique) on 0.17 acres
to include outdoor patio dining, landscaping and vehicle parking areas
located at 78-121 Avenida La Fonda.
1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Commission. Mr. Ed Cosek stated he was available
to answer any questions.
G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\ALRC 10-3-0 Lwpd 4
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 3, 2001
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the steel tubing indicated
on the patio cover. Mr. Cosek stated the steel columns would be
supporting the main beam that the rafters run on. The steel
beams would be covered with resawn cedar and stained to match.
Committee Member Bobbitt asked what would be on top of the
lattice for shade. Mr. Cosek stated it would be an open lattice.
Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern was that the wood
would warp and turn. Mr. Cosek stated they would be using
blocking and are adding a fascia in front. It would also be stained.
Committee Member Bobbitt stated that if they were to have the
open ends it should have some type of gingerbread finish.
4. Committee Member Cunningham stated he would suggest a
laminated material or paralams for the patio cover. Committee
Member Cunningham stated the blocking would not keep the
wood from turning. The only thing he has found that works in the
desert is gluilams or paralam as they will not turn and will stain
well. He then asked how the existing roof ties in, or does not tie
in with the existing fascia. Mr. Cosek stated they would be
removing the existing fascia and run the boards back underneath.
ANO, The pilasters will be stuccoed the same color as the building.
They would be using lexon glass enclosures rather than wrought
iron on the windows. Committee Member Cunningham stated his
only concern was the use of woods and would recommend
paralams be used. Discussion followed on how the roof
construction would tie in.
5. Staff asked if the Committee had any concern regarding the box
frame system not having lattice work above. Committee Member
Bobbitt stated he had seen some that are open and are attractive
if heavy enough. He asked the size of the wood. Staff stated
they would be 4" X 6".
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt adopt Minute Motion
2001-042 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-010
as amended:
a. Paralams shall be used for the patio cover joists.
1=. Village Use Permit 2001-012; a request of Santa Rosa Plaza, LLC for
review of landscapii and architectural plans for 18 buildings "Casitas"
portion of a 14 acre s e to be located on the north side of Calle Tampico,
between Desert Club a d Avenida Bermudas.
GAWPDOCSWA MALRC10-3-01.wpd
PH #D
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: OCTOBER 9, 2001
CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-012
REQUEST: REVIEW OF 18 CASITAS BUILDINGS, EACH CONTAINING EIGHT
UNITS, FOR A TOTAL OF 144 UNITS ON A PORTION OF THE
SANTA ROSA PLAZA SPECIFIC PLAN PROPERTY
LOCATION: THE NORTH SIDE OF CALLE TAMPICO, BETWEEN DESERT CLUB
DRIVE AND AVENIDA BERMUDAS.
APPLICANT: SANTA ROSA PLAZA, LLC
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (EA 2000-406) WAS
CERTIFIED ON FEBRUARY 6, 2001 BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR
SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-050. THERE ARE NO CHANGED
CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS OR NEW INFORMATION WHICH
WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC
RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166.
GENERAL PLAN/
ZONING/
DESIGNATIONS: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL/VILLAGE COMMERCIAL
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
The project site is currently vacant desert land. The site is bounded on three sides by
roadways, specifically Calle Tampico on the south, Avenida Bermudas on the west,
and Desert Club on the east. The La Quinta Evacuation Channel occurs along the
northern boundary of the site. The City Council approved the Specific Plan, with
conditions of approval, on February 6, 2001.
The Specific Plan provided for up to 72 casitas on the northern end of the property,
with the option to add up to 78 more on parcels originally planned for retail
commercial development in the southern half of the site (called parcels 4, 5, 6 and 7
in the Specific Plan).
G:\WPDC)CS\PC Stf Rpt\SantaRosaP VUP.WPD
Proiect Request
The Village Use Permit application requests approval for the construction of a total of
144 casitas units, 72 on the northern end of the property, and an additional 72
immediately south of the planned hotel on the site. A total of 18 buildings are
proposed, each housing 8 one -bedroom units.
The casitas' architectural style is Mediterranean, and is generally consistent with the
approved Specific Plan. Two building types are proposed, one with stone veneer, and
one without. Coloring of the buildings will also vary slightly. The buildings are
proposed to be stucco, in varying tones of off white, with wrought iron banisters and
balcony railings. This is a slight but acceptable modification to the renderings provided
in the Specific Plan, which showed stucco stair railings. Tile pitched roofs are
proposed. Wood shutters are included, as are wood exposed rafters under the eaves
of the buildings.
The facade includes square pillars which provide shaded balconies and patios. On the
other sides of the buildings, the elevations appear to show similar pillars, although the
lack of renderings makes this item difficult to gauge.
A broad mix of plant types is proposed, which will create visual interest on the
property.
Parking has been provided consistent with the requirements of the approved Specific
Plan.
Public Notice
This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 28, 2001.
All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice as required by the Zoning Ordinance of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
To date, no comments have been received.
Public Agency Review
All written comments received are on file with the Community Development
Department. All applicable agency comments received have been made part of the
Conditions of Approval for this case.
Architecture and Landscape Review Committee Recommendations: The Architecture
and Landscape Review Committee reviewed the Village Use Permit at its meeting of
October 2, 2001, and recommended conditions of approval, which have been
incorporated into the attached conditions.
G:\WPDIJCS\PC Stf Rpt\SantaRosaP VUP.WPD
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
As conditioned by the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, the findings
necessary to recommend approval of the Village Use Permit can be made, as noted in
the attached resolution with the following exceptions:
Finding #5 - Architectural Design:
The stone veneer, which appears to be only included on small portions of one
prototype, is recommended by the ALRC to be utilized as an integral design material
for this prototype (Condition #2), since the siting of the buildings will make all sides
highly visible to pedestrians walking through the project.
Findina #6 - Site Design:
The Specific Plan included a condition of approval which required that any casitas
planned for parcels 4, 5, 6 and 7 would include 50% of the land in landscaping. The
current configuration of the parcels, results in 45.7% landscaping, net of building and
parking lot areas. This calculation, however, does not include the gazebo or pavilion
area located immediately south of the casitas. If this area is added to the calculations,
the landscaped area for the casitas will exceed the required 50% of landscaped area.
A condition of approval has been added (Condition #1) which requires that the
gazebo/pavilion area, and the surrounding landscaping, be constructed with the
southern buildings of the casitas.
The Specific Plan required that all perimeter improvements be included with the first
phase of development. As this appears to be the first phase, the condition has been
reiterated (Condition #5).
The lighting for the project site was required in the Specific Plan to meet the City'
standards. Preliminary plans submitted by the project proponent do not meet those
standards. A condition of approval (Condition #6) has been added which requires that
the project proponent receive staff approval for the lighting plan.
Findings #7 - Landscape Design:
The Specific Plan included a condition of approval that berming be provided throughout
the site. The berming, however, is not shown on the landscaping plan provided. A
condition of approval has been recommended by the ALRC (Condition #3) which
requires staff review of final landscaping plans to assure that berming is included.
Finally, the majority of the landscaping is proposed to be in turf. In order to ensure
water efficient landscaping, the ALRC recommends the addition of a condition of
approval (Condition #4) which limits turf to 25% of all landscaping areas.
G:\WPDIDCS\PC Stf Rpt\SantaRosaP VUP.WPD
Finding #8 - Sign Program
No master signage program has yet been submitted for the project site. A condition
of approval is included (Condition #7) which requires the approval of both a master
signage program, and a conforming signage permit for the casitas project. The lighting
specifications submittal by the project proponent includes banner poles on each of the
light fixtures. Banners are considered as signse under the Municipal Code. As such,
banners, if desired by the project proponent, are required to be included in the Specific
Plan. Banners are not mentioned in the approved Specific Plan. As such, any banners
to be proposed must be enumerated in the Specific Plan, and require a Specific Plan
Amendment. A condition of approval has been added to address this issue (Condition
#8) .
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of Village Use Permit 2001-012, subject to the findings and
conditions.
Attachments:
1. Development Plan Booklet
2. Elevations, Site Plan and Floor Plans
3. ALRC Minutes of October 2, 2001
Prepared by:
Nicole Sauviat Criste, Consulting Planner
Submitted by:
0z
Christine di lorio, Pla ping Manager
G:\WPDC)CS\PC Stf Rpt\SantaRosaP VUP.WPD
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QU1NTA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS
FOR 18 CASITAS BUILDINGS ON A PORTION OF A 14.3
ACRE SITE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CALLE TAMPICO,
BETWEEN DESERT CLUB AND AVENIDA BERMUDAS.
CASE NO.: VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-012
APPLICANT: SANTA ROSA PLAZA, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 9th day of October, 2001, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for the Santa
Rosa Plaza project for review of a Village Use Permit to allow construction of a 144
casitas on a portion of a 14.3 acre site located on the north side of Calle Tampico,
between Desert Club Drive and Avenida Bermudas, more particularly described as:
APN 770-020-001 & 770-020-002
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the
City of La Quinta did, on the 2nd day of October, 2001 recommend approval of the
proposed project, by adoption of Minute Motion 2001-043, subject to conditions of
approval;
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 Village Use Permit:
1. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the General Plan goals,
policies and programs relating to the Village Commercial land use designation,
and supports resort residential and commercial opportunities for the residents
and visitors to the Cove.
2. The proposed Village Use Permit, as conditioned, is consistent with the
standards of Specific Plan 2000-050, which establishes development standards
for the project.
3. The proposed Village Use Permit will not be detrimental to the public health,
safety and welfare, as it has been designed to be compatible with surrounding
development, and conform with the City's standards and requirements, as
conditioned.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\PCResoSRPVUP.WPD
Planning Commission Resolution 2001-
Village Use Permit 2001-012
Santa Rosa Plaza
4. The proposed Village Use Permit complies with the architectural design
standards for Specific Plan 2000-050, and implements the high quality
standards called for in that document.
5. The proposed Village Use Permit is consistent with the landscaping standards
and palette in Specific Plan 2000-050.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning
Commission in this case; and
2. 'that it does hereby approve Village Use Permit 2001-012, for the reasons set
forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval attached
hereto; and
3. 'That it does hereby confirm that Environmental Assessment 2000-406 assessed
the environmental concerns of this Village Use Permit.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9th day of October, 2001, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN
Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
GAWPDOCSTC ResolutionsTCResoSRPVUP.WPD
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
VILLAGE USE PERMIT 2001-012 - SANTA ROSA PLAZA
OCTOBER 9, 2001
1. 'The parcel immediately south of the southeastern four casitas buildings will be
improved, including the gazebo/pavilion and associated landscaping, prior to the
issuance of occupancy permits for these buildings. The design and elevations
of the gazebo/pavilion shall be reviewed by the Architecture and Landscape
Review Committee prior to the issuance of building permits.
2. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the stone veneer shall be
included as an integral design material of one prototype.
3. The final landscaping plan shall be amended to include berming throughout the
interior of the property, varying in height from 1 to 3 feet. The amended
landscaping plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department
for review and approval.
4. Turfed areas shall not exceed 25% of the landscaped area.
5. All perimeter improvements, including landscaped parkways and street
improvements, shall be completed prior to the issuance of any occupancy
permit for the proposed casitas.
6. Lighting for the project site shall conform to the City's standards. A final
lighting plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for
review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits.
7. A master signage program for the entire site encompassed in Specific Plan
2000-050 shall be approved by the Planning Commission prior to the permitting
of individual signs for the casitas buildings and associated land uses.
8. No banners are permitted without a Specific Plan Amendment.
9. 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 tentative
map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting
its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding
and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\PCResoSRPVUPCOA.WPD
ATTACHMENT #,
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 3, 2001
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the steel tubing indicated
on the patio cover. Mr. Cosek stated the steel columns would be
supporting the main beam that the rafters run on. The steel
beams would be covered with resawn cedar and stained to match.
Committee Member Bobbitt asked what would be on top of the
lattice for shade. Mr. Cosek stated it would be an open lattice.
Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern was that the wood
would warp and turn. Mr. Cosek stated they would be using
blocking and are adding a fascia in front. It would also be stained.
Committee Member Bobbitt stated that if they were to have the
open ends it should have some type of gingerbread finish.
4. Committee Member Cunningham stated he would suggest a
laminated material or paralams for the patio cover. Committee
Member Cunningham stated the blocking would not keep the
wood from turning. The only thing he has found that works in the
desert is gluilams or paralam as they will not turn and will stain
well. He then asked how the existing roof ties in, or does not tie
in with the existing fascia. Mr. Cosek stated they would be
removing the existing fascia and run the boards back underneath.
The pilasters will be stuccoed the same color as the building.
They would be using lexon glass enclosures rather than wrought
iron on the windows. Committee Member Cunningham stated his
only concern was the use of woods and would recommend
paralams be used. Discussion followed on how the roof
construction would tie in.
5. Staff asked if the Committee had any concern regarding the box
frame system not having lattice work above. Committee Member
Bobbitt stated he had seen some that are open and are attractive
if heavy enough. He asked the size of the wood. Staff stated
<d they would be 4" X 6".
;. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt adopt Minute Motion
2001-042 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-010
as amended:
a. Paralams shall be used for the patio cover joists.
F. Village Use Permit 2001-012; a request of Santa Rosa Plaza, LLC for
review of landscaping and architectural plans for 18 buildings "Casitas"
portion of a 14 acre site to be located on the north side of Calle Tampico,
between Desert Club and Avenida Bermudas.
G:\WPD0CS\AR1,CWI,RC 10-3-0l .wpd 5
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 3, 2001
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.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to say anything. Mr. Dan Brown, representing the applicant, gave
a presentation on the project.
3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked the height of the buildings. Mr.
Brown stated 26 feet. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about
the brackets shown on the elevations and whether or not they
were structural. Mr. Brown stated they were not structural and
were made out of wood. Committee Member Bobbitt went over
the plant list and suggested they eliminate the eucalyptus trees.
Barrel Cactus are expensive and can be a liability. Committee
Member Bobbitt recommended the date palms be inspected and
young in age.
4. Committee Member Cunningham stated he liked the project and
had no objections.
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt adopt Minute Motion
2001-043 recommending approval of Village Use Permit 2001-
012, as recommended.
G. Site Development Permit 99-659; a request of Point Happy Ranch LLC
for review of architectural and landscaping plans for a mixed use project
consisting of commercial buildings and senior care living in villas and
multi -tenant buildings located on the west side of Washington Street,
south of Highway 111.
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.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Committee. Mr. Dennis Sunstrom, the applicant,
gave a presentation on the project.
G:\WPDOCS\ARLCW,RC 10-3-01.wpd 6
PH #E
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: OCTOBER 9, 2001
CASE NOS.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR ONE RETAIL BUILDING
LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND
HIGHWAY 111, WITHIN POINT HAPPY COMMERCIAL
CENTER
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY OWNER: MADISON DEVELOPMENT L.L.C.
REPRESENTATIVE: JOHN VUKSIC, ARCHITECT
ZONING: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS: THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFIED ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT 2000-395 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-043,
POINT HAPPY COMMERCIAL CENTER. 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
ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: CITY OF INDIAN WELLS (RC) RESORT
COMMERCIAL
SOUTH: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
EAST: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL
WEST: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC)
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC staff rpt. SDP 2001-714.wpd
BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW:
Property Description
The currently vacant project site, located at the northwest corner of Highway 1 1 1
and Washington Street, consists of one parcel consisting of .689 acres. The project
site is within Point Happy Specific Plan 2000-043, adopted by City Council on May
5, 2000, which establishes guidelines and standards in a focused development plan
for the distribution of land uses, location and sizing of supporting infrastructure,
development standards, and requirements for public improvements. The Design
Guidelines portion of the Plan provides specific design criteria which includes
Architectural Guidelines utilizing a contemporary interpretation of Colonial Spanish
style architecture; and Landscape Guidelines that complement and accent the project
with perimeter landscaping which is consistent the Highway Design Guidelines.
Application Under Consideration
The request is for approval of a Site Development Permit to construct one retail
building of 5,000 square feet (Attachment 1) within the Point Happy Commercial
Center Specific Plan 2000-043.
Site Plan
The site has frontage on Washington Street taking access to the center from
signalized driveways on Washington Street and Highway 111 with a drive way
access located at the midway point on Highway 1 1 1. Parking will be provided by
Madison Development as they will be constructing on -site improvements (parking,
parking lot lighting, parking lot planter landscaping) for the entire commercial center.
Architectural Design
Building No. 2
The structure is basically rectangular in shape and uses a variety of interlocking roof
types and heights ranging from 17 to 22 foot with flat concrete roof tile (Attachment
2). Tower elements will be highlighted with a stone the veneer at the base. The
proposed east and west elevations are provided with recessed windows and
architectural pop outs with concrete and stone veneer. Wall material consists of
exterior cement plaster with a light sand finish in a four shades of brown with a
decorative cornice trim that wraps around each elevation. Proposed windows will be
sectional pane glass with anodized frames.
Lighting
Site lighting consists of nine 18-foot high steel square post with a round 2' concrete
footing, located generally on the perimeter of the interior pavement, with box
luminaries directed downward. All poles have one 400 watt metal halide lamps.
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC staff rpt. SDP 2001-714.wpd
Landscape Plan
The applicant has asked that Landscaping Plan be withdrawn from this submittal in
that the plan is not consistent with the Point Happy Specific Plan. The Landscaping
Plan will be submitted to the ALRC Committee and the Planning Commission for
consideration at later date.
Sign Plan
Sign Plans for the each user will be submitted and reviewed by the Planning
Commission at the appropriate time.
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW:
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of October 3, 2001 (Attachment 2).
The Committee unanimously adopted Minute Motion 2001-040, recommending
approval.
COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES:
The applicant's request was sent to sent City Departments and affected public
agencies on September 13, 2001, requesting comments to be returned by September
28, 2001. All applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on September 28,
2001. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the
public hearing notice.
ANALYSIS AND ISSUES:
The findings necessary to approve the Site Development Permit can be made per
Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code as noted in the attached resolution. There are
no Issues.
RECOMMENDATION:
1 . Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2001- , approving Site Development
Permit 2001-714 to allow development plans for one retail building, subject to
conditions.
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC staff rpt. SDP 2001-714.wpd
ATTACHMENTS
1. Project Location Exhibit (Parcel Map 29736)
2. Site Plan and Elevations
3. Draft Minutes of the ARLC meeting of October 3, 2001
Prepared by:
Fred Baker, AICP
Principal Planner
Submitted by:
Christine di lorio
Planning Manager
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC staff rpt. SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA GRANTING APPROVAL
DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR ONE RETAIL BUILDING
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
APPLICANT: MADISON DEVELOPMENT
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the, 9th day of October, 2001 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, to review
building elevations, site plans for one 5,000 square foot commercial building on .689
acres generally located at the northwest corner of Highway 111 and Washington
Street; and
WHEREAS, the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee of the
City of La Quinta, California did on the Xd day of October, 2001 hold a public meeting
to review building elevations and site plan for one 5,000 square foot retail commercial
building on .689 acres generally located at the northwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and
Washington Street, more particularly described as:
PARCEL MAP 29736, PARCEL NO. 2
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 Environmental
Assessment 2000-395 for Specific Plan 2000-043, Point Happy Commercial Center.
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 of approval to justify
approval of said Site Development Permit 2001-714.
1. The proposed commercial building is consistent with the City's General Plan in
that the property is designated Community Commercial (CC). The Land Use
Element (Policy 2-3.1) of the 1992 General Plan Update allows retail business.
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.
2. The proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Point
Happy Specific Plan in that the project is a permitted use and complies with the
development standards and design guidelines.
AABIdg, No. 2\PC RESO. SDP 2001-714.wpd
3. The proposed commercial buildings are consistent with the City's Zoning Code
in that development standards and criteria contained in the Point Happy
Specific Plan 2000-043 supplement, replace 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 in the area, and accommodates site generated traffic at
area intersections.
5. The architectural design of the project is compatible with surrounding
development and development in the area in that it is similar in scale to the
development in the area; the building materials are a durable, aesthetically
pleasing, low maintenance, and a blend of surfaces and textures are provided.
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 2001-714 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 91h day of October, 2001, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
JACQUES ABELS, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC RESO. SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
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 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)
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.
The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES
stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES
construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB
acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading
or :site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm
Waiter Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site.
3. 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).
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
PROPERTY RIGHTS
4. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements
and other property rights required of this approval or otherwise 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. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and
along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five feet
with the express concurrence of IID.
7. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to
utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and
common areas.
8. 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.
9. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or
access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by
others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access
easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property
owners.
10. Prior to placement of any privately -owned buildings or other costly structures in the
City's drainage easement along Washington Street, the applicant shall obtain an
encroachment permit for that purpose. The permit will require that in the event the
City finds it necessary to construct, reconstruct or maintain facilities therein, the
applicant shall indemnify the City from expenses exceeding those which would
have been incurred with hardscape or landscaping.
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
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 landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be submitted on
24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets
& Drainage," and "Landscaping." Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks
for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall
have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for
construction until they are signed.
"Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths,
entry drives, gates, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include
irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise
Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls.
Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City
Engineer.
12. 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.
13. 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.
GRADING
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
14. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard
Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is or
may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood
Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and
exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood
and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of
the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building
permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as
required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met.
15. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish a preliminary
geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified
engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils
report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist.
16. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas
outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
17. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall
submit and receive approval of a Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance
with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form
acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the
provisions of the permit.
18. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water
erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided
with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and
Public Works Departments.
19. Prior to issuance of building permit(s), 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. The data shall be
organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times.
DRAINAGE
The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the
following:
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
20. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the
design storm) shall be retained within the development as per the approved
hydrology/storm drainage for Specific Plan 2000-043 or unless otherwise approved
by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of
adjacent public streets.
21. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater directly or indirectly to the
Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from
the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge
which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide
pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which
may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and
furnished to the City prior to issuance of any grading, construction or building
permit and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and
successors in interest in the land within this development plan excepting therefrom
those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the
indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is
approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the CC&Rs
for meeting these potential obligations
UTILITIES
22. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all
utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including,
but: not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and
telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic
purposes.
23. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all
proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv
are exempt from this requirement.
24. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in
existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration
requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall
provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
25. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development
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).
26. Parking facilities shall conform to the requirements of LQMC Chapter 9.150
27. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings
and other devices.
28. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC,
adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, and as approved by
the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas
shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers.
29. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations which
convey water without ponding and provide lateral containment of dust and residue
for street sweeping. If a wedge or rolled curb design is approved, the lip at the
flowline shall be vertical (1/8" batter) and a minimum of 0.1' in height. Unused
curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to normal curbing prior to final inspection of
permanent building(s) on the lot.
30. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using Caltrans' design
procedure (20-year life) and site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated
traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be
as follows (or approved equivalents for alternate materials):
Residential
Collector
Secondary Arterial
Primary Arterial
Major Arterial
3.0" a.c./4.50" c.a.b.
4.0"/5.00"
4.0"/6.00"
4.5 "/6.00"
5.5"/6.50"
31. 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.
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are
approved.
32. The City will conduct final inspections only when the buildings have improved
street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The
improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and
street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement
thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections.
LANDSCAPING
33. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots, and park areas.
34. 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.
35. 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
36. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet
the approval of the City Engineer.
37. 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.
38. 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.
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
39. 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.
MAINTENANCE
40. 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
41. 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.
FIRE MARSHALL
42. Approved super hydrants, shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165
feet: from any portion of the buildings as measured along approved travel ways.
43. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from centerline to the side
that: the hydrant is on, to identify hydrant locations.
44. Minimum fire flow 1500 GPM for a two hour duration. Fire flow based on type VN
construction and a complete fire sprinkler system.
45. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run
concurrent with the City plan check system.
46. City of La Quinta ordinance requires all commercial buildings 5,000 sq. ft. or larger
to be fully sprinkled. NFPA 13 standard. Sprinkler plans will need to be submitted
to the Fire Department.
47. Any operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a Hood/duct system
for fire protection. (Restaurants, drive-thru's, etc.)
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2001-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2001-714
OCTOBER 9, 2001
48. 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.
49. The applicant or developer shall submit to the Fire Department for approval, a site
plan designating required fire lanes with appropriate lane painting and/or signs.
50. Install a KNOX key box on the building. (Contact the fire department for an
application.)
51. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code.
A:\Bldg No. 2\PC COA SDP 2001-714.wpd
133HIS NOIDNIHSVM
FS
A IFTA C H M F N T-
ATTACHMENT #
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes DRAFT
October 3, 2001 i
3. There being no further discussion, it was moved nd seconded by
Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt a pt Minute Motion
2001-039 recommending approval of Sid Development Permit
2001-671, Amendment #1, subject to the conditions as
recommended.
B. Site Development Permit 2001-715.; a request of Sean Kearney for
review of architectural plans for a single family residence located at 78-
775 Lowe Drive, within Acacia�,t"
1. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Dev�topment Department.
2. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had a potential conflict of
interest due to the proximity of his residence to this home and
therefore, withdrew from the meeting.
3. There being no quorum due to the possible conflict of interest, the
application was removed from the agenda and no action was
taken.
C. Site Development Permit 2001-714; a request of John Vuksic for
elevations and landscaping plans for one retail building (Building #2)
located at the northwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Washington Street
within Point Happy Specific Plan
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.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if they were windows or
blockout as shown on the elevations. Staff stated it was to be
qT windows and the applicant could explain in more detail.
3. Mr. John Vuksic, representing the applicant, gave a presentation
Q on the project.
4. Committee Member Cunningham asked what the users would be
Mr. Vuksic stated so far they had a Tuxedo shop and realtor.
Committee Member Cunningham stated he liked the windows on
Washington Street with the pop -outs, and asked if there were any
City codes that would preclude someone from advertising in the
G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\ALRC 10-3-01.wpd 2
.21
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 3, 2001
window. Planning Manager Christine di lorio stated the Specific
Plan and Sign Ordinance which restricts the amount of window
advertising.
5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what material the window
frames would be constructed of. Mr. Vuksic stated they were a
sage green aluminum.
6. Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no issues and
thought it would be a good addition to the center.
7. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he agreed.
8. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt adopt Minute Motion
2001-040 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-714, as recommended.
D. Site Development Permit 2001-708; a request of Tom Lathrop for review
of building elevations and landscaping plans for a 25,240 square foot
two story building located on Avenue 47, west of Adams Street within
the Washington Square Specific Plan
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.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the Commission. Mr. Tom Lathrop gave a presentation
on the project.
3. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the exterior would be a
sand finish. Mr. tathrop stated it would be machine sprayed, and
® noted some of the architectural details on the building. Committee
Member Cunningham stated the gables portico in the upper center
appears to be light in�tature in relation to the balance of the
building. The columns either side do not carry down with
scale. Planning Manager Ch 'stine di lorio asked if the Committee
wanted the columns enhanc d and increase the size of the
quatrafoil. Committee Member Cunningham stated yes. Mr.
Lathrop stated this side of the building is pushed very close to
Avenue 47 so you are basically within 20 feet of the building
when driving by. Across the street is residential and he was not
G:\WPDOCCS\ARLC\ALRC 10-3-01.wpd 3
B 1 #A
DATE:
CASE NO.:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
ZONING:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION:
BACKGROUND:
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
OCTOBER 9, 2001
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-671, AMENDMENT #1
TOLL BROTHERS (GARY LEMON)
REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR ONE NEW PROTOTYPE
RESIDENTIAL UNIT
IN THE NORMAN GOLF COURSE, ON THE NORTH SIDE OF
AIRPORT BOULEVARD, EAST OF MADISON STREET
RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
LDR (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL)
AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EA 90-159 FOR SP 90-
015) FOR THE PROPERTY THIS PLAN WILL BE CONSTRUCTED
IN WAS CERTIFIED ON DECEMBER 3, 1991, BY THE CITY
COUNCIL. AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ADDENDUM TO
THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT WAS COMPLETED FOR AMENDMENT #1 WHICH WAS
APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 1, 1998. NO
CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS EXIST AND NO
NEW INFORMATION HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WHICH WOULD
TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES
CODE 21166.
The property is within the Norman golf course on the north side of Airport Boulevard,
east of PGA West. These units are proposed for Tract 29348-2. Specific Plan 90-
015 Amendment #2 for The Norman Course, approved under Resolution 99-112,
provides the Community Design Guidelines for the residential units.
Previously, eight prototypical residential plans were approved for the applicant on
April 11, 2000. Four plans are 60 foot wide units with the remaining plans 70 feet
wide. The previously approved plans include a Santa Barbara, Contemporary, and
Italiante style for each plan type. The residences are presently under construction.
P:\STAIN\sdp 2000-671 am 1 pc rpt.wpd
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
Proposed is a new one story (22'-3" feet high) 60 foot wide prototypical plan
containing 3,270 square feet of area with a three car garage (Attachment 1). Two
facades are proposed, with the applicant describing them as Santa Barbara and
Contemporary in style. Features of each facade include multi -paned windows, stucco
popouts, and multi -level interlocking hip roofs. The side and rear elevation for both
facades will be the same. The rear elevation includes a small covered patio detailed
columns and plaster popouts. The side elevations include single and multi -paned
windows and plaster window surrounds. The unit is similar to the previously
approved plans.
Exterior materials will match those previously approved and include flat or S-shaped
concrete roof tiles, plaster walls and small amount of stone accent on the bottom of
the garage area pilasters of the Contemporary plan. Colors will also match those
being used and include primarily earth tone colors varying from white to brown and
red.
Landscaping will match that being provided for the units under construction and
include two trees (24" box size or larger) per lot, lawn, five gallon shrubs, palm tree
accents, and annual color.
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) ACTION:
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of October 3, 2001, and by adoption
of Knute Motion 2001-039 recommended approved as submitted, subject to the
Staff recommended conditions (Attachment 2).
FINDINGS:
As required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the Zoning
Ordinance, the Planning Commission is required to determine that the following
findings can be made prior to approval:
1. The project is consistent with the Design Guidelines of Section 9.60.330
(Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code and Architectural
Guidelines of the Specific Plan (SP 90-015, Amendment #2).
The Zoning Code design guidelines require a minimum of two different front
elevations, varied roof heights, and window and door surrounds for flat
elevation planes. The proposed units comply with these requirements in that
two facades per plan are proposed, roof heights are varied with the
combination of roofs, and plaster surrounds are provided where required. The
P:\STAN\sdp 2000-671 am 1 pc rpt.wpd
Specific Plan guidelines dictate architectural themes, exterior color ranges and
materials, and design criteria. The proposed plans are also in compliance with
these items.
2. 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 and with the quality of design prevalent in the City.
The architectural styles, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural
details, roof style, and other architectural elements of the units are attractive
and compatible with surrounding developments to the south and west and with
the quality of design prevalent in the City.
3. Project landscaping, including but not limited to the location, type, size, color,
texture, and coverage of plant materials has been designed so as to provide
relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements and
vistas, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between
adjacent land uses and between development and open space, provide an
overall unifying influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, and
complement the surrounding project area, ensuring lower maintenance and
water use.
The planting will be similar to that which is now being provided for the
previously approved plans. The pallette includes those plants specified in the
specific plan, as well as additional compatible plants.
4. This project is consistent with the General Plan in that the proposed single
family residences are allowed within the General Plan designation of low
density single family residential.
5. This project has been determined to be categorically exempt from California
Environmental Quality Act Requirements pursuant to Section 15303, Class 3(a)
of the Guidelines for Implementation.
6. The proposed lots for these plans are sufficient in size to accommodate the
prototype unit plan.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 2001- , approving Site Development Permit 2000-671,
Amendment #1, subject to the attached Conditions of Approval.
P:\STAIN\sdp 2000-671 am 1 pc rpt.wpd
Attachment:
1. Proposed plans
2. Draft ALRC Minutes for the meeting of October 3, 2001
Prepared by:
Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner
Submitted by:
)CLI
Christine di loriol Planning Manager
P:\STA.N\sdp 2000-671 am 1 pc rpt.wpd
Minute Motion 2001-
Conditions of Approval - Recommended
Site Development Permit 2000-671, Amendment #1
October 9, 2001
General
1. This approval is for a 3,270 square foot plan and supplements the eight
previously approved plans.
2. Front yard landscaping plans shall conform with that previously approved by
the Community Development Department.
3. 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.
p:\stan\sdp 2000-671 amend #1 pc coa.wpd
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
October 3, 2001 10:00 a.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
was called to order at 10:03 a.m. by Planning Manager Christine di lorio,
who led the flag salute.
B. Committee Members present: Dennis Cunningham and Bill Bobbitt.
C. Staff present: Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Principal Planners Stan
Sawa and Fred Baker, Planning Consultant Nicole Criste, Associate
Planner Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed."RA"'
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
A. Planning Manager Christine di lorio asked if there were any changes to
the Minutes of September 5, 2001. There being no corrections, it was
moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to
approve the minutes as submitted.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Site Development Permit 2001-671 Amendment #1; a request of Toll
Bros. for review of architectural plans for one new prototype residential
unit on the north side of Airport Boulevard, east of Madison Street within
the Norman Golf Course
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.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like
to address the commission. Mr. Gary Lemon stated he was in
agreement with the staff's recommendation.
G:\WPDCCS\ARLC\AI.RC 10-3-0l .wpd
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
October 3, 2001
3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt adopt Minute Motion
2001-039 recommending approval of Site Development Permit
2001-671, Amendment #1, subject to the conditions as
recommended.
B. Site Development Permit 2001-715; a request of Sean Kearney for
review of architectural plans for a single family residence located at 78-
775 Lowe Drive, within Acacia.
1. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had a potential conflict of
interest due to the proximity of his residence to this home and
therefore, withdrew from the meeting.
3. There being no quorum due to the possible conflict of interest, the
application was removed from the agenda and no action was
taken.
C. Site Development Permit 2001-714; a request of John Vuksic for
elevations and landscaping plans for one retail building (Building #2)
located at the northwest corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Washington Street
within Point Happy Specific Plan
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.
2. Committee Member Cunningham asked if they were windows or
blockout as shown on the elevations. Staff stated it was to be
windows and the applicant could explain in more detail.
3. Mr. John Vuksic, representing the applicant, gave a presentation
on the project.
4. Committee Member Cunningham asked what the users would be
Mr. Vuksic stated so far they had a Tuxedo shop and realtor.
Committee Member Cunningham stated he liked the windows on
Washington Street with the pop -outs, and asked if there were any
City codes that would preclude someone from advertising in the
G:\WPDGCS\ARI.C\AI.RC 10-3-0I .wpd 2