2003 05 27 PCPlanning Commission Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-quinta.org
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
MAY 27, 2003
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2003-028
Beginning Minute Motion 2003-010
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled
for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your
comments to three minutes.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of the Minutes of the regular meeting of May 13, 2003.
B. Department Report
V. PRESENTATIONS: None
PC/AGENDA
VI. PUBLIC HEARING:
A. Item ................. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2003-006
Applicant .......... California Intelligent Communities and the La
Quinta Redevelopment Agency
Location ........... Southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Washington
Street
Request ............ Consideration of entering into a Development
Agreement
Action .............. Resolution 2003-
B. Item ................. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-075
Applicant .......... Cham Thi Prince and Lee W. Jones
Location ........... 47-120 Dune Palms Road, the southwest corner of
Highway 1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road
Request ............ Consideration of a use permit for a Cosmetology
School, in an existing commercial space
Action .............. Resolution 2003-
VI1. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Item ................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-764
Applicant .......... Paul Ehline Co.
Location ........... Northeast corner of Madison and Airport Boulevard
Request ............ Consideration of architectural and landscaping
plans for four new single family prototype
residential units with three different architectural
designs for each prototype within the Greg Norman
Estates Development.
Action .............. Resolution 2003-
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Report by Commissioner Steve Robbins on the City Council meeting of
May 20, 2003
X. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular
Meeting to be held on June 10, 2003, at 7:00 p.m.
PC/AGENDA
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
May 13, 2003
I. CALL TO ORDER
7:00 P.M.
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Butler who lead the flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Tom Kirk, Steve Robbins, Robert
Tyler and Chairman Butler.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant
City Attorney Michael Houston, Planning Manager Oscar Orci, Assistant
City Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Fred Baker, Associate
Planner Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Butler asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of
April 22, 2003. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 3, Item 6 be
corrected to read, "...there are no City-wide architectural guidelines per
se, but projects that are controlled by a Specific Plan, such as this one,
do generally contain architectural guidelines for that project." Page 4,
Item 2 corrected to read, "This will allow the Arts Foundation property
to have direct access to a public road, but the City will request that the
existing easterly access road from the Arts Foundation property be
permanently closed off. The new road will be a dedicated public road."
Page 7, Item 15 corrected to clarify the property referred to was the
property on the east side of Washington Street. Commissioner Robbins
asked that Page 5, Item 4 be corrected to read, "...he was concerned
that if there was no signal, there would be a tremendous impact on the
traffic, that a condition would need to be added requiring a Sheriff to be
present.... ", "...required at the intersection before it would be opened...."
There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Robbins to approve the minutes as amended.
Unanimously approved.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-13-03WD.wpd 1
B. Department Report: None
V. PRESENTATIONS: None
VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Site Development Permit 2003-768; a request of Santa Rosa Builders
Inc. and Santa Rosa Development, Inc. for consideration of architectural
and landscaping plans for three prototype residential units that range in
size from 2,296 square feet to over 3,700 square feet for a 33-lot single
family subdivision (Tract 30487) located on the north side of Avenue 58,
south of PGA West and approximately 0.3 miles west of Madison Street.
1. Chairman Butler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. 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. Chairman Butler asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler questioned Condition #7 as to why the exact
lots were not identified. Staff clarified it should be written to
clarify the exact lots that were affected.
3. Commissioner Kirk asked if the design changes to the retention
basin as recommended by the Architecture and Landscaping
Review Committee (ALRC) had been made to the plans they were
reviewing. Staff stated ALRC had requested the developer to
simplify the retention basins design and have staff approve it.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Butler asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr.
Brudvik, owner and developer of the project, gave a review of the
changes they have made to the project and the retention basins.
5. There being no further questions of the applicant Chairman Butler
asked if there was any other public comment on this project.
7. There being no public participation, Chairman Butler closed the
public participation portion of the hearing and opened the matter
up for Commission discussion.
8. Commissioner Robbins complimented the applicant on his packet
presentation. He questioned the blank building wall that faces the
street on the "El Rancho" Plan. Mr. Brudvik stated it would be
mitigated by the unit next door as you will only see 15 feet of the
wall due to the block wall that will be constructed between the
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-13-03WD.wpd 2
two houses. Discussion followed regarding the building wall that
was being referred to by Commission Robbins. Mr. Brudvik stated
he would add architectural detail to break up the building wall.
9. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Robbins/Kirk to adopt Minute Motion 2003-009
approving Site Development Permit 2003-768, as amended:
a. Condition #7: Two-story houses may not be built on Lots
2 and 3 pursuant to the requirements of Section 9.60.310
of the Zoning Code.
b. Condition #12: The El Rancho plan elevation side -loaded
garage wall facing the street shall be upgraded to include
additional architectural plant -on elements, subject to
approval by the Community Development Department.
Unanimously approved.
B. Site Development Permit 2002-730, Time Extension #1; a request of
Clubhouse Associates for consideration of a time extension for
development plans for a 149 unit apartment complex and ancillary facility
located on a 10.76 acre triangular parcel on the south side of Avenue 53,
east of Jefferson Street.
1. Chairman Butler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information
contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Butler asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked if there were any changes to any part
of the plan or the conditions. Staff stated it is proposed as
previously approved by the City Council.
3. Commissioner Robbins noted the Water District had approved new
water regulations and this will probably not comply with the new
requirements.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Butler asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chuck
Crookall stated the reason for the extension was that it took this
long to get water service to the site.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-13-03WD.wpd 3
5. There being no further questions of the applicant, and no other
public comment, Chairman Butler closed the public participation
portion of the hearing and opened the matter up for Commission
discussion.
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Abels/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2003-027, approving Site Development Permit 2002-
730, Extension #1, as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Kirk, Robbins, Tyler, and
Chairman Butler. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN:
None.
VII. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Site Development Permit 2002-751 Target Elevations; a request of
Washington 1 1 1, Ltd., for review and clarification of Condition of
Approval No. 40 for the property bounded by Highway 1 1 1, Avenue 47,
Washington Street and Adams Street.
1. Chairman Butler asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Fred
Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a
copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Chairman Butler asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Kirk stated he had originally requested the higher
elevation because big boxes are not traditionally pedestrian
orientated and this building was set a distance back from Highway
111. For that reason he thought it should be larger and take
advantage of the good designing. At the same time the front
elevation has been improved, and he would prefer to change the
condition.
3. There being no further questions of staff and no public comment,
Chairman Butler closed the public participation portion and opened
the matter up for Commission discussion.
6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Robbins/Tyler to direct staff to set a public hearing
date for consideration of an amendment to Condition No. 40.
Unanimously approved.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-13-03WD.wpd 4
B. Plot Plan 83-001 Use Interpretation; a request of KSL Development
Corporation for clarification of the allowed use of the property located at
78-501 Calle Ultimo.
1. Chairman Butler asked for the staff report. Planning Manager
Oscar Orci presented the information contained in the staff report,
a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Chairman Butler asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler stated the street was Calle Ultimo not
"Avenida Ultimo" and asked when and what was the citizen
compliant. Staff explained the complaint that staff was working
to resolve. Commissioner Tyler asked if staff had directed the
applicant to correct the violation. Staff stated several letters were
sent identifing the problems and options available to the applicant,
of which the use interpretation is one. Commissioner Tyler asked
if the applicant had met the requirements referred to in the letter.
Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the facility
was consolidated because the City had purchased the Ranch
property which contained the applicant's maintenance facility.
They were not, however directed to use this specific property.
3. Chairman Butler asked about the fuel tanks and whether or not
they were buried. Staff stated they, have existing underground
tanks install that are not in use as well as one above ground tank
to replace the underground tanks. The site is connected to the
sewer.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Butler asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Cindy
Zamora, representing KSL, explained the request.
5. Chairman Butler asked if there were any questions of the
applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked if the neighboring houses
were there when the use was approved. Ms. Zamora stated they
were.
6. Commissioner Tyler asked about the document created in 1983.
Ms. Zamora stated they have restricted the hours of operation.
Commissioner Tyler asked how this could be in compliance. Ms.
Zamora stated they were continuing the activities on the site that
Landmark Land Company had.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-13-03WD.wpd 5
7. There being no other public participation, Chairman Butler closed
the public participation portion and opened the matter up for
Commission discussion.
8. Commissioner Tyler noted the problems that were created by the
maintenance building on Avenida Carranza.
9. Commissioner Robbins stated the problems need to minimized on
the neighbors. If they are going to continue the use, a block wall
and landscaping should be required to mitigate the noise and
appearance.
10. Commissioner Tyler stated he would object to the noise, if he
were a neighbor. He asked if the conditions went with the
property. Staff stated they went with the property.
11. Commissioner Robbins agreed that they were not in compliance
with the conditions. As he understands the complaints, they are
in regard to the visual impact. The Commission can either tell
them to comply with the original conditions, or require them to
make it visually nice. Discussion followed regarding the pictures
provided by the applicant of the site.
12. Commissioner Kirk asked where the lawnmowers were tested.
Staff stated it was the City's understanding that most of the
repairs were made inside the building. Staff stated the issue is
based on staff's findings not the complaints of the neighbors.
Commisioner Kirk stated he would need more information in regard
to the neighbors complaints. Staff stated the issue before the
Commission is whether or not the use is in compliance with the
original approvals. Commissioner Kirk stated he would prefer this
come back as a public hearing and allow the neighbors an
opportunity to express their concerns.
13. Commissioner Tyler stated he would like to see the compliant
submitted by the neighbor.
14. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Kirk/Abets to direct staff to set the matter for
public hearing within the next 60 days and notify the adjacent
neighbors.
C. Discussion of Zoning Issues; a request of staff for review of proposed
changes to drive throughs and summation of proposed changes to the
front yard setback regulations.
G:\WPDCCS\PC Minutes\5-13-03WD.wpd 6
1. Chairman Butler asked for the staff report. Planning Manager
Oscar Orci presented the information contained in the staff report,
a copy of which is on file in the Community Development
Department.
2. Chairman Butler asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Tyler asked staff to identify the location of the
Quail Run and Fairway Plaza project. Staff indicated their location
on the map. Discussion followed regarding the various uses on
the different sites.
3. Commissioner Tyler asked what right the Commission has to
prohibit gas stations or drive throughs. Staff stated they would
not be allowed to expand or modify the use. Commissioner Tyler
asked if there were any guidelines regarding how many should be
allowed within any certain radius. Staff noted usually gas stations
are restricted to how many can be on an intersection.
5. There being no further discussion, the Commission recommended
the following changes:
a. Look at some kind of concentration standard. Limiting the
number of new gas stations in the community. Dividing the
City, consider aesthetics, traffic and circulation
b. Limit the number of drive thrus. Distinguish them by their
impacts. Look at the number of trips generated and
propose limit for those who go over the standard.
6. In regard to the Village it is incongruent to restrict them in light of
what the City is trying to achieve. Staff noted that if a resident
had to drive six miles to get gas, then this is a need in the Village.
Staff was directed to bring back some options.
7. Assistant City Attorney Michel Houston stated these uses could
be limited, but findings would need to be made to make that
decision.
8. Staff was directed to set a public hearing to consider front and
side yard setbacks and lot sizes before June 30, 2003.
Vill. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Commissioner Kirk gave a report on the City Council meeting of May 6,
2003.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-13-03WD.wpd 7
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Abels/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular
meeting of the Planning Commission to be held May 27, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. This
meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 8:36 p.m. on May 13, 2003.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\5-13-03WD.wpd 8
PH ##A
DATE:
CASE NO.:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
APPLICANT:
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
MAY 27, 2003
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 2003-006
CONSIDERATION OF ENTERING INTO A DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT
THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILES AVENUE AND
WASHINGTON STREET.
CALIFORNIA INTELLIGENT COMMUNITIES AND THE LA QUINTA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: AN ADDENDUM HAS BEEN PREPARED TO THE MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2001-436) WHICH WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON
FEBRUARY 5, 2002, UNDER RESOLUTION 2002-07. THE
REVISED PROJECT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE PREPARATION OF
A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IN THAT THE
REVISED PROJECT DOES NOT INVOLVE: (1) SUBSTANTIAL
CHANGES TO THE PROJECT NOT PREVIOUSLY ANALYZED; (2)
SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES WITH RESPECT TO THE
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE PROJECT IS BEING
UNDERTAKEN; OR (3) NEW INFORMATION OF SUBSTANTIAL
IMPORTANCE WHICH WOULD INVOLVE NEW SIGNIFICANT
EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOT PREVIOUSLY ANALYZED.
CURRENT GENERAL
PLAN/ZONING
DESIGNATION: TOURIST COMMERCIAL, MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND
PARK
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
On March 11, 2003, the Planning Commission reviewed and recommended approval
of this project located on a 50-acre subject property, situated at the southeast corner
of Miles Avenue and Washington Street, a major entry point to the City. The
developer is proposing to develop the following uses on the site:
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\CIC-DA-PC STAFF REPT.wpd
A. A mid -priced 134 unit suites type hotel;
B. 132 Condominium Casitas type units;
C. Two restaurants;
D. A medical office/clinic facility;
E. 30 unit Boutique hotel; and
F. 13 courtyard cluster villas;
G. 54 residential units containing 29 courtyard cluster and 25 perimeter
homes of which 40 units will be moderate income affordable units
The City's Redevelopment Agency and California Intelligent Communities propose to
entered into a Development Agreement as provided by the La Quinta Municipal Zoning
Code and State statues. A Development Agreement is a binding agreement between
both parties for the purpose of establishing certainty in the development.
Both parties desire to enter into this Agreement for purposes of: 1) identifying the
terms, conditions, and regulations for the construction of the Project, certain
components of which constitute a Planned Development; 2) setting forth a payment
schedule for the Developer's payment to the City of certain amounts designed to
compensate the City in the event that certain components of the Project fail to
generate specified levels of transient occupancy tax; 3) setting forth a payment
schedule for the Developer's payment to the City of Three Hundred Forty -Six
Thousand Eleven Dollars ($346,01 1) that the City has expended, or intends to expend,
to obtain a matching funds grant from the South Coast Air Quality Management
District; 4) requiring the Developer, at its sole cost, to construct a neighborhood park
on certain real property owned in fee by the City; and 5) setting forth the extent to
which the Developer may construct, develop, use and operate the Project.
The Development Agreement complies with the State statues and zoning regulations
for the formation of a Development Agreement and further provides for development
requirements.
The Development Agreement requires annual reviews in accordance with State and
local requirements. The City Attorney has, in conjunction with California Intelligent
Communities, prepared the Agreement.
Public Noticing
This application was advertised in the Desert Sun on May 17, 2003. All property
owners within 500 feet of the boundaries of the project were mailed a copy of the
public hearing notices. As of this writing no correspondence has been received
regarding this project.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
The findings necessary to recommend approval of the Development Agreement can be
made, as noted in the attached Resolution.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\CIC-DA-PC STAFF REPT.wpd
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003-_, recommending to the City
Council approval of the Development Agreement.
Attachments:
Development Agreement (Commission only)
G:\WPDOCS\PC Stf Rpt\CIC-DA-PC STAFF REPT.wpd
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT, BY AND AMONG THE CITY OF LA QUINTA
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CALIFORNIA
INTELLIGENT COMMUNITIES
CASE NO.: DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
APPLICANT: CALIFORNIA INTELLIGENT COMMUNITIES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
did on the 27th of May, 2003, hold a duly noticed Public Hearings to consider a
Development Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, said Specific Plan complies with the requirements of "The
Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended
(Resolution 83-63). The Community Development Department completed an
Addendum to the previously prepared Mitigated Negative Declaration for Environmental
Assessment 2001-436, certified by the City Council on February 5, 2002, for the
Specific Plan and Development Agreement. No changed circumstances or conditions
are proposed which would trigger the preparation of subsequent environmental review
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21 166; 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 Development Agreement:
1. The proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives,
policies, general land uses and programs of the City of La Quinta General Plan
and Specific Plan 2001-055.
2. The land uses authorized and regulations prescribed for the Development
Agreement are compatible with the zoning and its related regulations applicable
to the property.
3. The proposed Development Agreement conforms with public convenience and
the general welfare by providing for extensive public improvements and
conforms to good land use practice by encouraging a long-range, comprehensive
approach to the development of a major hotel services and mixed residential
complexes.
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\CIC-DA PC Reso.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-
Development Agreement 2003-006
Adopted: May 27, 2003
4. Approval of this Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health,
safety, and general welfare since adequate provisions has been made in
previous City approvals to provide for necessary and desirable improvements
which are incorporated herein.
5. Approval of this Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly
development of the subject or surrounding property nor the preservation of area -
wide property values, but rather will enhance them by encouraging planned,
phased growth.
6. Consideration of the Development Agreement has been accomplished pursuant
to California Government Code Section 65864 et seq. and the City of La Quinta
Municipal Code Section 9.250.030, which governs Development Agreements.
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 recommend approval to the City Council of Development
Agreement 2003-006 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 27th day of May, 2003, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICH BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Resolutions\CIC-DA PC Reso.wpd
SUMMARY REPORT
FOR THE
DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE
LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
AND
CENTER POINT DEVELOPMENT, LLC
May 15, 2003
INTRODUCTION
This document is the Summary Report ("Report") for the Disposition and Development
Agreement ("Agreement") by and between the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency
("Agency") and Center Point Development, LLC, a California limited liability company
("Developer"). The Agreement facilitates the sale of a 46.6-acre Agency -owned parcel
("Property") to the Developer who will construct:
• A 120 room Homewood Suites by Hilton hotel ("Hotel")
• 120 one and two story casitas hotel condominium units to be rented as vacation
rental units ("Casitas")
• A 30-room boutique hotel comprised of 1,200 square foot villas and a spa
("Boutique Hotel")
• A 120,000 square foot medical and surgical center comprised of three 40,000
square foot buildings ("MOB")
• Two sit-down restaurants ("Restaurants")
• 13 courtyard cluster villa homes that will be sold at market sales prices ("Villas")
• 54 single family and cluster courtyard homes of which 40 will be sold at prices
affordable to moderate income households ("Affordable Cluster Homes"), with
the remaining 14 sold at market sales prices ("Market Cluster Homes")
• A 2.68-acre park ("Park").
The aforementioned improvements constitute the "Development".
This Report has been prepared pursuant to Section 33433 of the California Health and
Safety Code (the California Community Redevelopment Law or "Law") and addresses
the following:
• A summary of the proposed Development.
• The cost of the Agreement to the Agency.
• The estimated value of the interest to be conveyed, determined at the highest and
best uses permitted by the Agency's Redevelopment Plan.
• The estimated value of the interest to be conveyed determined at the use with the
conditions, covenants, and development costs required by the Agreement.
• An explanation of why the sale of property pursuant to the Agreement will assist in
the elimination of blight.
GAWPDOCS\SumRpt-CIC.doc
• Conformance with the Agency's Five Year Implementation Plan.
THE DEVELOPMENT
The Agency purchased the Property in 1995 in order to reserve land for affordable
housing development. Subsequently, the Agency focused its attention on facilitating
affordable housing development opportunities on other Agency owned properties
located on Avenue 48. In December 1999, the Agency circulated a Request for
Proposals that sought a mix of hotel, restaurant, and affordable housing development
on the Property. The desire to seek hotel and restaurant uses was generated by the
opening of the Indian Wells tennis Gardens, located northwest of the Property.
Proposals were received and the Agency entered into two separate exclusive
negotiation agreements. The first, in March 2000, encompassed a 10.8-acre segment
of the Property and entailed a proposal to develop a Hilton Gardens Inn hotel. The
developer and Agency concluded negotiations without reaching agreement because site
access issues could not be resolved. The Agency entered into a second exclusive
negotiation agreement in February 2001 for the entire Property. This agreement was
also terminated after the development entity failed to structure an economically viable
project. The Agency then moved forward to secure environmental clearances and
entitle the Property with the approval, by the City of La Quinta ("City"), of a specific plan
in February 2002.
The Developer first contacted the Agency in June 2002 regarding their interest in
developing hotel, restaurant, medical office, and affordable and market rate housing on
the Property. In August 2002, the Agency entered into an exclusive negotiation
agreement with the Developer that initiated a 120 day period during which the
Developer would structure a development program, secure tenants, secure financing
commitments, and process amendments to the February 2002 specific plan. Further,
the Agency and Developer together, would negotiate property purchase terms, and if
agreement was reached, draft a disposition and development agreement. The
negotiations generated purchase terms that were accepted by both the Agency and
Developer, and the attached Agreement was subsequently drafted.
Per the Agreement the Developer will purchase the property for $7,054,074. The
Developer will then mass grade the Property and construct Seeley Drive, utility, and
drainage improvements. The first phase development will comprise the Hotel and 40
Casitas units, and if the Developer demonstrates that they have secured financing
and/or tenant commitments, the remaining Casitas units, the Boutique Hotel and the
Restaurants. Once the City approves the foundations for the Hotel and the 40 Casitas
units, the Developer may then commence construction of the Affordable Cluster Homes,
the Park and the first of the three MOB buildings. When the exterior walls of the Hotel
and 40 Casitas units are framed, then the Developer may then start construction of the
second MOB. Finally, when the Hotel and 40 Casitas units are 75% complete (defined
as having the exterior wall stucco and the roofs installed), the Developer may then
commence development of the third MOB.
G:\WPDOCS\SumRpt-CIC.doc 2
The Agreement provides two Property purchase options. The first, Option A, allows the
Developer to purchase the entire Property at one time. This Option was developed
because the lender or equity investor who funds the land purchase and site
improvement activities may require that a lien be recorded against the entire Property to
secure this financing. The second purchase option, Option B, allows the Developer to
purchase parcels as each development phase (as described in the preceding
paragraph) is constructed. This option would be instituted if the Developer secures
financing that does not require that a lien be recorded against the entire Property to
secure funds. In order to improve the Property as economically as possible, the
Developer desires to mass grade the Property, stabilize the soil, and construct Seeley
Drive, and required drainage and utility system improvements.
The Agreement includes provisions that give the Agency the option to repurchase
portions or all of the Property (if there is a Developer default caused by failure to
perform per the terms of the Agreement) at the price the Property was sold to the
Developer plus 33% of the cost of the site improvements, and their associated design
and soft costs. Per the Agreement, the Agency must review and approve the user
commitments, financing, improvements and construction budget for each development
phase.
The Agency will sell all but the Affordable Cluster Homes' land to the Developer at fair
market value. The only financial assistance the Agency will provide is $63,000 per unit
or $2,520,000 to secure the Affordable Cluster Homes. These funds will be slated for
the Affordable Cluster Homes' pro-rata share of land, site and building plan,
engineering, municipal permit and fee, and site improvement costs. The Agency will
reimburse the Developer for these costs per a schedule included in the Agreement; the
source of funds will be a portion of the proceeds generated from sale of the other
parcels that comprise the Property. When the Affordable Cluster Homes are purchased
the Agency assistance will be converted in homebuyer silent second trust deed loans.
The second trust deed loans will also feature covenants that require the dwellings to
remain affordable to moderate -income family households for 45 years. Further, unlike
past Agency second trust deed loans, the covenants will not afford the homeowner the
option to sell their dwelling at prevailing market values and release the unit from the
affordability covenant. Instead, the homeowner must sell their dwelling to either another
qualified buyer or if a qualified household cannot be found, as a last resort to the
Agency.
THE COST OF THE AGREEMENT TO THE AGENCY
To date, the Agency has invested $5,714,789 in the Property; these expenditures are
comprised of the initial land purchase cost, the cost to improve Miles Avenue and
Washington Street, the costs associated with preparing environmental and planning
studies, and the interest expense on the bonds used to purchase the property and fund
the other costs. The Developer will pay $7,054, 074 for the Property which will
reimburse the 1995 Housing Bond fund for $3,678,305 of non -interest expenses. The
Agency will pledge $2,520,000 of this amount to fund the silent second trust deed
G:\WPDOCS\SumRpt-CIC.doc 3
assistance to the Affordable Cluster Homes, and the remaining $1,158,305 will be
pledged to fund some of the costs associated with the Avenue 48 and Adams Street
affordable housing development. The specific expenditures were as follows:
Property Purchase Cost - $1,977,500
• Washington Street/Miles Avenue Improvements - $1,700,805
• Specific Plan and Environment Studies - $175,000
• Adjoining Property Utility System Reimbursement - $95,898
• Interest Expense on the 1995 Housing Bonds - $1,765,586
• Homebuyer Second Trust Deed Mortgages — $2,520,000
In order sell the Affordable Cluster Homes at costs affordable to moderate -income
family households, the Agreement provides that the Agency will fund 40-second trust
deed mortgages. The mortgages will cover each dwelling's pro rate share of land
($35,175), architecture and engineering ($7,175), entitlement/municipal fee costs
($11,300), and site improvement costs ($9,350). The Agreement provides that a
second trust deed of $40,000 to $63,000 per unit, or an average second trust deed
mortgage of $51,500, will be provided to 40 units to permit family households who earn
from 81 to 120 percent of the Riverside County median income to purchase these
homes. The exact mortgage amount will be determined by the purchase price of each
unit. The home prices will range from $216,000 to $251,000. The Agency second trust
deeds combined with the homebuyer down payments of 3% will reduce the first trust
deed mortgage to $142,000 to $175,000, a level affordable to moderate income family
households.
The Agency's Redevelopment Consultant has reviewed and verified the costs
associated with the Affordable Cluster Homes. The total development cost is projected
to be $8,129,700, with sales income projected to be $9,722,000.
ESTIMATED VALUE OF INTEREST TO BE CONVEYED
The Agency's Redevelopment Consultant reviewed comparable land sales for property
designated for commercial, hotel, condominium hotel and single-family uses that was
not entitled or improved. This review identified per acre land values ranging from
$60,000 to $283,140 per acre depending on size and location. Smaller parcels located
in high traffic locations commanded a greater land value. The Agreement provides that
the Agency will sell the Hotel, Casitas, Boutique Hotel, MOB and Restaurant parcels to
the Developer for $217,800 per acre; the Villas and Market Cluster Home land will be
sold for a value of $60,000 per acre.
G:\WPDOCS\SumRpt-CIC.doc 4
ESTIMATED VALUE OF THE INTEREST TO BE CONVEYED, DETERMINED AT THE
USE AND WITH THE CONDITIONS, COVENANTS, AND DEVELOPMENT COSTS
REQUIRED BY THE AGREEMENT
The Agreement does not impose additional conditions on the property other than those
required by the City's entitlement and environmental processes (imposed through a
development agreement involving the City and the Developer), and the requirement that
the Developer construct the various uses within the specified time frames presented in
the Schedule of Performance. The Agreement does require the Developer to construct
40 dwellings that must be sold at affordable housing costs to moderate -income family
households. The Agency's second trust deed mortgage assistance will fund the
difference between the sales prices required to fund the cost of developing these units
and housing costs that would be affordable to moderate income family households.
EXPLANATION OF WHY THE SALE OF THE PROPERTY PURSUANT TO THE
AGREEMENT WILL ASSIST IN THE ELIMINATION OF BLIGHT
The Property conveyance, and construction of the Development, addresses economic
blight within Project Area No. 2 by facilitating development of uses that generate
economic demand and additional patrons that will frequent Project Area businesses.
Further, the conveyance will facilitate the development of dwellings that will increase
and improve the supply of affordable housing within La Quinta Redevelopment Project
No. 2. Per the Second Five Year Implementation Plan, the Agency has an obligation to
facilitate the production of over 1,500 affordable units by 2004. In order to accomplish
this task the Agency must provide incentives to private developers and non-profit
organizations to construct units that will be affordable to households within the
respective income levels. The Property conveyance and the Development will further
the Agency's efforts to promote affordable housing development within Project No 2.
CONFORMANCE WITH THE AGENCY'S FIVE YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN
The Second Five Year Implementation Plan and the Second Amended Housing
Affordability Plan identifies a combination of market rate and affordable housing
development for the Property. Further, the Implementation Plan identifies the potential
for resort and hospitality uses for the Property. The conveyance of the Property and the
subsequent development will conform to the provisions of these Plans.
A copy of the proposed Agreement is attached to this Report or is available for review
at the Community Development Department located at the La Quinta City Hall. The
proposed Agreement will be the subject of a joint public hearing and the Agency and
City Council on June 3, 2003, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers are located at
the La Quinta City Hall, 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California.
G:\WPDOCS\SumRpt-CIC.doc 5
PH #B
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MAY 27, 2003
CASE NO: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-075
APPLICANT: CHAM THI PRINCE & LEE W. JONES
PROPERTY OWNER: DUNE PALMS PLAZA, L.L.C.
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A USE PERMIT FOR A
COSMETOLOGY SCHOOL, IN EXISTING COMMERCIAL
SPACE
LOCATION: 47120 DUNE PALMS ROAD (DUNE PALMS PLAZA),
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF HIGHWAY 111 AND DUNE PALMS
ROAD (ATTACHMENT 1)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROJECT IS
EXEMPT FROM CEQA REVIEW UNDER GUIDELINES
SECTION 15301 (LEASING OF EXISTING PRIVATE
FACILITIES)
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: M/RC (MIXED/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
ZONING: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
BACKGROUND:
Site Background
Specific Plan 96-028 was originally approved for Lapis Energy Corporation on
February 4, 1997. The plan called for ± 81,000 square feet of commercial space,
consisting of a 2,500 square foot fueling station with CNG capacity, a ± 67,000
square foot self -storage facility, ± 11,010 square feet of auto retail space, and a
total of 79 parking spaces. Subsequent amendments to the Specific Plan included
approval for the current ±23,000 s.f. building, in which the subject use is
contemplated.
Project Description
The applicant proposes to lease approximately 5,000 s.f. of space in the completed
building on Parcel 2, for use as a cosmetology school (Attachment 2). There will be
a minimum of 25 enrolled students and two instructors. Not all students will be on
site at one time due to scheduling. It is anticipated that there will be seven to
eight students on site at any time, as there will be morning, afternoon and evening
sessions. The space will be divided into three classrooms and a training area, along
with the ancillary space requirements (i.e. restroom(s), storage, etc.). Existing
parking on site will be utilized, and the owner has indicated he will restrict parking
for this use to 20 spaces, through an agreement with the tenant.
Public Notice
This case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 17, 2003. All
property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public
hearing notice as required. No comments have been received. Any correspondence
received before the meeting will be transmitted to the Planning Commission.
Public Agency Review
Staff did not identify any public agencies that the applicant's request might affect.
The use determination and conditions to be applied are at the sole discretion of the
City of La Quinta.
ISSUES
Based on the provisions of the La Quinta Zoning Code, Section 9.210.020.F, the
following findings as required for this Conditional Use Permit are provided:
General Plan Consisten
The proposed use is consistent with the land use designation of Mixed/Regional
Commercial. The designation allows both residential and commercial, and
encourages a mix of uses to allow diversity in available services and goods,
reductions in vehicle trips and increased use of public transportation. The City's
General Plan Policies encourage provision of a wide range of commercial
opportunities and support services.
Zoning Code Consistency
The proposed use is consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Zoning Code.
Use of the building space as a cosmetology school requires that 24 spaces be
provided, at three spaces per student seat and eight students on site at any one
time. A retail use in this space would require 25 spaces, while office would require
20 spaces. The original specific plan was approved with a set number of spaces,
based on the uses proposed at the time. As a result of changes in use by the
current owner, staff has deferred to the Zoning Code provisions to determine
parking necessary for this use. The lessor and lessee of the property shall be
required to enter in to a written agreement as part of the lease to provide or
reserve for the school a minimum of 24 spaces for the duration of the lease. In
order to insure that there is adequate parking in operation of the school, the lease
will also restrict the number of students per session at the facility to no more than
eight at any one time.
Compliance with CEQA
Processing of this Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use is in compliance
with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act. The La Quinta
Community Development Director has determined that the request is exempt from
CEQA under Guideline Section 15301 (Leasing of Existing Private Facilities). As a
result, no environmental review is required.
Compatibility With surrounding Uses
Approval of this proposed use will not be a detriment to the public health, safety
and general welfare, nor shall it be injurious or incompatible with other properties or
uses in the vicinity. Use of the space as a cosmetology school will have similar
characteristics and impacts as beauty salons, barber shops, professional offices,
and like uses which are permitted by right under the M/RC zoning district.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003- , confirming the environmental
determination of the Community Development Director, and granting approval of
Conditional Use Permit 2003-075, subject to conditions as recommended by staff.
Prepared by:
Wallace Nesbit, Associate Planner
Attachments:
1. Location Maps (2 pages)
2. Description of School Operation (2 pages)
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-075, TO ALLOW A
COSMETOLOGY SCHOOL IN A COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT
47120 DUNE PALMS ROAD
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-075
CHAM THI PRINCE / LEE W. JONES
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 27th day of May, 2003, consider a Conditional Use Permit
application for a ± 5,020 square -foot cosmetology school in a commercial building,
located at 47120 Dune Palms Road, near the southeast corner of Dune Palms Road
and Highway 1 1 1 and more particularly described as:
PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP 28422
WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit application has complied with
the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality
Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development
Director has determined that the proposed Conditional Use Permit is exempt from
CEQA review under Guidelines Section 15301 (Leasing of Existing Private
Facilities); and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings to justify approval
of said Conditional Use Permit:
1. The proposed use is consistent with the land use designation of
Mixed/Regional Commercial. The City's General Plan Policies relating to
Mixed/Regional Commercial encourage provision of a wide range of
commercial opportunities and support services.
2. The proposed use is consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta Zoning
Code. Use of the space as a cosmetology school will have similar
characteristics and impacts as beauty salons, barber shops, professional
offices, and like uses which are permitted by right under the M/RC zoning
district.
3. Processing of this Conditional Use Permit for the proposed use is in
compliance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act.
The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that the
request is exempt from CEQA under Guideline Section 15301 (Leasing of
Existing Private Facilities). As a result, no environmental review is required.
4. Approval of this proposed use will not be a detriment to the public health,
safety and general welfare, nor shall it be injurious or incompatible with other
properties or uses in the vicinity. Use of the space as a cosmetology school
will have similar characteristics and impacts as beauty salons, barber shops,
professional offices, and like uses which are permitted by right under the
M/RC zoning district.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the
Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2003-075 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 City Planning Commission, held on this the 27th day of May, 2003, by the
following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICH BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003- EXHIBIT „A„
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2003-075
CHAM THI PRINCE / LEE W. JONES
ADOPTED: MAY 27, 2003
GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. The lease agreement between the lessor and lessee of the property shall
incorporate a reciprocal provision, to provide or reserve for the use of the
assigned tenant space as a cosmetology school a minimum of 24 spaces for the
duration of the lease.
2. The lease agreement shall incorporate a provision to restrict the number of
students per session at the facility to no more than 8 at any onetime.
3. A copy of the lease agreement shall be submitted for review, prior to it's
execution, to the Community Development Department, for verification of
compliance with Conditions 1 and 2. The agreement shall have been approved
in writing by the Community Development Department prior to any final
inspection for any certificate of occupancy for this use.
N89-58-25E
a
0�
f
!
I
o JAB.
'
to to a
I
0
41
Cham T. Prince & Lee W. Jones
45280 Coeur d' alene
Indio, Ca. 92201
City of La Quinta
Community Development Department
78 495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, Ca. 92253
May 2, 2003
Attention: Wallace Mesbit
Associate Planner
Re: Request for Conditional Use Permit in the Dune Palms Plaza at 47 120 Dune Palms
Rd., La Quinta, Ca.. 92253 to operate a Cosmetology School with retail sales of Beauty
Supply products and a discount full service Beauty Salon.
The name of the business will be the Coachella Valley Beauty College. It will occupy
approximately 5040 square feet of space. The space will consist of three classrooms, two
offices, storage area for products, two handicap toilets, a reception area, a customer
waiting area. The remainder of the space will consist of 7 Beauty stations. After a
student has received 250 hours of classroom and training they will be able to use the 7
Beauty station to perform hair and nail services for customers at a discount price. Due to
class scheduling we expect no more than 8 students per shift.
The hours of operation will be Tuesday through Thursday from 9a.m., to 9p.m., and
Friday and Saturday 8a.m., to 4p.m. Students do not have mandatory attendance times
and may attend Morning, Afternoon or Evening Sessions. Approximately 85% of the
students will be Part Time. The High School RPO students can only attend 4 hours per
day.
The business will be licensed by the State of California Private and Postsecondary
Education Dept., as well as the State Bureau of Barbering and Cosmetology to operate as
a school and a retail business.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Very truly yo rs
�---
Cham� Lee . �50 es
May 07 03 07:42p Lee Jones 760 772 1295 p.2
Cham T. Prince & Lee w. Jones
45 280 Coeur d' alene
Indio, Ca., 92201
(760) 772-5950
Fax: (760) 772-1295
City of La Quinta
Community Development Dept.,
78-495 Celle Tampicio
La Quinta, Ca., 92253
Attention: Wallace Nesbit
Associate Planner
Subject: Additional information for cosmetology School: CUP 2003-075: 47120 Dune
Palms Red., La Quinta, Ca., 92253.
In reference to the second item of your fax dated May 6, 2003 we will have
approximately 15 portable stackable type chairs to be used in the classrooms and in the
customer waiting area. Since we have no way of knowing how many Cosmetology,
Esthetician or Manicure Student we will have at either the morning, afternoon or evening
session we have to move the chair from classroom to classroom. It should be also noted
that we do not expect to have more than 7 to 8 students at either, morning, afternoon or
evening session.
Shouid you hav y further question please, do not hesitate to call upon me.
Cham T Prince &Lee W. J ne
C: Dune Palms PIaza, L..,L.,C., via fax.
R5-&7-63 11:44 RECEIVED FROM:766 772 1295 P.62
BY #A
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: MAY 27, 2003
CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-764
APPLICANT/
PROPERTY
OWNER: PAUL EHLINE CO.
REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR
FOUR NEW SINGLE-FAMILY PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL UNITS
FOR CONSTRUCTION WITHIN THE GREG NORMAN ESTATES
DEVELOPMENT.
LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF MADISON AND AIRPORT
BOULEVARD WITHIN THE NORMAN COURSE.
ARCHITECT: SOUTH COAST ARCHITECTS
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: SJA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT WAS PREPARED AND
WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNDER RESOLUTION
NO. 91-100 FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 90-015. THERE ARE NO
CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS, OR NEW
INFORMATION WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION
OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS PURSUANT
TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166.
GENERAL
PLAN/
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) AND LOW DENSITY
RESIDENTIAL (LDR)
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
SDP 03-764/EHLINE
MAY 27, 2003
BACKGROUND:
The property is located within the Greg Norman golf course development at the
northeast corner of Madison Street and Airport Boulevard within Tract 29657
(Attachment 1). The property consists of 58 lots on Medallist Drive and National
Drive, between Kingston Heath and Tiburon Drive. Specific Plan 90-015,
Amendment #2, for the Norman Course, approved under Resolution 99-112,
provides the Community Design Guidelines for the residential units. Currently, all
the private street infrastructure improvements are constructed, and graded pads
ready for construction.
The applicant had originally received approval from the Planning Commission under
Site Development Permit 99-668 for 7 models to be constructed within the 58 lot
subdivision. Under that approval, the applicant constructed 10 homes (7 models
and three units) on lots 18 thru 24, and 46 thru 48, with one of them being used
as a sales office (Lot 18). Another lot (Lot 17) is a parking lot, which serves as the
sales office. The lots range in size between 13,939 square feet and 20,037 square
feet. The originally approved homes range in size between 4,162 to 4,474 square
feet. The majority of the existing units have been sold and are currently occupied,
while the sales office and one model home remain available for purchase.
The applicant has stated that these homes were difficult to sell due to their price
and is now proposing smaller units ranging in size between 2,995 and 3,890
square feet. The lots sizes will not change.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
The applicant proposes four new single-family prototype residential units with three
different architectural facades for each prototype. A new model home complex,
sales office, and parking lot is proposed on the east side of Medallist Drive just
south of the project entrance on Lots 55 thru 58. The new parking lot will be
located directly across the street. The remainder of the lots will be constructed
with the proposed unit types, if approved by the Planning Commission.
The project mixes different but compatible architectural styles to create an eclectic
street scene. The three architectural designs include Tuscan, Spanish Colonial, and
Early California. The plans for each design are attached (Attachment 2).
rj )
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
SDP 03-764/EHLINE
MAY 27, 2003
The following is a breakdown of the proposed floor plans:
Tuscan 1
Tuscan 2
Spanish
Early California
Colonial
Square Feet
2,555
3,008
3,249
3,258
440 casita
352 casita
432 casita
352 sky deck
2,995 max.
3,360 max.
3,681 max.
280 casita
3,890 max.
No. of
2or3
2or3
3or4
3
Bedrooms
No. of
3.5
3.5
4.5
3.5
Bathrooms
Garage
3 (2-front, and
3 (2-front and
3 (3-front with
3 (2-front and 1-
Parkin
1-side loaded)
1-side loaded)
1 1-tandem)
side loaded)
MATERIALS AND COLORS:
A variety of materials are proposed to be used including painted plaster/stucco,
two-piece barrel tile roofs with exposed beams, stone veneer, different colored
shutters, entry doors, garage doors, fascias, trims and decorative wrought iron.
The heights of the homes vary between 20 and 22 feet in height. The color
schemes are primarily variations of white, beige, brown and grey stucco with dark
accent colors in shades of grey, blue, maroon, brown and black (Attachment 3).
LANDSCAPING:
The front yard landscaping plan consists of a wide variety of specimen trees,
shrubs, vines and ground covers. The plant materials proposed are consistent with
other homes within the same development and in the City which, are drought
tolerant and appropriate for the desert climate (Attachment 4).
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC):
The ALRC reviewed this project at the May 7, 2003 meeting and determined that
the prototype units were acceptable with one minor clarification to the roof tile.
The architect for the project explained that the roof the type would be a two piece,
barrel made of concrete. The May 7, 2003, ALRC meeting minutes are attached
(Attachment 5). The Committee unanimously approved Minute Motion 2003-018
recommending approval of the prototype units to the Planning Commission as
presented.
G3
PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
SDP 03-764/EHLINE
MAY 27, 2003
COMPATIBILITY:
Section 9.60.300 of the Zoning Code requires that all second stories and new
residential units that are proposed for construction within a partially developed
subdivision, are subject to approval by the Planning Commission. The residential
units, as proposed, are compatible in architectural style, colors, and overall
appearance, with the existing units.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
Findings necessary to approve this request can be made and are contained in the
attached Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2003- , approving SDP 2003-764,
subject to findings and conditions contained in the attached Resolution.
Prepared by:
Martin Magaria
Associate Planner
Attachments:
1.
Site Location Map
2.
Proposed Models Plan Set
3.
Color & Material Boards
4.
Conceptual Landscape Plans
5.
May 7, 2003, Architecture
minutes
and Landscape Review Committee meeting
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2003-
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR
FOUR NEW SINGLE-FAMILY PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL
UNITS, EACH WITH THREE DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL
DESIGNS WITHIN THE GREG NORMAN ESTATES
DEVELOPMENT FOR TRACT 29657, LOCATED AT THE
NORTHEAST CORNER OF MADISON STREET AND
AIRPORT BOULEVARD.
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-764
APPLICANT: PAUL EHLINE COMPANY
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 27T" day of May, 2003 hold a Public Hearing to consider a
request by Paul Ehline Company for approval of architectural and landscaping plans
for four new single-family prototype residential units with three different
architectural designs for each prototype within the Greg Norman Estates
Development for Tract 29657, located at the northeast corner of Madison Street
and Airport Boulevard, more particularly described as follows:
APNs: 767-500-01 1 thru 025;
767-510-001 thru 020; and,
767-570-001-01 1
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
(ALRC) of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 7th day of May, 2003, hold
a public meeting to review architecture and landscaping plans for four new single-
family prototype residential units with three different architectural facades for each
prototype within the Greg Norman Estates Development for Tract 29657; and,
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified
by the City Council under Resolution No. 91-100 for Specific Plan 90-015, there
are no changed circumstances, conditions, or new information which would trigger
the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21166.
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all
testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said
Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to
Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code to justify approval of said Site Development
Permit:
01 J
PAMartin\SDP 03-764 Ehline\PC Reso SDP 03-764.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-
Site Development Permit 2003-764-Ehline Company
Adopted: May 27, 2003
1. Consistency with the General Plan: The project, as proposed, is consistent
with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the design, height,
scale and mass of the homes are compatible with an established land uses
for the Greg Norman Course).
2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed project, as conditioned, is
consistent with the development standards of the City's Zoning Code and
the Greg Norman Specific Plan, which establishes development standards
with regard to architecture, building heights, building mass, parking, and
landscaping.
3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): An
Environmental Impact Report was prepared and certified by the City Council
under Resolution No. 91-100 for Specific Plan 90-015. There are no
changed circumstances, conditions, or new information which would trigger
the preparation of a subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21166.
4. Architectural Design: The proposed project complies with the architectural
design standards of the Greg Norman Specific Plan and implements the
development standards and design guidelines in that document.
5. Site Design: The proposed project complies with the Greg Norman Specific
Plan, with regard to lot layout and site design in terms of project entries,
interior circulation, pedestrian access, and other site design elements such as
scale, mass, and appearance.
6. Landscape Design: The proposed project is consistent with the landscaping
standards and plant palette in the Greg Norman Specific Plan and implements
the standards for landscaping and aesthetics established in the General Plan
and in said Specific Plan.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of
the Planning Commission for this Site Development Permit.
2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2003-764, subject to
conditions, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution.
P:\Martin\SDP 03-764 Ehline\PC Reso SDP 03-764.wpd 0
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-
Site Development Permit 2003-764-Ehline Company
Adopted: May 27, 2003
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 27th day of May, 2003, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
RICH BUTLER, Chairman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director
City of La Quinta, California
G '1
P:\Martin\SDP 03-764 Ehline\PC Reso SDP 03-764.wpd
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-
Site Development Permit 2003-764-Ehline Company
Conditions of Approval -Recommended
V19011I .OTTI l
1. The use of this site shall be in conformance with the approved exhibits
contained in Site Development Permit 2003-764 unless otherwise
amended by the following conditions.
2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the
case file documents for plan checking processes.
3. The approved Site Development Permit shall be used within two years
of approval, otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect
whatsoever.
"Used" means the issuance of a building permit. A time extension
may be requested as permitted in Municipal Code Section 9.200.080
(D).
4. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City
of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any
claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the
approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole
discretion in selecting its defense counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the developer of any claim, action or
proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense.
5. Should the parking lot not be located on one of the residential lots, the
applicant shall obtain written permission from the owner of the
property to locate the parking lot on said land for a fixed period of
time. Said parking lot shall conform to city standards.
6. The applicant shall post a $1000.00 deposit for each unit that is used
as a sales office. After the sales office(s) is/are converted back to a
residence, the Community Development Department shall inspect the
site(s) for compliance before releasing the deposit back to the
applicant.
7. The residential units shall not exceed a maximum height of twenty-two
feet.
Planning Commission Resolution 2003-
Site Development Permit 2003-764-Ehline Company
Conditions of Approval -Recommended
8. The four residential units approved for the remainder of the lots within
the subdivision in question shall be as follows:
Tuscan 1
Tuscan 2
Spanish
Early California
Colonial
Square Feet
2,555
3,008
3,249
3,258
440 casita
352 casita
432 casita
352 sky deck
2,995 max.
3,360 max.
3,681 max.
280 casita
3,890 max.
No. of
2or3
2or3
3or4
3
Bedrooms
No. of
3.5
3.5
4.5
3.5
Bathrooms
Garage
3 (2-front, and
3 (2-front and
3 (3-front with
3 (2-front and 1-
Parkin
1-side loaded)
1-side loaded)
1-tandem)
side loaded)
9. Any front, side, or rear walls shall be of masonry or other non -wood
construction and conform to development regulations of the Zoning
Code.
10. Landscaping plans for the units shall comply those plans submitted for
this project, and as approved by the Planning Commission. Said
landscaping plans shall include a complete irrigation system showing
location and size of water lines, valves, clock timer, type of sprinkler,
etc. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the landscape plans
shall also be approved by Coachella Valley Water District before final
approval by the Community Development Department.
nJ
ATTACHMENT #
36
------------
SHEET 4]
I i 34,133 ter ,
GOLF I LOUR
--�u,-l� 32i 31 g1-T�- --T-T-r-r-�-i-� I21
\ i 30� 28 127 26 25 " 24 23 22 21 � T� g , 18
T- IN
LOT D
A 1 1 2 1 1- _ L---�--_ _
a i 3 4 i T�-� T T-T-r-r-�I-T---=__-
1 1-1 J J 1 6 71 8 1 9 110111 1121131141151161 171
3 I x, 1 i �`��12
10
4 —SHEET 5 r 16 i 1r ,g l i �1:
6 57 I M.B. 205/4-1656
7 I GOLF COURSE i r � �15'
8 55 —I 25 L -�
j6 1o16"
54 —
10 53 I , ,. •'�:, � L5-mil
1L •17�-
29 1
_I
N.A.Pq 11 I 4 18�
12V)------_-- �� 3 lg�;
13 --3 LOT E I �2 '�� 1
t 41 40 39 38 37 �� , , �\ �� i
14 42 43 36 I 1 -
k 15 ® 5 4 4 4 45 O `v 35i
22 23 24
16 52 5 1 A 29 30 31 32 D ' 33 I �\39 `38
LOT 59 27 28
17 25 26 I
18 19 20 21 E
F
— — — _ _ SHEET 6
GOLF COURSE
35 24 20 1 17
--------- -- —------^--
- _
AIRPORT BOULEVARD
ATTACHMENT
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
May 7, 2003
6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he too is concerned it he
rear elevation. He appreciates that no plantings are nex o the
building. Commercial developments typically have too ny plant
beds where pedestrians will walk through them and ey become
unattractive. It appears Brachy cyiton (Bottle Tree) re to be used
and they are a messy, hearty tree and in this cation it might
work. The Rhus Lancea is a supple tree tha ill require double
staking and it is in a narrow area and they id Ily need an area that
is 8 X 8. There needs to be some type o lantings/trees that will
stand up by themselves. The Sum would be an excellent
example. The growth habits n d to be considered when
determining what to use where. iscussion followed.
7. There being no further discu ion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Cun ' gham/Thorns to adopt Minute Motion
2003-017 approving ' e Development Permit 2003-754, as
amended:
/The
peo a spaces shall be created by the landscape
c .
rate some decomposed granite in the planters
en the car overhang and the western property line.
rent type of tree that is substantial on its own to be
the parking lot.
condary Gateway sign design at the northeast corner
site shall come back to the ALRC for review.
ensitivity given to the rear elevation with planting.
Unanimously approved.
--100. C. Site Development Permit 2003-764; a request of Paul Ehline/Medallist
Development, Inc. for review of landscaping plans for four prototype
units at PGA West Norman Estates located at 81-480 Madison Street.
1. Associate Planner Martin Magana gave an overview of the project
and introduced, Mr. Frank Scole and Paul Ehline, landscape
architect and developer for the project respectively, who were
available to answer questions on the project.
2. Committee Member Thorns stated he likes the models but it needs
a better roof treatment such as the better "S" tile.
G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\5-7-03.wpd 5
Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes
May 7, 2003
3. Mr. Scole explained there will be a two piece barrel made of
concrete to create a more authentic Spanish look.
4. Committee Member Cunningham stated he defers to the architect
and developer for projects that are behind gates. They will suffer
for the lack of detail. If the buyers aren't there, they will change
the style. The market will make the determination. A
consideration may be to lower the pitch to allow less roof to be
seen. Staff stated the buildings are at 22 feet.
5. Committee Member Thorns agreed, but when something is shown
at this meeting, to him that is the example of what is proposed to
be used. Applicants should be showing what will be used. He
understands they are market driven. If the attitude of the
Committee is to allow the developer to make that determination he
does not see why the projects should be brought before the
Committee.
6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he likes the units and the
comments on the roof are well stated.
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Thoms/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion
2003-018, approving Site Development Permit 2003-764, with
the following recommendations:
a. The roof treatment as verbally presented by the architect
shall be used.
Unanimously approved.
D. Site Development Permit 2003-768; a request of Sant sa Builders for
review of architectural and landscaping plans for ct 30487 located on
the north side of Avenue 58, south of PG est and west of Madison
Street.
1. Associate Planner Gr rousdell gave an overview of the project
and introduced a Brudvik, representing the project, who gave
a presentati on the project.
2. C ittee Member Thorns stated this is an exciting plan even
ough it is located on a long lot. He asked who designed the
retention basin planting schemes in the front of the project. Mr.
G:\WPDOCSWRLC\.5-7-03.wpd 6
:C r".