Loading...
2002 05 14 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 14 2002 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2002-042 Beginning Minute Motion 2002-010 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 on April 23, 2002. B. Department Report V. PRESENTATIONS: None PC/AGENDA VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A C Item ................. CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-443, ZONE CHANGE 2002-106, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 Applicant .......... Clubhouse Associates, L.L.C. Location ............ 10.76 acre triangular parcel on the south side of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street Request ..........1. Recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; 2. Change in Zoning designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; and 3. Review of development plans for a 149 unit apartment complex and ancillary facilities. Action ............... Resolution 2002- Resolution 2002- and Resolution 2002- Item .................. CONTINUED - SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-056 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-731 Applicant ........... WG Properties, LLC Location ............ The east side of Washington Street, north of Lake La Quinta Drive, within the Lake La Quinta project area Request ............. Review of design guidelines and development standards for a 16,042 ± square foot office/medical office complex on 1.5 acres; and consideration of development plans for construction of a 8,792 square foot medical office structure. Action ............... Resolution 2002- and Resolution 2002- Item ................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-444, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-069, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 Applicant .......... Southern California Presbyterian Homes/City of La Quinta Location ............ Southwest corner of Avenue 47 and Adams Street Request ......... 1. Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact; 2. Consideration of a conditional use permit to allow an 81 unit, single story, senior apartment complex; and 3. Review of development plans for an 81 unit, single story, senior apartment complex. Action ............... Resolution 2002- Resolution 2002- and Resolution 2002- PC/AGENDA D. Item ................. SPECIFIC PLAN 99-036 AMENDMENT #1 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-734 Applicant .......... Sky West Corporate Centre Group LLC and the City of La Quinta Location ............ North side of Corporate Centre Drive, on the north side of Highway 1 1 1, east of Adams Street and west of Dune Palms Road Request ......... 1. Amendment of the text development standard and design guidelines for a 36-acre Specific Plan; and 2. Review of architectural, landscaping, site, and lighting plans for a two-story office building on 2.25 acres. Action ............... Resolution 2002- , Resolution 2002- , VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Discussion regarding a joint meeting with the City Council to be held on June 5, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. B. Report on the City Council meeting of May 7, 2002 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 April 23, 2002 CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:09 p.m. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Tyler to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Steve Robert Tyler, and Chairman Jacques Abels. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to excuse Commissioner Robbins. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Martin Magana, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of March 26, 2002. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to verify the statement made on Page 2, Item #6; Page 6, Item #4 be corrected to read, "...no supporting text given..."; Page 7, Item #6 corrected to state the elevators were a marketing issue.."; Page 8, Item #12 corrected to read, "...long term energy cost analysis..."; and Page 10, Item #9 corrected to read, "...for a total of 74 feet." There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to approve the minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved. B. Department Report: None V. PRESENTATIONS: None. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 1 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 20002-443 General Plan Amendment 2002- 084 Zone Change 2002-106 and Site Development Permit 2002-730; a request of Clubhouse Associates, L.L.C. for a recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; change the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; and approval of development plans for a 149 unit apartment complex and ancillary facilities located on a 10.75 acre triangular parcel on the south side of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Abels asked if there was a motion to continue the project to May 14, 2002 as requested by the applicant. 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to continue the project to May 14, 2002. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2002-731; a request of WG Properties, LLC for consideration of development plans for construction of a 8,792 square foot office building on a 1.51 acre parcel located at the east side of Washington Street, north of Lake La Quinta Drive, within the Lake La Quinta project area. 1. Chairman Abels asked if there was a motion to continue the project to May 14, 2002 as requested by the applicant. 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to continue the project to May 14, 2002. Unanimously approved. C. Environmental Assessment 2002-445 Conditional Use Permit 2002-068. and Site Development Permit 2002-733; a request of SECO/SDC LLC/A.G. Spanos Construction, Inc.,1) Recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; 2) Conditional Use Permit to allow a 1- 3 story, 120 room hotel; and 3) Review of development plans for a 1-3 story, 120 room hotel to be located on the east side of Washington Street, north of Avenue 48. 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Butler asked staff to identify the location of the three story building on Caleo Bay in relation to Via Florence. Staff showed how it intersected the eastern building. Discussion followed as to the location of the three story buildings. 3. Commissioner Kirk asked if the applicant did any visual impact that would affect view sheds. Staff stated yes, and the architect would make that presentation. Commissioner Kirk asked how this property relates to the previously approved medical facility. Staff showed where the medical building was located. Community Development Director Jerry clarified it was approved under a specific plan which does not expire. This project encompasses part of that site which would require it to be modified. Commissioner Kirk asked how much of this site belonged to the earlier specific plan. Staff stated two acres. Commissioner Kirk asked if the traffic generated by this project would be more, less, or same amount of traffic as the previously approved medical center. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it is about the same generation. The one issue is that this project is taking direct access off Washington Street. The previous approval had traffic taking access off Caleo Bay. Commissioner Kirk asked if the traffic distribution with the access off Washington Street, would be less off Caleo Bay. Staff stated the traffic study showed by taking the access of Washington Street it will significantly reduce the amount of traffic on Caleo Bay. Commissioner Kirk asked if this property would be allowed under the Regional Commercial land use designation. Staff stated yes as well as the Community Commercial designation. Commissioner Kirk asked if a use that is more intense could be put here. Staff stated the hotel is probably the most intense use, but they could build up to 50 feet in height. With the zone change it reduces it to 40 feet and they are proposing 36 feet. 4. Commissioner Butler asked staff to identify where the entrance was to Lake La Quinta and how the proposed three story buildings would line up in relation to the entrance to Lake La Quinta. Discussion followed. 5. Commissioner Tyler stated the way the property is graded the pad levels are roughly two feet above the sidewalk. Staff stated they are looking at reducing it down to one foot. If you drop it much more, the existing infrastructure would not work for the site. Commissioner Tyler asked how this level compares with the pad G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 levels on the east side of Caley Bay. Staff stated they are about the same. Discussion regarding the pad levels of the project and the homes in Lake La Quinta. Commissioner Tyler asked about the lighting. Staff stated the lighting would be the same as the Arts Foundation project and gave a description. They would be allowed 20 feet high lights and are requesting 12 feet high lights. Commissioner Tyler asked about the vacation of the restricted access. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained that when the map was created for Lake La Quinta, staff restricted the access from Washington Street to one location which was La Quinta Drive. In order for the access to be taken from Washington Street the actual acquiring of the access must be presented to the City Council. Commissioner Tyler asked if entry into the project off Caleo Bay was wide enough to accommodate a left turn lane. Staff explained it is 40 feet between the curbs. Staff will have a 12 foot center, two-way left turn lane, with 14 foot travel lanes on the outside. There will be no parking allowed on Caleo Bay. 6. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Lew Bishop, the applicant, gave a presentation on the project with a site line presentation. The lighting will be low and hopefully at 10 feet. The maximum height of the building facing Caleo Bay is only 28 feet. The parapets take it to 36 feet. 7. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked what the focus of the name "Residence" meant. Mr. Bishop stated it is designed for longer stays than the normal. 8. Commissioner Kirk asked the location of the site analysis. Mr. Bishop indicated the location on the map. Commissioner Kirk asked if the impact would be different on the other lots. Mr. Bishop explained the difference. 9. Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. David Flemer, Jr., 47-780 Via Livorno, stated the reason they moved to La Quinta is for the family friendly environment. They would like to ask the Planning Commission to vote no on this project because they believe it is a negative impact to the G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 residents in the community with small children. A bus stop exists at the corner of Via Florence, near the entrance off Caleo Bay into the property and this is a concern to the parents. The elevation are also a concern as the second and third floors residents will be able to see into their backyards which is a violation of their privacy. 10. Commissioner Kirk asked if anyone had any ideas for better commercial uses for this property, please state them. 11. Mr. Leo Ahern, 47-780 Via Firenze, stated he had written to the Commission and outlined eight objections to the project that he, his wife, and neighbors share. Some of those concerns are safety, children, emissions, land values, views, drainage and maintenance of the lake, lighting pollution, Caleo Bay is a Local Street and this project makes it a major highway. The Commission should take all these concerns into consideration. 12. Mr. John Miller, HOA Association President, 47-850 Via Nice, stated his issues were the three stories and being setback 152 feet from Washington Street. The other buildings being built are not set back this far off of Washington Street. The residents have expressed concern over the loss of privacy and the limited number of parking spaces being provided. Where do the employees and attendees of conferences park? For example the projects at Highway 1 1 1 and Washington which are completed already do not have enough parking spaces. He understands the need to attract hotels, but not at the expense of property owners. Hotels should be on Highway 1 1 1 . He is also concerned with the high volume of traffic and 24-hour business. The entrance to Caleo Bay is directly outside their community and this is where their children gather to meet the school bus. In regard to the traffic study, his concern is that those traveling south on Washington Street will not be able to make a left turn in and will have to turn down Caleo Bay or Avenue 48 to come into the back entrance to the hotel. Also, the originally approved medical facility was only a 9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday to Friday business and this project will be 24-hours; how can it not have a greater impact on traffic? 13. Mr. Tom Plouffe' 47-905 Via Jardin, stated he shares the concerns expressed by Mr. Miller. When he walks in the morning he will not be able to see the mountains because of the hotel. Another concern is parking. There are no other structures in this area over one story. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 14. Ms. Bernadette McNulty 47-395 Via Opera, has talked to the architect, and she is an environmental consultant and does like the design of the building. They have altered the height of the roof line to break up the space and it is superior to having two or three giant structures. They are only using 25% of the site for the structure so there is a lot of landscaping and that is good. The issue is parking is a concern and they are only providing 1.3 spaces per room and this is not enough. There needs to be more parking for the employees and attendees. She does not want to be in her backyard looking at the backside of a three story building, nor does she want a resident of the hotel looking down into her yard. Her third concern is the pollution to the lake. 15. Mr. Marshal Italiano 47-785 Via Firenze, stated he lives on the corner lot directly across the street and does not agree with the site lines as presented. The perimeter wall was referred to as having 9 foot bushes. They are trimmed to six feet. East of his property the wall is only six feet and that would be at a diagonal. His biggest concern is not the project, but also what happens to the other properties on this site and the traffic on Caleo Bay. It will bring more traffic and pollution. Right now they are an oasis surrounded by commercial. He understood and accepted the original medical center because the architecture blended in and would only be two stories, limited hours and closed on the weekends. Now this. In addition, probably three quarters of the community did not receive notice of this meeting. At the far end of the site there is Palm Desert National Bank, one story and they have no problem with it. The restaurant was also no problem. They did have a problem with the design, but they were concerned with the parking and overflow onto Caleo Bay. His home is 54 feet from the wall. Take a good look at site plans. He would recommend putting up balloons to look at the effect. 16. Mr. Stephanie Eichel, 47-995 Via Nice, stated she has sold most of the resales at Lake La Quinta and this project and she has to disclose the hotel and buyers do not want to buy. This will hurt their property values. There are other commercial options, such as a beauty salon, that would not be a three story hotel. 17. Mr. Larry Borses, 78-935 Via Trieste, did parking calculations for the restaurant and realized the parking would spill over onto the Caleo Bay. Now this project will add to that. Delivery trucks will G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 be backed up onto Caleo Bay. No one calculated the number of persons delivering as well as attending or working at this project. This is what he is concerned about. 18. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public participation portion of the public hearing and opened the matter for Commission discussion. 19. Commissioner Tyler stated he appreciated the public comment In regard to this parcel of land, the residents of Lake La Quinta have known since the beginning that it was designated as a commercial site. If no one knew this, it is an issue with your realtor. In regard to the water runoff, this is an issue that was addressed when the specific plan was approved. Research was done at that time and it was designed to have the drainage from the entire project drain into the lake. It was designed for this purpose. As far as parking, it should be looked look at again. The issue of parking on Caleo Bay, staff has stated there will be no parking allowed on Caleo Bay. Children should not be playing on public streets so parents would not have to be concerned about traffic on Caleo Bay. He too was concerned about the line of site as to where the three story part of the building would be facing Caleo Bay, but at the moment that is undeveloped property. As to the affect on the property on Caleo Bay, between Avenue 48 and Via Florence, the site line is useful. In regard to the site line, it works both ways. If you cannot see the building, they cannot see you. As to the traffic, all the projects proposed and developed so far have taken access off Caleo Bay. Now, some entry will be allowed off Washington Street which will help. Realistically this property will be developed. 20. City Attorney John Ramirez interrupted by informing the public that the public comment period has been closed and this is the time for the Commission to deliberate. This is a public forum and if everyone could be polite, it would be appreciated by both the Commission and staff. 21. Commissioner Butler noted he had taken notes on the comments that were made by those who spoke and a lot of issues were raised. We all suffer with the growth of the community. We are ruling on what is allowed for this site. He asked staff to explain how the water from this project would drain into the lake. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the Spanos Corporation was the G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 original developer of the site and the lake was made the major drainage source for the entire specific plan site. Commissioner Butler asked if the site line could be done in reverse. Can the residents of the hotel see into the Lake La Quinta property owners backyard? Should mitigation measures be placed on the development to deter the view. 22. Commissioner Kirk stated the Commission is trying to realize the impact on the property owners as well as the owners of the project. This overall is a good project. There are some issues to address. Most can or have been addressed. He would like to ask the applicant what the height of the wall was for the site line study. Mr. Bishop stated the hedges they measured were approximately nine feet above the 30 inch wall on the back side of the walkway on the east side of Caleo Bay. He took a separate site line eliminating the height of the existing shrubbery and lowering the site line to the top of the six foot wall that is in the backyard of all the houses and you still cannot see the building. Because the street curves and because there is a lot of vacant land to the north, they took the worst case scenario. There are no balconies facing Caleo Bay except for three that face vacant property. There is a 30-inch retaining wall at the back side of the sidewalk and four feet back from that there is a six foot wall. So from the back of the sidewalk on the east side of Caleo Bay to the top of the wall is approximately nine feet. Commissioner Kirk stated that they would be affected while walking whether or not it was a one story or three story building. What has impressed him is that this is one of the best looking Residence Inn he has seen. Rarely do we have applicants who will vary their rooflines. This has a lot of visual interest compared to what could be a blank wall of a supermarket or drugstore. Parking is a concern for this project and generally projects are over parked. He would suggest the access along Washington Street should be a shared access. Also, he would recommend a driveway access along the northern and southern perimeter. Low scale lighting should be applauded with the ten foot high light standards. 23. Commissioner Tyler asked the location of the windows on Caleo Bay. Mr. Bishop indicated there is one bedroom window and indicated how they would block the view into the neighborhood. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 24. Commissioner Tyler asked what the setback was for the first building. Staff stated the building setback is 80 feet back from Washington Street. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the previously approved two story Eisenhower medical facility was 35-36 feet in height. 25. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-037 certifying Environmental Assessment 2002- 445, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. ABSTAIN: None. 26. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-038 approving Conditional Use Permit 2002-068, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. 27. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-039 approving Site Development Permit 2002-733, as amended: a. The access along Washington Street shall be a shared access off Washington and reciprocal access to the northern and southern properties b. Low scale lighting shall be used with ten foot high light standards. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. ABSTAIN: None. Chairman Abels recessed the meeting at 8:43 p.m. and reconvened at 8:49 p.m. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2002-735; a request of Peter and Marie Andriet for compatibility review of architectural and landscaping plans for a one story single family residence on approximately 0.2 acres located at 47- 300 Via Ravenna, south of Dulce Del Mar within Lake La Quinta 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. None. 3. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Frank Moreno, architect for Peter Andriet stated he was available for questions. 4. Commissioner Butler asked if this had been approved by the homeowners' association. Applicant stated yes. 5. There being no further questions of the applicant and no other public comment, Chairman Abels open the matter for Commission discussion. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Kirk to adopt Resolution 2002-040, approving Site Development Permit 2002-735, as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. ABSTAIN: None. B. Sign Application 2002-613; a request of JDD, LLC, for consideration of an amendment to the sign program for La Quinta Court. 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 10 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Butler asked why this was being considered a sign. Staff explained the sign program was created so that all signs have to be letters. If this were an art feature it would have to be owned by the City and therefore it has to be a sign. 3. There being no further questions of staff and no public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public participation portion and opened it for Commission discussion. 4. Commissioner Kirk asked why staff was requesting to change Specific Plan Criteria 1.7. Staff stated it was not clear enough as the applicant drafted it to ensure this business could have two signs. Commissioner Kirk stated that as now written, for spaces that face away from Highway 1 1 1. Staff stated that in the old program. Commissioner Kirk noted that now the language changed. Staff clarified that if you face Highway 111 and the interior you would be allowed two signs. In this case if you had wall with a storefront you would be allowed a sign and another on the corner. Commissioner Kirk stated it is now permissive. As he reads it under the old version it seems to be more clear that not facing Highway 111 was for properties on Highway 111. The new version seems to allow any property that did not face Highway 111 and was not on Highway 111 to have additional signs. Discussion followed. Staff would clarify that for properties on Highway 111 or facing Highway 111 cannot have an additional sign. Commissioner Kirk stated it appears it would allow an artistic feature and a sign. Staff explained the artistic feature could not represent to the product or products being sold in the building. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Minute Motion 2002-008, approving Sign Application 2002-613, as amended: a. Clarification on signs facing Highway 1 1 1. Unanimously approved. C. Zoning Code Interpretation; a request of staff for an interpretation of Section 9.60.300 of the Zoning Code regarding two story units. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd l l Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Community Development Director Jerry Herman presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment. Mr. Kevin McCune 78-760 Sunbrook Lane, showed the Commission the proposed changes to their house which initiated the Commission interpretation. 3. Commissioner Tyler asked if there would be any structural changes. Mr. McCune stated they will have a structural engineer design the change. Commissioner Tyler stated his only concern is windows that would invade a neighbors privacy. 4. There being no further public participation, the public comment portion was closed and open for Commission discussion. Staff explained possible alternatives as to how the Code could be written. 5. Commissioner Butler stated this should be done on a case by case basis. Staff stated it would not be allowed as it would be a variance which is not allowed. It could be done by zones. 6. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Minute Motion 2002-009, directing staff to prepare a Zoning Code Amendment to modify Section 9.50.300 regarding two story units addressing the following concerns: A. Approval is obtained from adjacent property owners; B. Windows shall be allowed on the street frontage only; C. The change must stay within the existing structure with no exterior changes; and D. Prepare a provision that will not allow any adjoining neighbor to build a second story that changes the existing structure. Unanimously approved. E. General Plan Consistency Finding; a request of the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency for finding of General Plan conformity for the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency's proposed acquisition and development of The Ranch property with a municipal golf course and tourist commercial uses. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 12 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Community Development Director Jerry Herman 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 Tyler suggested deleting use of the name "The Ranch" as it was the name of the former owner and that the project read "could include golf courses" instead of "would include". Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez stated is has to be "would". Commissioner Tyler asked for clarification on the circulation of Avenue 54. Staff did so. 3. There being no further public participation or discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to adopt Resolution 2002-041, finding conformity with the General Plan for the La Quinta Redevelopment Agency's proposed acquisition and development of The Ranch property with a municipal golf course and tourist commercial uses. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of April 16, 2002. X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held May 14, 2002, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:21 p.m. on April 23, 2002. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 13 PH #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 14, 2002 CASE NOS.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-443 ZONE CHANGE 2002-106 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; 2) CHANGE ZONE DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; 3) APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A 149 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND ANCILLARY FACILITIES ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-443 WAS PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2002-084, ZONE CHANGE 2002-106, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE CERTIFIED LOCATION: 10.76 ACRE TRIANGULAR PARCEL ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF AVENUE 52, EAST OF JEFFERSON STREET APPLICANT: CLUBHOUSE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. REPRESENTATIVE: ROBERT KRAFT, KRAFT ARCHITECTS ZONING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) AAPC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)/VACANT SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)/CANAL AND PLANNED CASITAS EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)/CANAL AND PLANNED CASITAS WEST: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC)/TEMPORARY BANK AND FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The currently vacant triangular 10.76 acres project site is located on the south side of Avenue 52, approximately 600 feet east of Jefferson Street; with the All American Canal on the eastern property line (Attachment 1). General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone The applicant is requesting to change the Zoning designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential. The High Density Residential allows up to 16 units per acre; the proposal is for 149 apartment units on 10.76 acres which yields a density of 13.8 units per acre. Site Development Permit The applicant proposes eighteen apartment buildings with eight different floor plans having similar elevations including a one story 5,680 square foot Clubhouse/Administration building, pool, putting green, barbeque areas and a great lawn (Attachment 2). Apartment buildings are one, two, and three stories with four buildings at the maximum 40' height. Units proposed are one and two bedrooms (some with dens) . Previous Planning Commission Action The Planning Commission, at the March 26, 2002 public hearing, continued this project to the April 23, 2002 meeting; and at that meeting, the applicant asked for a continuance until May 14, 2002 meeting (Attachment 3). The Planning Commission requested the applicant work with staff on the following items: 1) that the access to the property be consistent with the General Plan, 2) provide architectural relief to end units north elevations, 3) provide elevators for three story buildings, 4) provide landscape relief, greenery or detailing along the carport asphalt driveways, and, 5) provide additional amenities. AAPC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd Access/Circulation/Parking The applicant has moved the middle access driveway to be 250 feet from the westerly driveway consistent with the General Plan Update. In summary, the proposed site plan has frontage on Avenue 52 with three access points into the site parking for residents and guests. The west access will be shared with an adjacent planned and approved neighborhood commercial center allowing a right -in, right -out, and left -in turning movement; the middle access provides a right -in, right -out turning movement; and the east access allows a right -in, right -out, and left - in turning movement. Proposed resident parking is provided around the entire perimeter of the project; with the east and west perimeter parking proposed to be screened by a 6' chain link fence. Proposed are 69 open parking stalls (9' X 17' with a 2' overhang), 228 carports (9' X 17' with a 2' overhang) , and 40 one car (10' X 20) garages. Architectural Plans The applicant has provided two options for the three story units; one with elevators and one without elevators. At the applicant's request, staff met with the applicant and the Sheriff's Department to review defensible space issues and particularly elevators for the three story units. As a result, the Sheriff's Department (Attachment 4) requested the following: "It is highly desirable to design an elevator shaft and cab to be transparent, making occupants of the cab visible from the outside. Convex mirrors should be installed in elevator cabs and at stairwell landings." The applicant has also provided a market study (Attachment 5) that identifies a target market for the project. The study finds that elevator access is not market mandated; and would have a negative effect on the overall project appearance and function. In addition, the applicant has added additional design detail to the north elevation of Building 9 by redesigning the floor plan and adding windows on the north elevation to the both stories. If the Planning Commission chooses to require elevators for three story buildings and/or modify the proposed architectural elevations, Conditions of Approval will be need to be added In summary, the applicant proposes eighteen buildings with eight different floor plans and similar elevations including a Clubhouse. Floor plans are one and two bedrooms (some with dens) ranging in size from 752 square feet to 1,308 square feet. Four apartment buildings are one story at approximately 24 feet in height, 10 buildings are two story at approximately 33 feet in height, and three stories with a maximum 40' height. A:\PC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd ;� i Landscape Plan The applicant proposes to soften the asphalt driveways that provide access to the project's carports and garages by adding a landscaped trellis above the carports for all buildings along on the southerly portion of the project by adding decorative paving and plant material at each pedestrian entrance into the project. Also proposed is decorative paving leading out of the project into each trash enclosure area, and landscape material such as vines at the project perimeter fencing opposite the pedestrian entrances. Amenities The applicant is not proposing to change the amenity package for the project. Based upon the market study, the amenities proposed satisfy and exceed the demands of the target market. These amenities include: a community center, a pool, a spa, a great lawn, water elements, barbeques, and a putting green. If the Planning Commission chooses to modify the proposed amenity package, a Condition of Approval will be need to be added. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, staff prepared Environmental Assessment (EA) 2002-443 for the project. The Noise Assessment Study, prepared for the EA, recommends certain noise control mitigation measures including a minimum five feet in height noise barrier along Avenue 52 which can be achieved with a berming and/or a wall. Staff recommends certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW: The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of March 13, 2002 (Attachment 6). The Committee unanimously adopted Minute Motion 2002-010, recommending approval subject to the conditions which have been incorporated into this review. COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES: The project was sent out for comment to City departments and affected public agencies on February 25, 2002, requesting comments be returned by March 15, 2002. All applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. PUBLIC NOTICE: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on, March 4, 2002. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Zoning Code. A:\PC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd dui STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS• The findings, as noted in the attached Resolution, required by the Zoning Ordinance can be made, subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission 2002-_ recommending to the City Council certification of an Environmental Assessment 2002-443; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City Council approval of a Zone Change 2002-106; and, 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2002-730 subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. ATTACHMENTS 1 . Location Map 2. Plans and Elevations (Planning Commission only) 3. Minutes of the of March 26, 2002 meeting of the Planning Commission, and draft minutes of the April 23 meeting of the Planning Commission 4. Letter from Sheriff Smith 5. Market Study - Product Positioning and Overview 6. Minutes of the of March 13, 2002 meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee Prepared by: Fred Baker, Al 'V Principal Planner AAPC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR ZONE CHANGE 2002-106, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-443 APPLICANT: CLUBHOUSE ASSOCIATES L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 26th day of March, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 23`d day of April and subsequently continued said Public Hearing to the 1 e, day May to consider Environmental Assessment 2002-443 for Change of Zone 2002-106, and Site Development Permit 2002-730 herein referred to as the "Project" for Clubhouse Associates L.L.C.; and, WHEREAS, said Project has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"(as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2002-443) to evaluate the potential for adverse environmental impacts; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said Project could have a significant adverse effect on the environment unless mitigation measures are implemented, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact could be filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1 . The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that appropriate mitigation measures have been imposed which will minimize project impacts. 2. The proposed Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. Considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources A:\cond PC RESO EA 2002-443.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Environmental Assessment 2002-443 Adopted May 14, 2002 or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals as no significant effects on environmental factors by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed Project will not have environmental effects directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 6. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect setforth in 14 CAL Code Regulations §753.5(d). 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record, including EA 2002-443 and the comments received thereon, that the project will have a significant impact upon the environment. 8. EA 2002-443 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. 9. The location and custodian of the record of proceedings relating to this project is the Community Development Department of the City of La Quinta, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 922253. 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 constitutes the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2002-443 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist, A:\cond PC RESO EA 2002-443.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Environmental Assessment 2002-443 Adopted May 14, 2002 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 14th day of May, 2002, 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:\cond PC RESO EA 2002-443.wpd i i Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2001-084, Change of Zone 2002-106, Site Development Permit 2002-730, Clubhouse Apartments. 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Fred Baker, 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: South side of Avenue 52, approximately 600 feet east of Jefferson 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Clubhouse Associates, LLC 160 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 6. General Plan Designation: Current: Low Density Residential Proposed: High Density Residential 7. Zoning: Current: Low Density Residential Proposed: High Density Residential 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone to change the density of the property from 4 units per acre to up to 16 units per acre on a parcel of land approximately 10 acres in size. Site Development Permit to allow the construction of 149 apartments and ancillary facilities. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: Avenue 52, Low Density Residential South: All -American Canal West: Vacant Neighborhood Commercial, recently approved for a shopping center East: All -American Canal, Single Family Residential 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Not applicable PACEQAchecklistEA 02-443wpd Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. J L 0 I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. El ��J�J March 7 2002 ignature Date G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analysis are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8. The analysis of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: AESTHETICS: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit CIR-5) b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (General Plan EIR, page 5-12 ff.) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs) III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X X X X X X f3 is\WPDOCS\Env Asses\C1ubAssocCk1st.WPD 4 d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Project Description) BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5-1) b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta Municipal Code; General Plan) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person)? c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (Lakebed Delineation Map) X X X 9 91 Q1 X X K9 is\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 5 11 d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ("Cultural Resources Assessment of a 15 acre Parcel...," Archaeological Associates, July 2001) GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-2, page 6-7) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-2, page 6-7) iv) Landslides? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-2, page 6-7) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-2, page 6-7) c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? ("Geotechnical Investigation Proposed 7 Lot Residential Subdivision...," Sladden Engineering, August 2001) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-32) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application Materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application Materials) c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application Materials) X X F3 \WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 6 d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 6-11) h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) III. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY : Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-26, 6-27) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR, page 4- 30 ff.) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, inc0uding through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off -site? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) \WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 7 LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan Project Description) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Master Environmental Assessment 2-11) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) MINERAL RESOURCES: Wound the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) CI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? ("Acoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates; General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-4, page 6-17) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? ("Acoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates; General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-4, page 6-17) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-4, Pg 6-17) d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Master Environmental Assessment) e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive levels? (General Plan map) X X X Q K9 X X X FN :\WPDOCS\Env Asses\C1ubAssocCk1st.WPD 8 :II. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: (IV KV a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, page 2-14) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. ) Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. ) RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials) TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan EIR, pg 4-126 ff.) X X X X X K4 X X X M :\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 9 b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials) ;VI. - UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-27) d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, pg 4-20) e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20) f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, page 4-28) \WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 10 X X X X X X X 9 X P— X KI ;V11. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a) Does the project have the ,potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? KVIII. EARLIER ANALYSIS. X FA FN Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review. No earlier analysis were used in this review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. See attached Addendum. 30URCES: Vlaster Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 1992. 3CAQMD CEQA Handbook. 3eneral Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992. City of La Quinta Municipal Code 3:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 11 ►coustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates, JVEMBER 29, 2001. 'hase I Archaeological Survey of the Clubhouse at La Quinta...," prepared by W & S )nsultants. affic Impact Analysis letter, dated February 12, 2002, prepared by Wildan. \WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 12 . Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2002-443 I. a) & c) The proposed project includes one, two and three story buildings. The three story buildings are proposed on the boundary of the site adjacent to the All - American Canal (buildings 1, 2, 2.13 and 4). The height of these buildings is shown to reach 40 feet. However, the buildings will never be adjacent to other development, insofar as the All -American Canal will always provide a buffer to development on the south. The buildings will be at least 200 feet from any development to the south, and probably more when setbacks are added to those properties. This distance reduces the potential impacts associated with the structures to a less than significant level. III. a) The proposed project will generate air pollution primarily from the operation of motor vehicles. The 149 apartment units could generate approximately 5,500 trips per day'. Based on this trip generation, the project at buildout will generate the following pollutants. Running Exhaust Emissions (pounds/day) PM 10 PM 10 PM 10 CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires 50 mph 198.8 7.65 40.7 -- 0.85 0.85 7 9 Daily Threshold 550 75 100 150 Based on 5,500 trips/day and average trip length of 7 miles, using EMFAC7G Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light autos at 75°F. * Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance in determining the significance of a project and the need for an EIR. As demonstrated in the Table above, the proposed project will not exceed any threshold for the generation of moving emissions, as established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District in determining the need for an EIR. The impacts to air quality relating to chemical pollution are not expected to be significant. III. c) The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or smaller). The construction of the proposed project has the Traffic Analysis letter dated February 13, 2002, prepared by Wildan. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\CIubAssocAdd.WPD potential to generate dust, which could contribute to the PM10 problem in the area. In order to control PM 10, the City has imposed standards and requirements on development to control dust. The applicant will be required to submit such a plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity at the site. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the mitigation measures below. 1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation. 3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 7. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Perimeter landscaping on Avenue 52 and the retention basin landscaping shall be completed with the first phase of development. 8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. 9. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality from buildout will not be significant. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdd.WPD V. b) A cultural resource survey was conducted for the subject property'. The survey found three prehistoric sites and one isolate on the site. As a result, the report recommends the imposition of the following mitigation measure: 1. A Phase II testing program shall be conducted on the subject property. The findings of the Phase II testing shall be compiled into a report to be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. VI. a) i) & ii) The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major earthquake. Structures on the site will be required to meet the City's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of grading plans (please see below). This requirement will ensure that impacts from ground shaking are reduced to a less than significant level. VI. b) The subject property is subject to soil erosion due to wind. The City will implement requirements for a PM 10 management plan, and additional mitigation measures have been included in the Air Quality discussion above. These mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. b) Domestic water is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District, which extracts groundwater from a number of wells in the Lower Thermal sub -basin. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures and on -site retention, which both aid in reducing the potential impacts associated with groundwater. The proposed project will also meet the requirements of the City's water -conserving landscaping ordinance. These standards will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. VIII. c)&d) The proposed project will alter the drainage pattern in the area through grading and covering of soil with impermeable surfaces. The City requires that all construction projects retain the 100 year 24 hour storm on -site. This will control the amount of runoff which exits the site during a storm. The project's drainage plan will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. 2 "Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Clubhouse at La Quinta...," prepared by W & S Consultants. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdd.WPD XI. a) A noise study was prepared for the proposed project'. The study found that noise levels of 69 dBA CNEL could be expected at 100 feet from the center line of Avenue 52. Since the project proposes sensitive receptors, namely apartments, for the site, mitigation is required to reduce the impacts, particularly to first floor units near the Avenue 52 right-of-way. 1. A 5 foot tall barrier, either in the form of a wall or berm, or combination of both, shall be erected along the entire length of the property on Avenue 52, and for a distance of at least 200 feet along the western and eastern property lines. The wall shall have no openings or cutouts, except drain holes, within the 5 feet of height. 2. Construction of all units shall conform to the recommendations made in the "Acoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments...," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates, November 2001. XI. c) The construction of the proposed project will also generate temporary high noise levels which could impact residential development to the south and east. In order to reduce these potential impacts, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. All internal combustion equipment operating within 500 feet of any occupied residential unit shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers and air intake silencers. 2. All stationary construction equipment (e.g. generators and compressors) shall be located in the northwest corner of the site. 3. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La Quinta Municipal Code. XIII. a) The proposed development will have a direct impact on public services and will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, acting under City contract. Site development will generate property tax which will offset the costs of added police and fire services. The project area will be required to pay the mandated school fees as development occurs. These fees mitigate the students generated, and offset the impacts to schools. 3 "Acoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments...," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates, November 2001. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdd.WPD XV. a) The project will be required to participate in the City's Impact Fee Program, which helps to offset roadway improvement costs. Site development is not expected to have a significant impact on municipal services or facilities. A traffic analysis letter was prepared for the proposed project'. The letter finds that the potential additional traffic generated at the site will not represent a significant impact on the City's roadway system. Further, the City's General Plan EIR and associated traffic study included analysis of this property for High Density Residential development. The project falls within the parameters of the EIR, and will not further impact the roadway system. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. 4 Letter dated February 12, 2002, by Wildan. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdd.WPD N O 0 0 O M N N O O N U �� N O p oCN r.,o N o N � N � 4, o bA O U 00 CD 'V—D O M "Zt N 0 O N U a LO o z ® z � H U A U W d H A U� ZA a� OU b ►y � � � U U u ti a o a a a o bA .O O O O O •U 4, O U 0 1U .0 N U G, N cl 0 41 F U 0 w 0 0 �• U U Q U U a a as a as �,oa a o� z~ o° 5 � � � W W U U U UAL GA N z a� 0 Ei ►ate a�i a`i �' 0 Q C �Q o o a a a _0 w > O Cdd ) O Cd cad a od a 0 P-4 H A U� �A �W ®x UU id 0 a� W F o '- U C U a-+ Cd VJ P. � U F U ^, td O � O } L1. a � Y 0 z A a U Q z ® rA U a Cd � � a Cd � a U � U H A U� �WAW �U �W ®x UU o 0 0 0 U U U U GS O O O O U U U U U U U U aU bq bq bq A A A A a Zz cqj Cd c ®o P. b 0A � GA 0A w 0 O U En � N 4-4 O O ® C 3 o H a o 0 N • �-4 4-+ W N � o rn - 3 z Cd o 0 IRi U 45 N U` i1. �••� R. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM LOW DENSITY TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON APPROXIMATELY 10.7 ACRES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET EAST OF JEFFERSON, SOUTH OF AVENUE 52 CASE NO.: CHANGE OF ZONE 2002-106 APPLICANT: CLUBHOUSE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 261h day March, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 23`d day of April and subsequently continued said Public Hearing to the 14th day May to consider the request of Clubhouse Associates, L. L.C. for a Zone Change as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: A.P.N.: 772-300-002 & 772-300-003 and; 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 find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Zone Change. This Zone Change is consistent the updated General Plan, in that the zone change category proposed are consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan. 2. The Zoning Change is suitable and appropriate for the property involved because it is a small triangular shaped lot more suitable for the higher intensity use. 3. The new land use designation is compatible with the similar designations within the City because the property is accessible from an arterial street . 4. This Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of development plans, which will ensure adequate conditions of approval. AAcond PC RESO ZC 2002-106.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Change of Zone 2002-106 Adopted May 14, 2002 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 Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described Zone Change request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 14th day of May, 2002, 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:lcond PC RESO ZC 2002-106.wpd EXHIBIT A 4 h B sol 34 /N I4{/i7 e TRA 020-057 P. y ` M 9 25Aa NJ a Avenue 52 O a �i A7J at _a� Por 2 P 590*m e. iRaKt4- V1 LA � O O � 40 j9 -- 10 � PROJECT LOCATION L CASE MAP CASE No. ZONE CHANGE 2002-106 ORTH SCALE: NTS PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL THE DESIGN PLANS FOR A 149 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 APPLICANT: CLUBHOUSE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 261h day of March, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 23d day of April and subsequently continued said Public Hearing to the 14th day May to consider the request of Clubhouse Associates, L. L.C. for a Site Development Permit as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: A.P.N.: 772-300-002 & 772-300-003 and; WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, at its meeting of March 131h, 2002 did review the architecture and landscape plans for the proposed project and recommended approval. WHEREAS, at said Pubic Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify said Site Development Permit 2002-730 : A. Site Development Permit 2002-730 is consistent with Goal 2 of the residential goals, policies, and programs and intent of the La Quinta General Plan which states: "A broad range of housing types and choices for all residents of the City" in that the proposed housing is not extensively available in the City. B. Site Development Permit 2002-730 is consistent with the allowed density of up to 16 units per acre and stated purpose to allow multi -family housing (Table 2.1) for the High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation in that the proposed density for the project is 14.9 units per acre and the project provides multi -unit residential buildings. C. The design and development of the apartment complex will be consistent with the City's Zoning Code provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with the General Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences pursuant to Environmental Assessment 2002-443. A:\cond PC RESO SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Site Development Permit 2002-730 Adopted May 14, 2002 D. The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the development quality in the area and accommodates site generated traffic. E. The landscape design of the proposed project complements the building and surrounding development in that it enhances the aesthetic and visual quality of the area, provides adequate visual buffering with trees and mounding, and uses a high quality of plant materials. E. The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding development in that is a similar scale, massing and building height of other development in the area; the building materials will be high quality, durable and low maintenance, provided conditions are met. G. The architectural design of the project is consistent with the Zoning Code in that land use and circulation considerations, scale, massing and building height of the facility are met. 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 to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2002-730 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 14th day of May, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: A:\cond PC RESO SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Site Development Permit 2002-730 Adopted May 14, 2002 JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\cond PC RESO SDP 2002-730.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002- 730 CLUBHOUSE APARTMENTS, L.L.C. ADOPTED MAY 14, 2002 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 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. 2. Prior to the issuance of any permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary permits and/or clearances from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting the improvement plans for City approval. (FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION SITES FIVE (5) ACRES OR MORE: A project -specific NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the applicant; and who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent (°NOI"), prior to the issuance of a grading or site construction permit by the City.) A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 3. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08- DWQ . A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five (5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this Site Development Permit. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practice ("BMPs"), 8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC: 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All of applicant's erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off site grading being done in relation to this project. F. All approved project BMPs shall be maintained in their proper working order throughout the course of construction, and until all improvements have been accepted by the City. 4. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire, or confer, those easements, and other property rights necessary for the construction and/or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services, and for the maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. The applicant shall offer for dedication all public street right-of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 7. Unless the ultimate developed right-of-way can be documented, the public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial) 110 foot ultimate developed right of way, 55 feet on the south side. 8. Right-of-way geometry for property line corner cut -backs at curb returns shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawing #805, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 9. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 10. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. Avenue 52 (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the Right of Way/Property Line. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes. A:lcont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd / Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 1 1. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas shown on the Site Development Permit. 12. The applicant shall vacate all abutter's right -of -access to public streets and properties from all frontages along such public streets and properties, excepting those access points shown on the Site Development Permit. 13. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, ingress/egress, or other encroachments will occur. 14. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, any existing right-of-way, or access easement, which will diminish the access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to those properties, or shall submit notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 15. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of this Site Development Permit and the date of final acceptance of the on and off -site improvements for this Site Development Permit, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 16. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 17. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 A. Off -Site Street Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control and separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. B. Off -Site Street Median Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' C. Perimeter Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' D. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal E. On -Site Precise Grading Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal F. On -Site Utility Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal G. On -Site Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' Horizontal The plans shall be submitted a minimum of 8 to 10 weeks prior to the issuance of construction permits to allow adequate time for plan check and revisions. Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements; and show the existing street improvements out to at least the center lines of adjacent existing streets. "Site Utility" plans shall normally include all sub -surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to sewer lines, water lines, fire protection and storm drainage systems. "Rough Grading" plans shall include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. 18. The City maintains standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 19. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all complete, approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format which can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. OFF -SITE IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 20. Prior to the conditional approval of this Site Development Permit, or the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall construct all off -site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Off -Site Improvement Agreement ("OSIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 21. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monuments. 22. When improvements are to be secured through an OSIA, and prior to any permits being issued by the City, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed off -site improvements for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. At the same time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for the security determination of the OSIA, the applicant shall also submit one copy of an 8- 1 /2" x 11 " reduction of the Site Development Plan, along with one copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates for its own on and off -site improvements. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 Cost estimates for the security of telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements will not be required. 23. When improvements are phased through an administrative approval (e.g., Phasing Plan, Site Development Permits, etc.), all off -site improvements and common on -site improvements (e.g., backbone utilities, retention basins, perimeter walls, landscaping and gates) shall be constructed, or secured through an OSIA, prior to the occupancy of any permanent buildings in the first phase of the development, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each subsequent phase shall either be completed, or secured through an OSIA, prior to the occupancy of permanent buildings within such latter phase, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The same submittal criteria shall apply to all subsequent phases as required for the first phase submittal. (E.g. detailed cost estimates, 8-1 /2" x 11 " reductions, etc.) 24. In the event the applicant fails to construct improvements for the development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, or other phasing method, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 25. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 26. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 27. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, and C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16 (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions submitted with its application for a grading permit. 28. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 29. 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. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the pads within this development. The existing approved SDP 2001-71 1 is located immediately west of the subject property and has proposed grades at the southerly end approximately 6 feet lower than the proposed parking grade for the subject project. The applicant shall provide a workable design which either minimizes the grade difference between the two projects or design and construct a retaining wall/garden wall system in accordance with the City's standards to accommodate the grade differential. Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 30. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any building pads within the project site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Site Development Permit, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 31. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 32. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 33. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rete shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise. 34. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain surges of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 35. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) 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. 36. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 37. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall not exceed six feet and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1. 38. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. 39. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 40. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 41. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 42. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. 43. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 44. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 45. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 46. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 47. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and residue during street sweeping operations. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd ' Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 48. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial) 110 foot Right of Way Option Widen the south side of Avenue 52 along the project frontage. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design standard. Street widening improvements shall include all appurtenant components such as, but not limited to, curb, gutters, cross gutters and spandrels, traffic control striping, legends, marking and signs. Other significant new improvements required for installation in, or adjacent to the subject right of way include: a) 6 foot wide meandering sidewalk b) 18 foot wide landscaped median from the westerly property line to the easterly project limits. Necessary transitions and tapers into the existing bridge at the All American Canal will need to be designed and is subject to approval by the City Engineer. The pavement rehabilitation/reconstruction and landscape median improvements are eligible for reimbursement from the City's Development Impact Fee fund in accordance with policies established for that program. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential 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" or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 51. 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. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 52. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 53. Standard knuckles and corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 54. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 55. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. 56. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Avenue 52) at the Westerly Property Line. This driveway shall be a shared access drive/road with the adjacent landowner (See SDP 2001-71 1) and shall be centered on the westerly property line. This driveway shall have right in, right out and left in turning movements. The median improvements shall accommodate a left in, only, design. The shared access drive/road layout shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The security gate for this project shall be located away from the property line a sufficient distance with the following access road design features: adequate stacking, a rejection turnaround feature, and a separate lane for guests. Nothing in this condition requires the adjacent landowner to pay for sufficient improvements to implement the shared access requirements in a manner that serves the development proposed by SDP 2002-730. However, reasonable cooperation by the adjacent landowner does include granting of reciprocal cross -access easements between the two landowners that facilitate construction of improvements necessary to implement the shared access concept on both properties in a manner that precludes unnecessary reconstruction of the improvements in the future. B. Secondary Entry (Avenue 52) approximately 740 feet east of the westerly property line. This driveway shall have right in, right out and left in turning movements. The median improvements shall be designed for left in only turning A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 movements. The location of this proposed driveway shall take into account the proposed entry for the Mountain View Country Club on the north side of Avenue 52. The Mountain View Country Club entrance will also have a left in only turn lane design. The driveway for SDP 2002-730 may need to shift easterly to provide adequate separation from the Mountain View Country Club Entrance to accommodate the proposed left in only turn lane designs for both projects. The location of the driveway and median design is subject to City Engineer's approval. C. Secondary Entry (Avenue 52) approximately 240 feet east of the westerly property line. This driveway shall be a right in/right out driveway. 57. Pursuant to Section 9.150.080(A)(8)(b) (Parking), LQMC, the applicant shall provide 30-foot uninterrupted driveway throats into the parking lot, or alternatively provide a combination of a dedicated right turn deceleration lane and the drive throat that will equal a total of 30-feet. CONSTRUCTION 58. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphaltic concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include the test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include the most recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that the design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs have been approved. 59. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 60. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which shall identify an average three foot mounding within the Avenue 52 landscape setback to screen the parking lot. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 61. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which shall not use Queen Palms on -site in an organized pattern as this tree will not provide the intended effect. 62. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which shall eliminate the use of Date Palms trees along pedestrian corridors and courtyards and substitute it with another palm tree type such as a California Fan Palm or a Mexican Fan Palm. 63. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which provides vines on all perimeter walls/fences; and eliminates plant material from the perimeter landscape setback adjacent to parking. 64. The applicant shall comply with Sections 9.90.040 (Table of Development Standards) & 9.100.040 (Landscaping), LQMC. 65. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 66. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect, The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 67. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 68. Only incidental storm water will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 QUALITY ASSURANCE 69. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 70. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such or other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 71. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 72. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As - Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. MAINTENANCE 73. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 74. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 75. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 FIRE MARSHALL 76. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding Fire Marshall conditions should be directed to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. SHERIFF DEPARTMENT 77. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall review building plans with the Sheriff's Department regarding vehicle code requirements, defensible space, and other law enforcement and public safety concerns. All questions regarding the Sheriff Department should be directed to the Senior Deputy at (760) 863-8950. MISCELLANEOUS 78. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, applicant shall provide a minimum of six spaces in close proximity to the Clubhouse facility to be signed and striped for apartment managers and prospective renters only. 79. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, applicant shall redesign of the Monument Signs, consistent with Section 9.160.040 of the Zoning Code, to be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval. 80. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, applicant shall provide a waH design be consistent with Section 9.60.030 and Section 9.150.080 (Parking Facility Design Standards) to be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval. 81. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, applicant shall submit a revised Illumination study to the Community Development Department for review and approval which provides driveways with illumination to allow overall site illumination to achieve an average of two footcandle or less. 82. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, applicant shall record a Parcel Merger for A.P.N.'s 772-300-002 & 772-300-003. 83. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened by roof parapets so that they cannot be viewed from adjacent properties. Prior to occupancy of the proposed building complexes, a visual inspection shall be made by the Community Development Department to confirm that parapets conceal any roof mounted equipment. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd ATTACHMENT # 5 Avenue 52 PROJECT LOCATION I v ATTACHMENT # Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. 17. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-036 recommending approval of Specific Plan 2000-043 Amendment No. 1, subject to the findings and conditions as amended: A. Condition #:40: Electrical power is to be supplied to and maintained by the entity who receives revenue from the advertising on the bus shelter on Washington Street. The applicant shall be allowed to work with staff to make modifications to the landscaping at the rear of the bus shelter to accommodate the bus stop users. B. Condition #55: Delete C. Condition #60: A street name change to "Point Happy Drive" shall be allowed on the east side of the property on Washington Street into the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center. A street name change to "Point Happy Drive" shall be allowed when and if written permission is obtained from the La Quinta Plaza Shopping Center owners to said change. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. D. Environmental Assessment 20002-443 General Plan Amendment 2002- 084 Zone Change 2002-106 and Site Development Permit 2002-730; a request of Clubhouse Associates, L.L.C. for a recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; change the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; and approval of development plans for a 149 unit apartment complex and ancillary facilities located on a 10.75 acre triangular parcel on the south side of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Abels 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. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Kirk asked about the results of the water analysis in regard to the Water Efficient Ordinance. Staff stated the results of the calculations were on the landscape plans and stated the maximum allowable is 4,400,000 gallons per year and the actual use is approximately 2,900,000 gallons per year. Commissioner Kirk asked where the additional parking spaces would be located and asked for an explanation of how the fabric roofs would hold up in the deserts temperatures. He also asked if the three access points are appropriate for this kind of project. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it met the General Plan requirements. He explained and went on to explain the circulation pattern. Commissioner Kirk asked if the access point and the one to the east met the 240 foot separation. Staff stated the new General Plan requires 250 feet between driveways measured between the curb returns. On the plan there is not enough room for the third driveway access, it would need to be moved. 3. Commissioner Butler asked if an elevator was required on a three story building. Staff stated only if the Building Code required it and Building and Safety did not require it. The applicant is providing handicapped accessible units. 4. Commissioner Tyler questioned why there was no supporting text given for Item XVII(b) Mandatory Findings of Significance in the Environmental Assessment. Staff explained there were none are required for this section. Commissioner Tyler asked staff why the staff reports states a General Plan Amendment is not required under the updated General Plan, yet there is a General Plan Amendment Resolution is before them for approval. Staff explained that since the updated General Plan is within the 30-day protest period, and the applicant asked for a General Plan Amendment, staff is processing the General Plan Amendment in anticipation of the updated General Plan being in affect by the time this application reaches the City Council. At that time it will no longer be needed. Commissioner Tyler stated he not concur with the Site Development Permit findings in regard to the architecture. In Condition #48, Commissioner Tyler asked staff to explain what the word "option" meant. Senior Engineer Steve Speer clarified there were two options the applicant could chose from. Commissioner Tyler asked staff the location of the mounding as discussed in Condition #60. Staff clarified they were recommending four foot mounding in the street landscaping in G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 conjunction with the sound wall. Commissioner Tyler asked if there was to be a block wall on the perimeter of the project. Staff clarified they were required to provide a sound wall with mounding along Avenue 52. The applicant was asking for a chainlink fence on the rear of the site. Commissioner Tyler asked the location of the retention basin and staff identified them. Staff clarified that a condition would be added requiring a parcel map to be approved prior to building permits being issued. 5. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chuck Crookrall, representing the applicant, stated they have no problem with relocating the third access point. They will hopefully be installing a living fence along the Canal. The remainder of the site will have a block wall. 6. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked about the lack of elevators as it seemed to be a marketing issue. Mr. Crookrall stated there are only four buildings that have three stories, or 20 units. 7. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was any problem having two access points instead of three. Mr. Crookrall stated he did not see any objection. 8. Mr. Robert Kraft, architect for the project, stated that in regard to the 250 foot distance on the access point, it would not be an issue. Their purpose was to not create a dead-end aisle for the internal circulation. They have no problem with the perimeter block wall. The Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was in favor of a living fence. He went on to explain the site and the elevations. 9. Commissioner Tyler asked if the garages would be visible from the east side of the Canal. Mr. Kraft stated they would be below the visual site line. 10. Chairman Abels asked about the material to be used on the carports. Mr. Kraft stated it was the same material as what is used at the Palm Springs Airport. It is guaranteed for 30-years. Discussion followed regarding the material to be used for the carports. 11. Commissioner Kirk asked the applicant to explain what would be G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 seen from the other side of the Canal. Mr. Kraft gave a demonstration. Commissioner Kirk asked about the location of the extra 39 parking spaces. Mr. Kraft clarified the request was for 39 additional covered spaces not additional spaces. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was a target demographic for the project. Mr. Kraft stated he did not have that information. Mr. Crookrall stated their market study showed a need for upscale apartments in the age group of 40 + . Commissioner Kirk asked about active activities. Mr. Kraft explained the amenities. Commissioner Kirk asked about the north side elevations being typical and how many would have the blank wall. Mr. Kraft stated not all the buildings would be the same; only three of the buildings would look at the blank wall. 12. Commissioner Tyler asked about the long term energy cost analysis for the units. Mr. Kraft stated none had been done at this time. They will be as cost effective as they can make them. 13. There being no further public participation, the public comment portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 14. Commissioner Butler stated that on the three story buildings he is uncomfortable not having elevators as the project will be targeting the older generation. This project will need additional amenities to draw people to the site. He would want the project conditioned to have elevators for the three story units. 15. Commissioner Kirk stated he was in support of the General Plan Amendment. In terms of the design, he has concerns with the asphalt mote around the perimeter. It needs to be broken up with landscaping and design to create interest. 16. Commissioner Tyler stated he agrees this is a good location for the high density project. There needs to be more amenities to off -set the density. His main concern is the external appearance driving around it and being highly visible from Avenue 52 and the shopping center adjacent to it. 17. Commissioner Kirk suggested the architect review the plans in light of the suggestions made by the Commission. Mr. Crookrall explained this was not the first design, but it was based on meeting all the Agency requirements. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 18. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to continue the project to April 23, 2002 allowing the applicant to work with staff on the following items: A. Work with staff on the access points to be consistent with the General Plan. B. Architecture relief on the end buildings. C. Landscape relief, greenery or detailing along the carports and asphalt to break up the asphalt. D. Provide additional amenities Unanimously approved. Chairman Abels recessed the meeting at 9:16 p.m. and reconvened at 9:21 p.m. VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Village Use Permit 2000-040 Amendment #1; a request of Chapman Golf Development, LLC for review of lighting and landscaping plans for a restaurant to be located on the northeast corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive. 1. Commissioner Kirk stated he had a possible conflict of interest and withdrew from the dias. 2. Chairman Abels 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. 3. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Christina Dores, representing the applicant, stated they had met with the adjacent residents and have made modifications based on their concerns. She is available to answer any questions. 4. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tyler stated he would like to hear from the lighting consultant. Mr. Ralph Reyna, lighting consultant, reviewed the lighting plan. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 20002-443, General Plan Amendment 2002- 084 Zone Change 2002-106 and Site Development Permit 2002-730; a request of Clubhouse Associates, L.L.C. for a recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; change the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; and approval of development plans for a 149 unit apartment complex and ancillary facilities located on a 10.75 acre triangular parcel on the south side of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Abels asked if there was a motion to continue the project to May 14, 2002 as requested by the applicant. 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to continue the project to May 14, 2002. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2002-731; a request of WG Properties, LLC for consideration of development plans for construction of a 8,792 square foot office building on a 1.51 acre parcel located at the east side of Washington Street, north of Lake La Quinta Drive, within the Lake La Quinta project area. 1. Chairman Abels asked if there was a motion to continue the project to May 14, 2002 as requested by the applicant. 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to continue the project to May 14, 2002. Unanimously approved. C. Environmental Assessment 2002-445 Conditional Use Permit 2002-068, and Site Development Permit 2002-733; a request of SECO/SDC LLC/A.G. Spanos Construction, Inc.,1) Recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; 2) Conditional Use Permit to allow a 1- 3 story, 120 room hotel; and 3) Review of development plans for a 1-3 story, 120 room hotel to be located on the east side of Washington Street, north of Avenue 48. 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 2 IVERSIDE COUNTY \RRY D. SMITH. SHERIFF May 2, 2002 Fred Baker City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 ATTACHMENT # Sher]-ti 0 -- 82-695 DR. CARREON BLVD. • INDIO. CA 92201 • (760) RE: General Plan Amendment 2002-084, Change of Zone 2002-106, Site Development Permit 2002-730, & Environmental Assessment 2002-443. Dear Mr. Baker, Thank you for meeting with Senior Deputy Andy Gerrard to discuss elevator design on the above described plan. The following issues of concern related to public safety and law enforcement are presented. LINE OF SIGHT/NATURAL SURVEILLANCE: It is highly desirable to design an elevator shaft and cab to be transparent, making occupants of the cab visible from the outside. Convex mirrors should be installed in elevator cabs and at stairwell landings. Should the community development department, developer or construction staff have any questions regarding the listed law enforcement and public safety concerns, please contact Senior Deputy Andy Gerrard at 760-863-8950. , D. ; John Horton, Captain Indio Station Commander ATTACHMENT Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes March-- 3, 2002 Mr. Jim Cathcart explained the location of the ducts and work to {� be done. �q y�. 3.\ Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the ducting were removed would the exposed stucco be repainted. Mr. Cathcart stated yes, bal,it is not part of the funding request. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if there was any limit as to how many times an applicant can apply for the funding. Staff stated only once a year, but as many times as there are funds. 5. Committee Member Cunningham stated the duct work is the area of concern from the public view, but the replacement of the duct is not $2,6O0. The cost involved is the replacement of the entire system to replace the duct. The question is how far does the City want to go to get rid of the duct. In essence, the City is paying $2,682 to get rid of the duct eyesore. Mr. Cathcart explained the request was based on comments n qde by members of the City Council and Historical Society member. Discussion followed as regarding the request. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated it was border line as to whether or not the City should pay for this, but he has no problem with the request. 7. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thoms to adopt Minute Motion 2002-009 approving Commercial Property Improvement Program request of La Quinta Palms Realty with a score of 81. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2001-730; a request of Clubhouse Associates, LLC for review of building elevations and landscaping plans for the Clubhouse Apartments to be located on the south side of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street. 1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Mr. Bob Kraft, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff what the height limit was G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\3-13-02.wpd 2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes March 13, 2002 for commercial buildings. Staff noted it was 36-feet. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the coordination of the shared access. Mr. Chuck Cockrell, Project Manager, stated they worked with the City on the shared access. They have a left in, with right in and out only. Their concern is the truck deliveries for the commercial project at the corner and the traffic patterns. To resolve the issue they decided to have a stacking element for three cars. If this project is constructed before the commercial project an agreement will be made between the two to meet the conditions for the commercial project to reimburse them for the payments. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the use of wood on some of the elements. Mr. Kraft stated they will be blocked as designed to be constructed to keep them from turning. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the wood doors and the use of the date palm trees in a high traffic areas. He asked how the residents at Country Club of the Desert would be impacted by the height of the apartment buildings at the 40-feet. Mr. Kraft showed a site elevation. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern in light of the problems that were created with the height of the berm is the height of the buildings. 4. Committee Member Cunningham stated it is a situation of who is there first. This backs up to the Canal and with the parking it has a buffer, but you will never be able to hide it. 5. Staff noted a different material would be used on the carports and asked the Committee's opinion. Mr. Kraft gave a presentation on the material. 6. Committee Member Cunningham stated the material gives a lot of design freedom and are great. He likes the shade structures. Mr. Kraft stated that from a design standard it offers a lot more than the wood. Committee Member Cunningham stated he liked the architecture. A big issue with apartments is the maintenance over a period of years. In regard to the wood siding, he would prefer a painted metal. They will be using clay tiles instead of concrete which are better and richer. The white on the color board should be replaced on the stucco. He questioned whether or not the small tiles on the dome would pop off due to the earthquakes. He would recommend a different material. The windows are all setback giving a shadow line that will enhance the building. In regard to the carports, the fabric covers do look good, but a sand color should be used. In regard to the wood, whether or not you block them they will turn. Metal may be a consideration. He asked the location of the trash enclosures and that they be "bullet G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\3-13-02.wpd 3 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes March 13, 2002 proof". 7. Committee Member Thoms asked what type of fencing would be used along the property line that backs up to the All American Canal. Mr. Kraft stated they would prefer to use the chainlink fence that is installed by CVWD and they would be asking them to put it on the property line, not where it is now. They hope to make it into a living fence. Committee Member Thoms asked about the area between the carports and fence on the west of south side, as they are difficult to landscape. The important item is to give attention to will be the fence. Plant material on the barrier itself. He asked for an explanation on the security wall on Avenue 52. Mr. Ronald Masanobu Izumita, Image Design, stated they have a requirement to provide a five foot high sound barrier wall. Committee Member Thoms stated he liked the site plan, architecture, and carports. He is concerned about the landscaping on Avenue 52. There is an exposed parking lot and he would like to see more screening for the car noses. Mr. Izumita stated it will be bermed with meandering sidewalks with a lot of ground cover. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt asked that the plant pallette be similar to the adjacent shopping center. 9. Committee Member Thoms asked if the wall facing the north side will have plant material. Mr. Izumita stated there would be plant material on certain locations. Committee Member Thoms asked what "'I 5-feet BTH" meant. Staff stated at means "brown trunk height". Committee Member Thoms asked that the Queen Palm not be used in an row situation. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2002-010 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-730, subject to the conditions as submitted and amended: A. Landscaping along the perimeter, around the parking lot not to use plant material on the ground, but use vines on the wall or living fence. B. Avenue 52 a three foot berm is required to screen the parking lot. C. Queen Palms not be planted in an organized pattern. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None GAWPD0CS\AR1,C\3-13-02.wpd 4 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes March 13, 2002 VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None VIII. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on April 3, 2002. This meeting was adjourned at 2:25 p.m. on March 13, 2002. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California �; G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\3-13-02.wpd 5 PH #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 14, 2002 CASE NOS.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-443 ZONE CHANGE 2002-106 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; 2) CHANGE ZONE DESIGNATION FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; 3) APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR A 149 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX AND ANCILLARY FACILITIES ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-443 WAS PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2002-084, ZONE CHANGE 2002-106, AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED. THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS RECOMMENDED THAT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT BE CERTIFIED LOCATION: 10.76 ACRE TRIANGULAR PARCEL ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF AVENUE 52, EAST OF JEFFERSON STREET APPLICANT: CLUBHOUSE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. REPRESENTATIVE: ROBERT KRAFT, KRAFT ARCHITECTS ZONING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) A:\PC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)/VACANT SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)/CANAL AND PLANNED CASITAS EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR)/CANAL AND PLANNED CASITAS WEST: NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL (NC)/TEMPORARY BANK AND FUTURE NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: The currently vacant triangular 10.76 acres project site is located on the south side of Avenue 52, approximately 600 feet east of Jefferson Street; with the All American Canal on the eastern property line (Attachment 1). General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone The applicant is requesting to change the Zoning designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential. The High Density Residential allows up to 16 units per acre; the proposal is for 149 apartment units on 10.76 acres which yields a density of 13.8 units per acre. Site Development Permit The applicant proposes eighteen apartment buildings with eight different floor plans having similar elevations including a one story 5,680 square foot Clubhouse/Administration building, pool, putting green, barbeque areas and a great lawn (Attachment 2). Apartment buildings are one, two, and three stories with four buildings at the maximum 40' height. Units proposed are one and two bedrooms (some with dens) . The Planning Commission, at the March 26, 2002 public hearing, continued this project to the April 23, 2002 meeting; and at that meeting, the applicant asked for a continuance until May 14, 2002 meeting (Attachment 3). The Planning Commission requested the applicant work with staff on the following items: 1) that the access to the property be consistent with the General Plan, 2) provide architectural relief to end units north elevations, 3) provide elevators for three story buildings, 4) provide landscape relief, greenery or detailing along the carport asphalt driveways, and, 5) provide additional amenities. A:\PC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd Access/Circulation/Parking The applicant has moved the middle access driveway to be 250 feet from the westerly driveway consistent with the General Plan Update. In summary, the proposed site plan has frontage on Avenue 52 with three access points into the site parking for residents and guests. The west access will be shared with an adjacent planned and approved neighborhood commercial center allowing a right -in, right -out, and left -in turning movement; the middle access provides a right -in, right -out turning movement; and the east access allows a right -in, right -out, and left - in turning movement. Proposed resident parking is provided around the entire perimeter of the project; with the east and west perimeter parking proposed to be screened by a 6' chain link fence. Proposed are 69 open parking stalls (9' X 17' with a 2' overhang), 228 carports (9' X 17' with a 2' overhang) , and 40 one car 0 0' X 20) garages. The applicant has provided two options for the three story units; one with elevators and one without elevators. At the applicant's request, staff met with the applicant and the Sheriff's Department to review defensible space issues and particularly elevators for the three story units. As a result, the Sheriff's Department (Attachment 4) requested the following: "It is highly desirable to design an elevator shaft and cab to be transparent, making occupants of the cab visible from the outside. Convex mirrors should be installed in elevator cabs and at stairwell landings." The applicant has also provided a market study (Attachment 5) that identifies a target market for the project. The study finds that elevator access is not market mandated; and would have a negative effect on the overall project appearance and function. In addition, the applicant has added additional design detail to the north elevation of Building 9 by redesigning the floor plan and adding windows on the north elevation to the both stories. If the Planning Commission chooses to require elevators for three story buildings and/or modify the proposed architectural elevations, Conditions of Approval will be need to be added In summary, the applicant proposes eighteen buildings with eight different floor plans and similar elevations including a Clubhouse. Floor plans are one and two bedrooms (some with dens) ranging in size from 752 square feet to 1,308 square feet. Four apartment buildings are one story at approximately 24 feet in height, 10 buildings are two story at approximately 33 feet in height, and three stories with a maximum 40' height. AAPC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd The applicant proposes to soften the asphalt driveways that provide access to the project's carports and garages by adding a landscaped trellis above the carports for all buildings along on the southerly portion of the project by adding decorative paving and plant material at each pedestrian entrance into the project. Also proposed is decorative paving leading out of the project into each trash enclosure area, and landscape material such as vines at the project perimeter fencing opposite the pedestrian entrances. The applicant is not proposing to change the amenity package for the project. Based upon the market study, the amenities proposed satisfy and exceed the demands of the target market. These amenities include: a community center, a pool, a spa, a great lawn, water elements, barbeques, and a putting green. If the Planning Commission chooses to modify the proposed amenity package, a Condition of Approval will be need to be added. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: Based on California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requirements, staff prepared Environmental Assessment (EA) 2002-443 for the project. The Noise Assessment Study, prepared for the EA, recommends certain noise control mitigation measures including a minimum five feet in height noise barrier along Avenue 52 which can be achieved with a berming and/or a wall. Staff recommends certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW• The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of March 13, 2002 (Attachment 6). The Committee unanimously adopted Minute Motion 2002-010, recommending approval subject to the conditions which have been incorporated into this review. COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES: The project was sent out for comment to City departments and affected public agencies on February 25, 2002, requesting comments be returned by March 15, 2002. All applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. PUBLIC NOTICE: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on, March 4, 2002. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Zoning Code. AAPC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: The findings, as noted in the attached Resolution, required by the Zoning Ordinance can be made, subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission 2002-_ recommending to the City Council certification of an Environmental Assessment 2002-443; and, 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City Council approval of a Zone Change 2002-106; and, 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2002-730 subject to the findings and Conditions of Approval. 1. Location Map 2. Plans and Elevations (Planning Commission only) 3. Minutes of the of March 26, 2002 meeting of the Planning Commission, and draft minutes of the April 23 meeting of the Planning Commission 4. Letter from Sheriff Smith 5. Market Study - Product Positioning and Overview 6. Minutes of the of March 13, 2002 meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee Prepared by: Fred Baker, Al Principal Planner AAPC staff rpt 5-14-02. 2002-730.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT PREPARED FOR ZONE CHANGE 2002-106, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-443 APPLICANT: CLUBHOUSE ASSOCIATES L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 26th day of March, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 23`d day of April and subsequently continued said Public Hearing to the 1 e day May to consider Environmental Assessment 2002-443 for Change of Zone 2002-106, and Site Development Permit 2002-730 herein referred to as the "Project" for Clubhouse Associates L.L.C.; and, WHEREAS, said Project has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970"(as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2002-443) to evaluate the potential for adverse environmental impacts; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said Project could have a significant adverse effect on the environment unless mitigation measures are implemented, and that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact could be filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify recommending certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The Project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that appropriate mitigation measures have been imposed which will minimize project impacts. 2. The proposed Project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. Considering the record as a whole, there is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have potential for adverse effect on wildlife resources AAcond PC RESO EA 2002-443.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Environmental Assessment 2002-443 Adopted May 14, 2002 or the habitat on which the wildlife depends. 4. The proposed Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals as no significant effects on environmental factors by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed Project will not have environmental effects directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 6. The City has on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect setforth in 14 CAL Code Regulations §753.5(d). 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record, including EA 2002-443 and the comments received thereon, that the project will have a significant impact upon the environment. 8. EA 2002-443 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration reflects the City's independent judgment and analysis. 9. The location and custodian of the record of proceedings relating to this project is the Community Development Department of the City of La Quinta, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California 922253. 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 constitutes the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council certification of Environmental Assessment 2002-443 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist, A:lcond PC RESO EA 2002-443.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Environmental Assessment 2002-443 Adopted May 14, 2002 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 14th day of May, 2002, 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:\cond PC RESO EA 2002-443.wpd Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: General Plan Amendment 2001-084, Change of Zone 2002-106, Site Development Permit 2002-730, Clubhouse Apartments. 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Fred Baker, 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: South side of Avenue 52, approximately 600 feet east of Jefferson 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Clubhouse Associates, LLC 160 Newport Center Drive Newport Beach, CA 92660 6. General Plan Designation: Current: Low Density Residential Proposed: High Density Residential 7. Zoning: Current: Low Density Residential Proposed: High Density Residential 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone to change the density of the property from 4 units per acre to up to 16 units per acre on a parcel of land approximately 10 acres in size. Site Development Permit to allow the construction of 149 apartments and ancillary facilities. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: Avenue 52, Low Density Residential South: All -American Canal West: Vacant Neighborhood Commercial, recently approved for a shopping center East: All -American Canal, Single Family Residential 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Not applicable P:\CEQAchecklistEA 02443wpd Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. It I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. 7F;ial��— March 7, 2002 ignature Date G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\C1ubAssocCk1st.WPD Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: I . A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project -specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4. "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5. Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analysis are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist. 6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. g. The analysis of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: AESTHETICS: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan Exhibit CIR-5) b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (General Plan EIR, page 5-12 ff.) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29, 5-32) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs) AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X X X )9 X X rJ is\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 4 d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Project Description) ✓. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5-1) b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment, p. 5-2 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta Municipal Code; General Plan) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) V. CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person)? c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (Lakebed Delineation Map) X X X X Q X X X X I:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 5 /1. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ("Cultural Resources Assessment of a 15 acre Parcel...," Archaeological Associates, July 2001) GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan EIR, Exhibit 4.2-3, page 4-35) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-2, page 6-7) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-2, page 6-7) iv) Landslides? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-2, page 6-7) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-2, page 6-7) c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? ("Geotechnical Investigation Proposed 7 Lot Residential Subdivision...," Sladden Engineering, August 2001) d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-32) HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application Materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application Materials) c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application Materials) X X X \WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 6 d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 6-11) h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) III. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY : Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-26, 6-27) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR, page 4-57 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR, page 4- 30 ff.) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off -site? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (General Plan EIR, page 4-30 ff.) f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment 6-13) ,WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 7 K. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Specific Plan Project Description) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (Master Environmental Assessment 2-11) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-5) C. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment 5-29) CI. NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? ("Acoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates; General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-4, page 6-17) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? ("Acoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates; General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-4, page 6-17) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan MEA, Exhibit 6-4, Pg 6-17) d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Master Environmental Assessment) e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive levels? (General Plan map) Q M X X f3 X X ri 91 .\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 8 (II. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, page 2-14) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) (111. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Police protection? (General Plan MEA, page 4-3 ff. ) Schools? (General Plan MEA, page 4-9 ff. ) Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, page 4-14 ff. 1 KIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials) X X X X X X KV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of X vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan EIR, pg 4-126 ff.) 9 KI M M :\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 9 b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (General Plan EIR, page 4-126 ff.) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials) VI. • UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-24 ) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, page 4-27) d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, pg 4-20) e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, page 4-20) f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, page 4-28) WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 10 X X X X X X X X X X X X :VII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the' incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? (Vill. EARLIER ANALYSIS. X *1 X P Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review. No earlier analysis were used in this review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. See attached Addendum. ;OURCES: /faster Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 1992. )CAQMD CEQA Handbook. 3eneral Plan, City of La Quinta, 1992. ;ity of La Quinta Municipal Code ;:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 11 kcoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates, )VEMBER 29, 2001. 'hase I Archaeological Survey of the Clubhouse at La Quinta...," prepared by W & S )nsultants. affic Impact Analysis letter, dated February 12, 2002, prepared by Wildan. ,WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocCklst.WPD 12, Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2002-443 I. a) & c) The proposed project includes one, two and three story buildings. The three story buildings are proposed on the boundary of the site adjacent to the All - American Canal (buildings 1, 2, 2.13 and 4). The height of these buildings is shown to reach 40 feet. However, the buildings will never be adjacent to other development, insofar as the All -American Canal will always provide a buffer to development on the south. The buildings will be at least 200 feet from any development to the south, and probably more when setbacks are added to those properties. This distance reduces the potential impacts associated with the structures to a less than significant level. III. a) The proposed project will generate air pollution primarily from the operation of motor vehicles. The 149 apartment units could generate approximately 5,500 trips per day'. Based on this trip generation, the project at buildout will generate the following pollutants. Running Exhaust Emissions (pounds/day) PM 10 PM 10 PM 10 CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires 50 mph 198.8 7.65 7 Daily Threshold 550 75 40.7 -- 0.85 9 100 150 Based on 5,500 trips/day and average trip length of 7 miles, using EMFAC7G Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light autos at 75°F. " Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance in determining the significance of a project and the need for an EIR. As demonstrated in the Table above, the proposed project will not exceed any threshold for the generation of moving emissions, as established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District in determining the need for an EIR. The impacts to air quality relating to chemical pollution are not expected to be significant. III. c) The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or smaller). The construction of the proposed project has the Traffic Analysis letter dated February 13, 2002, prepared by Wildan. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdd.WPD potential to generate dust, which could contribute to the PM 10 problem in the area. In order to control PM 10, the City has imposed standards and requirements on development to control dust. The applicant will be required to submit such a plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity at the site. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the mitigation measures below. 1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation. 3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 7. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. Perimeter landscaping on Avenue 52 and the retention basin landscaping shall be completed with the first phase of development. 8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. 9. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality from buildout will not be significant. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdd.WPD V. b) A cultural resource survey was conducted for the subject property'. The survey found three prehistoric sites and one isolate on the site. As a result, the report recommends the imposition of the following mitigation measure: 1. A Phase II testing program shall be conducted on the subject property. The findings of the Phase II testing shall be compiled into a report to be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to the issuance of grading permits. VI. a) i) & ii) The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major earthquake. Structures on the site will be required to meet the City's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of grading plans (please see below). This requirement will ensure that impacts from ground shaking are reduced to a less than significant level. VI. b) The subject property is subject to soil erosion due to wind. The City will implement requirements for a PM 10 management plan, and additional mitigation measures have been included in the Air Quality discussion above. These mitigation measures will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. Vill. b) Domestic water is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District, which extracts groundwater from a number of wells in the Lower Thermal sub -basin. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures and on -site retention, which both aid in reducing the potential impacts associated with groundwater. The proposed project will also meet the requirements of the City's water -conserving landscaping ordinance. These standards will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. Vlll. c)&d) The proposed project will alter the drainage pattern in the area through grading and covering of soil with impermeable surfaces. The City requires that all construction projects retain the 100 year 24 hour storm on -site. This will control the amount of runoff which exits the site during a storm. The project's drainage plan will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. z "Phase I Archaeological Survey of the Clubhouse at La Quinta...," prepared by W & S Consultants. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdd.WPD XI. a) A noise study was prepared for the proposed project'. The study found that noise levels of 69 dBA CNEL could be expected at 100 feet from the center line of Avenue 52. Since the project proposes sensitive receptors, namely apartments, for the site, mitigation is required to reduce the impacts, particularly to first floor units near the Avenue 52 right-of-way. 1. A 5 foot tall barrier, either in the form of a wall or berm, or combination of both, shall be erected along the entire length of the property on Avenue 52, and for a distance of at least 200 feet along the western and eastern property lines. The wall shall have no openings or cutouts, except drain holes, within the 5 feet of height. 2. Construction of all units shall conform to the recommendations made in the "Acoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments...," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates, November 2001. XI. c) The construction of the proposed project will also generate temporary high noise levels which could impact residential development to the south and east. In order to reduce these potential impacts, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. All internal combustion equipment operating within 500 feet of any occupied residential unit shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers and air intake silencers. 2. All stationary construction equipment (e.g. generators and compressors) shall be located in the northwest corner of the site. 3. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La Quinta Municipal Code. XIII. a) The proposed development will have a direct impact on public services and will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, acting under City contract. Site development will generate property tax which will offset the costs of added police and fire services. The project area will be required to pay the mandated school fees as development occurs. These fees mitigate the students generated, and offset the impacts to schools. 3 "Acoustical Analysis The Clubhouse Apartments...," prepared by Gordon Bricken & Associates, November 2001. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdcI.WPD XV. a) The project will be required to participate in the City's Impact Fee Program, which helps to offset roadway improvement costs. Site development is not expected to have a significant impact on municipal services or facilities. A traffic analysis letter was prepared for the proposed project'. The letter finds that the potential additional traffic generated at the site will not represent a significant impact on the City's roadway system. Further, the City's General Plan EIR and associated traffic study included analysis of this property for High Density Residential development. The project falls within the parameters of the EIR, and will not further impact the roadway system. Impacts are expected to be less than significant. 4 Letter dated February 12, 2002, by Wildan. G:\WPDOCS\Env Asses\ClubAssocAdd.WPD 'ya ,o N 0 0 0 0 M N M �t N 0 0 N U A zz O z a H U a A V W F d A ' U� QA au �W O� UU W ° V d FW„ Cd �, •v o U ao � a o � '� 0 a � b 0 a m a a � a Q n 10 10 b O Ur r. o o O O U O O zU Y U U cd U y''y-. � t ry y Cd ..Ni � W M F" o U N o U N °' a0i o 0.0 0 U ob.�, a a as a as wa a o ciw G a� a G o a� 0 a� O 00 a to w E U U U m U A PQ PQ tn N O ►� H +� 0 o4-4 U O � a�i r Pi ° w ? a ogw:� 'd Sao Cl) a • � U U � � t��d end tb cc oa a a n k A Z� /q § �u Q k .� w \ o � Q " � ) m k \ � � U H � 2g � o \� k \\ ? « Q \� �k & §f o � UQ 0 § � U ? � a to ƒ � 43 2 Q ƒ / U � U 2 0 b� \2 �U �§ �U Q 2 k . . . . k �0 m$ k \ k k me f E $ z2 c \ C \ § � E � / 0 q �g 4-4 V 2 U � d� r olK 2 � ¥0 /CY f 2 §ƒ § 2 � § m § § 2 2 C .0 . 2 3 cd k { m 0-4t\ 2 f 7ƒ 0. f f -A a k U§/ 0 K w PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ZONE CHANGE FROM LOW DENSITY TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ON APPROXIMATELY 10.7 ACRES LOCATED AT APPROXIMATELY 600 FEET EAST OF JEFFERSON, SOUTH OF AVENUE 52 CASE NO.: CHANGE OF ZONE 2002-106 APPLICANT: CLUBHOUSE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 26th day March, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 23`d day of April and subsequently continued said Public Hearing to the 14th day May to consider the request of Clubhouse Associates, L. L.C. for a Zone Change as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: A.P.N.: 772-300-002 & 772-300-003 and; 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 find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Zone Change. 1. This Zone Change us consistent the updated General Plan, in that the zone change category proposed are consistent with those goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan. 2. The Zoning Change is suitable and appropriate for the property involved because it is a small trianguVar shaped lot more suitable for the higher intensity use. 3. The new land use designation is compatible with the similar designations within the City because the property is accessible from an arterial street . 4. This Zone Change will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land uses will require Planning Commission review and approval of development plans, which will ensure adequate conditions of approval. A:\cond PC RESO ZC 2002-106.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Change of Zone 2002-106 Adopted May 14, 2002 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 Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described Zone Change request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 14th day of May, 2002, 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:\cond PC RESO ZC 2002-106.wpd EXHIBIT A Avenue 52 I TRA 020-057 Poi t w w O O M P 25Ae Nt Pai 2 I w" i � O F'9 O ' +9 4 4 PROJECT LOCATION I .Nr-j CASE MAP CASE No. ZONE CHANGE 2002-106 NORTN SCALE: NTS PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL THE DESIGN PLANS FOR A 149 UNIT APARTMENT COMPLEX CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-730 APPLICANT: CLUBHOUSE ASSOCIATES, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 26"' day of March, 2002, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued said Public Hearing to the 23`d day of April and subsequently continued said Public Hearing to the 14th day May to consider the request of Clubhouse Associates, L. L.C. for a Site Development Permit as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: A.P.N.: 772-300-002 & 772-300-003 and; WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, at its meeting of March 131h, 2002 did review the architecture and landscape plans for the proposed project and recommended 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 Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify said Site Development Permit 2002-730 : A. Site Development Permit 2002-730 is consistent with Goal 2 of the residential goals, policies, and programs and intent of the La Quinta General Plan which states: "A broad range of housing types and choices for all residents of the City" in that the proposed housing is not extensively available in the City. B. Site Development Permit 2002-730 is consistent with the allowed density of up to 16 units per acre and stated purpose to allow multi -family housing (Table 2.1) for the High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation in that the proposed density for the project is 14.9 units per acre and the project provides multi -unit residential buildings. C. The design and development of the apartment complex will be consistent with the City's Zoning Code provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with the General Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences pursuant to Environmental Assessment 2002-443. AAcond PC RESO SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Site Development Permit 2002-730 Adopted May 14, 2002 D. The site design of the proposed project is compatible with the development quality in the area and accommodates site generated traffic. E. The landscape design of the proposed project complement$ the building and surrounding development in that it enhances the aesthetic and visual quality of the area, provides adequate visual buffering with trees and mounding, and uses a high quality of plant materials. E. The architectural design of the project is compatible with the surrounding development in that is a similar scale, massing and building height of other development in the area; the building materials will be high quality, durable and low maintenance, provided conditions are met. G. The architectural design of the project is consistent with the Zoning Code in that land use and circulation considerations, scale, massing and building height of the facility are met. 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 to the City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2002-730 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 14th day of May, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: A:\cond PC PESO SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Site Development Permit 2002-730 Adopted May 14, 2002 JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\cond PC RESO SDP 2002-730.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002- 730 CLUBHOUSE APARTMENTS, L.L.C. ADOPTED MAY 14, 2002 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 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. 2. Prior to the issuance of any permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary permits and/or clearances from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting the improvement plans for City approval. (FOR ALL CONSTRUCTION SITES FIVE (5) ACRES OR MORE: A project -specific NPDES construction permit must be obtained by the applicant; and who then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's ("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NOI"), prior to the issuance of a grading or site construction permit by the City.) AAcont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, LIC. Adopted May 14, 2002 3. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08- DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five (5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off -site grading being done in relation to this Site Development Permit. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practice ("BMPs"), 8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC: 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All of applicant's erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off site grading being done in relation to this project. F. All approved project BMPs shall be maintained in their proper working order throughout the course of construction, and until all improvements have been accepted by the City. 4. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire, or confer, those easements, and other property rights necessary for the construction and/or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocab9e offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services, and for the maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. The applicant shall offer for dedication all public street right-of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 7. Unless the ultimate developed right-of-way can be documented, the public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial) 110 foot ultimate developed right of way, 55 feet on the south side. 8. Right-of-way geometry for property line corner cut -backs at curb returns shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawing #805, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 9. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 10. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of- ways as follows: A. Avenue 52 (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the Right of Way/Property Line. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 11 . The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas shown on the Site Development Permit. 12. The applicant shall vacate all abutter's right -of -access to public streets and properties from all frontages along such public streets and properties, excepting those access points shown on the Site Development Permit. 13. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, ingress/egress, or other encroachments will occur. 14. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, any existing right-of-way, or access easement, which will diminish the access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to those properties, or shall submit notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 15. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of this Site Development Permit and the date of final acceptance of the on and off -site improvements for this Site Development Permit, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," °`surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 16. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 17. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 A. Off -Site Street Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical The street improvement plans shall include permanent traffic control and separate plan sheet(s) (drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area. B. Off -Site Street Median Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' C. Perimeter Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' D. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal E. On -Site Precise Grading Plan: 1 " = 30' Horizontal F. On -Site Utility Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal G. On -Site Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' Horizontal The plans shall be submitted a minimum of 8 to 10 weeks prior to the issuance of construction permits to allow adequate time for plan check and revisions. Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements; and show the existing street improvements out to at least the center lines of adjacent existing streets. "Site Utility" plans shall normally include all sub -surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to sewer lines, water lines, fire protection and storm drainage systems. "Rough Grading" plans shall include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. 18. The City maintains standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 19. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all complete, approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format which can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. OFF -SITE IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS 20. Prior to the conditional approval of this Site Development Permit, or the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall construct all off -site improvements and satisfy its obligations for same, or shall furnish a fully secured and executed Off -Site Improvement Agreement ("OSIA") guaranteeing the construction of such improvements and the satisfaction of its obligations for same, or shall agree to any combination thereof, as may be required by the City. 21. Improvements to be made, or agreed to be made, shall include removal of any existing structures or other obstructions which are not a part of the proposed improvements; and shall provide for the setting of the final survey monuments. 22. When improvements are to be secured through an OSIA, and prior to any permits being issued by the City, the applicant shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed off -site improvements for checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall be approved by the City Engineer. At the same time the applicant submits its detailed construction cost estimates for the security determination of the OSIA, the applicant shall also submit one copy of an 8- 1 /2" x 11 " reduction of the Site Development Plan, along with one copy of an 8-1 /2" x 11 " Vicinity Map. Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's detailed cost estimates for its own on and off -site improvements. A:lcont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 Cost estimates for the security of telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V. improvements will not be required. 23. When improvements are phased through an administrative approval (e.g., Phasing Plan, Site Development Permits, etc.), all off -site improvements and common on -site improvements (e.g., backbone utilities, retention basins, perimeter walls, landscaping and gates) shall be constructed, or secured through an OSIA, prior to the occupancy of any permanent buildings in the first phase of the development, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Improvements and obligations required of each subsequent phase shall either be completed, or secured through an OSIA, prior to the occupancy of permanent buildings within such latter phase, or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The same submittal criteria shall apply to all subsequent phases as required for the first phase submittal. (E.g. detailed cost estimates, 8-1 /2" x 11 " reductions, etc.) 24. In the event the applicant fails to construct improvements for the development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, or other phasing method, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the improvements. GRADING 25. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 26. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 27. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, and C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16 (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, LIC. Adopted May 14, 2002 All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions submitted with its application for a grading permit. 28. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 29. 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. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the pads within this development. The existing approved SDP 2001-71 1 is located immediately west of the subject property and has proposed grades at the southerly end approximately 6 feet lower than the proposed parking grade for the subject project. The applicant shall provide a workable design which either minimizes the grade difference between the two projects or design and construct a retaining wall/garden wall system in accordance with the City's standards to accommodate the grade differential. Building pad elevations on contiguous interior lots shall not differ by more than three feet except for lots that do not share a common street frontage, where the differential shall not exceed five feet. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction with the grade differential. 30. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any building pads within the project site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Site Development Permit, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 31. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 32. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 33. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rete shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise. 34. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain surges of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 35. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) 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. 36. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 37. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall not exceed six feet and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1. 38. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. 39. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 40. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 41. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 42. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. 43. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 44. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 45. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. 46. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Sections 13.24.060 (Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100 (Access For Individual Properties And Development), LQMC for public streets; and Section 13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed. 47. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and residue during street sweeping operations. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 48. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) Avenue 52 (Primary Arterial) 110 foot Right of Way Option Widen the south side of Avenue 52 along the project frontage. Rehabilitate and/or reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and convert it from a rural county road design standard to La Quinta's urban arterial design standard. Street widening improvements shall include all appurtenant components such as, but not limited to, curb, gutters, cross gutters and spandrels, traffic control striping, legends, marking and signs. Other significant new improvements required for installation in, or adjacent to the subject right of way include: a) 6 foot wide meandering sidewalk b) 18 foot wide landscaped median from the westerly property line to the easterly project limits. Necessary transitions and tapers into the existing bridge at the All American Canal will need to be designed and is subject to approval by the City Engineer. The pavement rehabilitation/reconstruction and landscape median improvements are eligible for reimbursement from the City's Development Impact Fee fund in accordance with policies established for that program. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Residential 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" or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 51. 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. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 52. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 53. Standard knuckles and corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 54. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 55. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. 56. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Avenue 52) at the Westerly Property Line. This driveway shall be a shared access drive/road with the adjacent landowner (See SDP 2001-71 1) and shall be centered on the westerly property line. This driveway shall have right in, right out and left in turning movements. The median improvements shall accommodate a left in, only, design. The shared access drive/road layout shall be designed to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The security gate for this project shall be located away from the property line a sufficient distance with the following access road design features: adequate stacking, a rejection turnaround feature, and a separate lane for guests. Nothing in this condition requires the adjacent landowner to pay for sufficient improvements to implement the shared access requirements in a manner that serves the development proposed by SDP 2002-730. However, reasonable cooperation by the adjacent landowner does include granting of reciprocal cross -access easements between the two landowners that facilitate construction of improvements necessary to implement the shared access concept on both properties in a manner that precludes unnecessary reconstruction of the improvements in the future. B. Secondary Entry (Avenue 52) approximately 740 feet east of the westerly property line. This driveway shall have right in, right out and left in turning movements. The median improvements shall be designed for left in only turning A:lcont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, LIC. Adopted May 14, 2002 movements. The location of this proposed driveway shall take into account the proposed entry for the Mountain View Country Club on the north side of Avenue 52. The Mountain View Country Club entrance will also have a left in only turn lane design. The driveway for SDP 2002-730 may need to shift easterly to provide adequate separation from the Mountain View Country Club Entrance to accommodate the proposed left in only turn lane designs for both projects. The location of the driveway and median design is subject to City Engineer's approval. C. Secondary Entry (Avenue 52) approximately 240 feet east of the westerly property line. This driveway shall be a right in/right out driveway. 57. Pursuant to Section 9.150.080(A)(8)(b) (Parking), LQMC, the applicant shall provide 30-foot uninterrupted driveway throats into the parking lot, or alternatively provide a combination of a dedicated right turn deceleration lane and the drive throat that will equal a total of 30-feet. CONSTRUCTION 58. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphaltic concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include the test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include the most recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that the design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs have been approved. 59. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 60. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which shall identify an average three foot mounding within the Avenue 52 landscape setback to screen the parking lot. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 61. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which shall not use Queen Palms on -site in an organized pattern as this tree will not provide the intended effect. 62. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which shall eliminate the use of Date Palms trees along pedestrian corridors and courtyards and substitute it with another palm tree type such as a California Fan Palm or a Mexican Fan Palm. 63. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, a revised Landscape Plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval which provides vines on all perimeter walls/fences; and eliminates plant material from the perimeter landscape setback adjacent to parking. 64. The applicant shall comply with Sections 9.90.040 (Table of Development Standards) & 9.100.040 (Landscaping), LQMC. 65. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 66. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 67. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 68. Only incidental storm water will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wod Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 QUALITY ASSURANCE 69. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 70. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such or other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 71. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City°s inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 72. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As - Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. MAINTENANCE 73. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 74. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 75. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Conditions of Approval - Recommended Site Development Permit 2002- 730 Clubhouse Apartments, L.LC. Adopted May 14, 2002 ' : IEW11 76. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding Fire Marshall conditions should be directed to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. SHERIFF DEPARTMENT 77. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall review building plans with the Sheriff's Department regarding vehicle code requirements, defensible space, and other law enforcement and public safety concerns. All questions regarding the Sheriff Department should be directed to the Senior Deputy at (760) 863-8950. MISCELLANEOUS 78. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, applicant shall provide a minimum of six spaces in close proximity to the Clubhouse facility to be signed and striped for apartment managers and prospective renters only. 79. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, applicant shall redesign of the Monument Signs, consistent with Section 9.160.040 of the Zoning Code, to be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval. 80. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, applicant shall provide a wall design be consistent with Section 9.60.030 and Section 9.150.080 (Parking Facility Design Standards) to be submitted to the Community Development Director for review and approval. 81. Prior to issuance of a Grading Permit, applicant shall submit a revised Illumination study to the Community Development Department for review and approval which provides driveways with illumination to allow overall site illumination to achieve an average of two footcandle or less. 82. Prior to issuance of a Building Permit, applicant shall record a Parcel Merger for A.P.N.'s 772-300-002 & 772-300-003. 83. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened by roof parapets so that they cannot be viewed from adjacent properties. Prior to occupancy of the proposed building complexes, a visual inspection shall be made by the Community Development Department to confirm that parapets conceal any roof mounted equipment. A:\cont PC COA SDP 2002-730.wpd ATTACHMENT # 5 14 - Avenue 52 �,� TRA OZO-957 Po( a O • 2 9 25Ae Nt a w 0 O • !� Li — PROJECT LOCATION v 0 ATTACHMENT I Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. 17. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners rk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002- 36 recommending approval of Specific Plan 2000-043 Ame ment No. 1, subject to the findings and conditions as amende 0 Condition #:40: Electrical maintai/Delete he enti advertise bu shE applicane allowe modificthe lanc shelter tmodate t ConditioeleteConditioA streetDrive" llowed or Was ington Street into tho 156wer is to be supplied to and rvho receives revenue from the ter on Washington Street. The i to work with staff to make >caping at the rear of the bus e bus stop users. name change to "Point Happy the east side of the property on One Eleven La Quinta Shoppinq Cghter. A street name change to "Point Happy Drive" shall ,be allowed when and if written permission is obtained from the La Quinta Plaza Shopping Center owners to said change. ROLL' CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. Butler, Kirk, Tyler, and Chairman ABSENT: Commissioner Robbins. D. Environmental Assessment 20002-443, General Plan Amendment 2002- �� 084 Zone Change 2002-106, and Site Development Permit 2002-730; a request of Clubhouse Associates, L.L.C. for a recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; change the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; and approval of development plans for a 149 unit apartment complex and ancillary facilities located on a 10.75 acre triangular parcel on the south side of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Abels 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. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Kirk asked about the results of the water analysis in regard to the Water Efficient Ordinance. Staff stated the results of the calculations were on the landscape plans and stated the maximum allowable is 4,400,000 gallons per year and the actual use is approximately 2,900,000 gallons per year. Commissioner Kirk asked where the additional parking spaces would be located and asked for an explanation of how the fabric roofs would hold up in the deserts temperatures. He also asked if the three access points are appropriate for this kind of project. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it met the General Plan requirements. He explained and went on to explain the circulation pattern. Commissioner Kirk asked if the access point and the one to the east met the 240 foot separation. Staff stated the new General Plan requires 250 feet between driveways measured between the curb returns. On the plan there is not enough room for the third driveway access, it would need to be moved. 3. Commissioner Butler asked if an elevator was required on a three story building. Staff stated only if the Building Code required it and Building and Safety did not require it. The applicant is providing handicapped accessible units. 4. Commissioner Tyler questioned why there was no supporting text given for Item XVII(b) Mandatory Findings of Significance in the Environmental Assessment. Staff explained there were none are required for this section. Commissioner Tyler asked staff why the staff reports states a General Plan Amendment is not required under the updated General Plan, yet there is a General Plan Amendment Resolution is before them for approval. Staff explained that since the updated General Plan is within the 30-day protest period, and the applicant asked for a General Plan Amendment, staff is processing the General Plan Amendment in anticipation of the updated General Plan being in affect by the time this application reaches the City Council. At that time it will no longer be needed. Commissioner Tyler stated he not concur with the Site Development Permit findings in regard to the architecture. In Condition #48, Commissioner Tyler asked staff to explain what the word "option" meant. Senior Engineer Steve Speer clarified there were two options the applicant could chose from. Commissioner Tyler asked staff the location of the mounding as discussed in Condition #60. Staff clarified they were recommending four foot mounding in the street landscaping in G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 conjunction with the sound wall. Commissioner Tyler asked if there was to be a block wall on the perimeter of the project. Staff clarified they were required to provide a sound wall with mounding along Avenue 52. The applicant was asking for a chainlink fence on the rear of the site. Commissioner Tyler asked the location of the retention basin and staff identified them. Staff clarified that a condition would be added requiring a parcel map to be approved prior to building permits being issued. 5. Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Chuck Crookrall, representing the applicant, stated they have no problem with relocating the third access point. They will hopefully be installing a living fence along the Canal. The remainder of the site will have a block wall. 6. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tyler asked about the lack of elevators as it seemed to be a marketing issue. Mr. Crookrall stated there are only four buildings that have three stories, or 20 units. 7. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was any problem having two access points instead of three. Mr. Crookrall stated he did not see any objection. 8. Mr. Robert Kraft, architect for the project, stated that in regard to the 250 foot distance on the access point, it would not be an issue. Their purpose was to not create a dead-end aisle for the internal circulation. They have no problem with the perimeter block wall. The Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee was in favor of a living fence. He went on to explain the site and the elevations. 9. Commissioner Tyler asked if the garages would be visible from the east side of the Canal. Mr. Kraft stated they would be below the visual site line. 10. Chairman Abels asked about the material to be used on the carports. Mr. Kraft stated it was the same material as what is used at the Palm Springs Airport. It is guaranteed for 30-years. Discussion followed regarding the material to be used for the carports. 11. Commissioner Kirk asked the applicant to explain what would be G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 7 Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 seen from the other side of the Canal. Mr. Kraft gave a demonstration. Commissioner Kirk asked about the location of the extra 39 parking spaces. Mr. Kraft clarified the request was for 39 additional covered spaces not additional spaces. Commissioner Kirk asked if there was a target demographic for the project. Mr. Kraft stated he did not have that information. Mr. Crookrall stated their market study showed a need for upscale apartments in the age group of 40 + . Commissioner Kirk asked about active activities. Mr. Kraft explained the amenities. Commissioner Kirk asked about the north side elevations being typical and how many would have the blank wall. Mr. Kraft stated not all the buildings would be the same; only three of the buildings would look at the blank wall. 12. Commissioner Tyler asked about the long term energy cost analysis for the units. Mr. Kraft stated none had been done at this time. They will be as cost effective as they can make them. 13. There being no further public participation, the public comment portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 14. Commissioner Butler stated that on the three story buildings he is uncomfortable not having elevators as the project will be targeting the older generation. This project will need additional amenities to draw people to the site. He would want the project conditioned to have elevators for the three story units. 15. Commissioner Kirk stated he was in support of the General Plan Amendment. In terms of the design, he has concerns with the asphalt mote around the perimeter. It needs to be broken up with landscaping and design to create interest. 16. Commissioner Tyler stated he agrees this is a good location for the high density project. There needs to be more amenities to off -set the density. His main concern is the external appearance driving around it and being highly visible from Avenue 52 and the shopping center adjacent to it. 17. Commissioner Kirk suggested the architect review the plans in light of the suggestions made by the Commission. Mr. Crookrall explained this was not the first design, but it was based on meeting all the Agency requirements. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 8 Planning Commission Minutes March 26, 2002 18. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Tyler to continue the project to April 23, 2002 allowing the applicant to work with staff on the following items: A. Work with staff on the access points to be consistent with the General Plan. B. Architecture relief on the end buildings. C. Landscape relief, greenery or detailing along the carports and asphalt to break up the asphalt. D. Provide additional amenities Unanimously approved. Chairman Abels recessed the meeting at 9:16 p.m. and reconvened at 9:21 p.m. VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Village Use Permit 2000-040 Amendment #1; a request of Chapman Golf Development, LLC for review of lighting and landscaping plans for a restaurant to be located on the northeast corner of Avenue 52 and Desert Club Drive. 1. Commissioner Kirk stated he had a possible conflict of interest and withdrew from the dias. 2. Chairman Abels 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. 3. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Christina Dores, representing the applicant, stated they had met with the adjacent residents and have made modifications based on their concerns. She is available to answer any questions. 4. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of the applicant. Commissioner Tyler stated he would like to hear from the lighting consultant. Mr. Ralph Reyna, lighting consultant, reviewed the lighting plan. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\3-26-02.wpd 9 Planning Commission Minutes April 23, 2002 VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 20002-443, General Plan Amendment 2002- 084, Zone Change 2002-106 and Site Development Permit 2002-730; a request of Clubhouse Associates, L.L.C. for a recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; change the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Designation from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential; and approval of development plans for a 149 unit apartment complex and ancillary facilities located on a 10.75 acre triangular parcel on the south side of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street. 1. Chairman Abels asked if there was a motion to continue the project to May 14, 2002 as requested by the applicant. 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Kirk to continue the project to May 14, 2002. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2002-731; a request of WG Properties, LLC for consideration of development plans for construction of a 8,792 square foot office building on a 1.51 acre parcel located at the east side of Washington Street, north of Lake La Quinta Drive, within the Lake La Quinta project area. 1. Chairman Abels asked if there was a motion to continue the project to May 14, 2002 as requested by the applicant. 2. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Butler to continue the project to May 14, 2002. Unanimously approved. C. Environmental Assessment 2002-445 Conditional Use Permit 2002-068 and Site Development Permit 2002-733; a request of SECO/SDC LLC/A.G. Spanos Construction, Inc.,1) Recommendation for certification of an Environmental Assessment; 2) Conditional Use Permit to allow a 1- 3 story, 120 room hotel; and 3) Review of development plans for a 1-3 story, 120 room hotel to be located on the east side of Washington Street, north of Avenue 48. 1. Chairman Abels asked for the staff report. Associate Planner Martin Magana presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\4-23-02.wpd 2 VERSIDE COUNTY RRY D. SMITH. SHERIFF May 2, 2002 Fred Baker City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 ATTACHMENT # sheTff-t 82-695 DR. CARREON BLVD. • INDIO. CA 92201 - (760) 863-8990 RE: General Plan Amendment 2002-084, Change of Zone 2002-106, Site Development Permit 2002-730, & Environmental Assessment 2002-443. Dear Mr. Baker, Thank you for meeting with Senior Deputy Andy Gerrard to discuss elevator design on the above described plan. The following issues of concern related to public safety and law enforcement are presented. LINE OF SIGHT/NATURAL SURVEILLANCE: It is highly desirable to design an elevator shaft and cab to be transparent, making occupants of the cab visible from the outside. Convex mirrors should be installed in elevator cabs and at stairwell landings. Should the community development department, developer or construction staff have any questions regarding the listed law enforcement and public safety concerns, please contact Senior Deputy Andy Gerrard at 760-863-8950. Sipcerely, taW v D. fohn Mort no Captain Indio. Station Commander ATTACH M EN1 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes Marc�3, 2002 Mr. Jim Cathcart explained the location of the ducts and work to be done. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the ducting were removed would the exposed stucco be repainted. Mr. Cathcart stated yes, bbt it is not part of the funding request. 4. Commi a Member Bobbitt asked if there was any limit as to how many time an applicant can apply for the funding. Staff stated only once a y r, but as many times as there are funds. 5. Committee Membe unningham stated the duct work is the area of concern from the p lic view, but the replacement of the duct is not $2,600. The cost ' volved is the replacement of the entire system to replace the duct. he question is how far does the City want to go to get rid of the d t. In essence, the City is paying $2,682 to get rid of the duct eye re. Mr. Cathcart explained the request was based on comments de by members of the City Council and Historical Society membe . Discussion followed as regarding the request. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated it was bor line as to whether or not the City should pay for this, but he has no roblem with the request. 7. There being no discussion, it was moved and se onded by Committee Members Cunningham/Thorns to adopt Minu Motion 2002-009 approving Commercial Property Improvement .ogram request of La Quinta Palms Realty with a score of 81. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2001-730; a request of Clubhouse Associates, LLC for review of building elevations and landscaping plans for the Clubhouse Apartments to be located on the south side of Avenue 52, east of Jefferson Street. 1. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Mr. Bob Kraft, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the project. 3. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff what the height limit was G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\3-13-02.wpd 2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes March 13, 2002 for commercial buildings. Staff noted it was 36-feet. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the coordination of the shared access. Mr. Chuck Cockrell, Project Manager, stated they worked with the City on the shared access. They have a left in, with right in and out only. Their concern is the truck deliveries for the commercial project at the corner and the traffic patterns. To resolve the issue they decided to have a stacking element for three cars. If this project is constructed before the commercial project an agreement will be made between the two to meet the conditions for the commercial project to reimburse them for the payments. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the use of wood on some of the elements. Mr. Kraft stated they will be blocked as designed to be constructed to keep them from turning. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the wood doors and the use of the date palm trees in a high traffic areas. He asked how the residents at Country Club of the Desert would be impacted by the height of the apartment buildings at the 40-feet. Mr. Kraft showed a site elevation. Committee Member Bobbitt stated his concern in light of the problems that were created with the height of the berm is the height of the buildings. 4. Committee Member Cunningham stated it is a situation of who is there first. This backs up to the Canal and with the parking it has a buffer, but you will never be able to hide it. 5. Staff noted a different material would be used on the carports and asked the Committee's opinion. Mr. Kraft gave a presentation on the material. 6. Committee Member Cunningham stated the material gives a lot of design freedom and are great. He likes the shade structures. Mr. Kraft stated that from a design standard it offers a lot more than the wood. Committee Member Cunningham stated he liked the architecture. A big issue with apartments is the maintenance over a period of years. In regard to the wood siding, he would prefer a painted metal. They will be using clay tiles instead of concrete which are better and richer. The white on the color board should be replaced on the stucco. He questioned whether or not the small tiles on the dome would pop off due to the earthquakes. He would recommend a different material. The windows are all setback giving a shadow line that will enhance the building. In regard to the carports, the fabric covers do look good, but a sand color should be used. In regard to the wood, whether or not you block them they will turn. Metal may be a consideration. He asked the location of the trash enclosures and that they be "bullet G:\WPDOCS\AnC\3-13-02.wpd 3 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes March 13, 2002 proof". 7. Committee Member Thoms asked what type of fencing would be used along the property line that backs up to the All American Canal. Mr. Kraft stated they would prefer to use the chainlink fence that is installed by CVWD and they would be asking them to put it on the property line, not where it is now. They hope to make it into a living fence. Committee Member Thoms asked about the area between the carports and fence on the west of south side, as they are difficult to landscape. The important item is to give attention to will be the fence. Plant material on the barrier itself. He asked for an explanation on the security wall on Avenue 52. Mr. Ronald Masanobu Izumita, Image Design, stated they have a requirement to provide a five foot high sound barrier wall. Committee Member Thoms stated he liked the site plan, architecture, and carports. He is concerned about the landscaping on Avenue 52. There is an exposed parking lot and he would like to see more screening for the car noses. Mr. Izumita stated it will be bermed with meandering sidewalks with a lot of ground cover. 8. Committee Member Bobbitt asked that the plant pallette be similar to the adjacent shopping center. 9. Committee Member Thoms asked if the wall facing the north side will have plant material. Mr. Izumita stated there would be plant material on certain locations. Committee Member Thoms asked what "15-feet BTH" meant. Staff stated at means "brown trunk height". Committee Member Thoms asked that the Queen Palm not be used in an row situation. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2002-010 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-730, subject to the conditions as submitted and amended: A. Landscaping along the perimeter, around the parking lot not to use plant material on the ground, but use vines on the wall or living fence. B. Avenue 52 a three foot berm is required to screen the parking lot. C. Queen Palms not be planted in an organized pattern. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None GAYvTD0CS\ARLC\3-13-02.wpd 4 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes March 13, 2002 VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None VIII. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adjourn this regular meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee to a regular meeting to be held on April 3, 2002. This meeting was adjourned at 2:25 p.m. on March 13, 2002. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California G:\WPDOCS\ARLC\3-13-02.wpd 5 PH #B T,af 4 XP a" MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Community Development Department DATE: May 14, 2002 RE: AGENDA ITEM IV.B: SPECIFIC PLAN 2002-056 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #2002-731 WG PROPERTIES Staff requests that the Planning Commission continue the above item, in order to allow for additional time to finalize staff conditions. This item will be continued to the May 28, 2002 Planning Commission meeting as regularly scheduled. PH #C STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 14, 2002 CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-444 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-069 SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PRESBYTERIAN/CITY OF LA QUINTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT; 2) CONSIDERATION OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW AN 81 UNIT, SINGLE STORY, SENIOR APARTMENT COMPLEX; AND 3) REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR AN 81 UNIT, SINGLE STORY, SENIOR APARTMENT COMPLEX. LOCATION: SOUTHWEST CORNER OF AVENUE 47 AND ADAMS STREET. ENGINEER: DCI ENGINEERING, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-444. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT; THEREFORE, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS RECOMMENDED. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR): UP TO 8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RH). Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 1 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: AVENUE 47, A WATER WELL SITE AND VACANT LAND. SOUTH: EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (LAKE LA QUINTA). EAST: ADAMS STREET, VACANT LAND AND AUTO DEALERSHIP. WEST: EXISTING RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (LAKE LA QUINTA). BACKGROUND: The project site is located at the southwest corner of Avenue 47 and Adams Street (Attachment 1). Currently, the site is vacant and consists of one parcel totaling 10.17 acres. The site generally slopes from the northeast to the southwest, over a distance of approximately 92 feet, with changes in elevation from 67 to 59 feet. A six-foot high chain -link fence exists along the entire northern boundary of the site and a six- foot high block wall with a stucco finish exists along the eastern and western boundaries. A very dense row of oleanders approximately 15 feet in height forms the southern boundary. A chain -link fence exists within the oleanders. A ten foot wide storm drain easement exists along the entire western and southeastern boundaries of the site. Overhead power lines exist on west side of Adams Street along the eastern boundary of the site. Existing streets include Avenue 47 to the north and Adams Street to the east. Avenue 47 is designated in the General Plan as a Collector with a 74 foot wide right-of-way. Currently, Avenue 47 is a two-lane undivided street and is improved with curb, gutter, sidewalk and minimal landscaping. Adams Street is designated in the General Plan as a Secondary Arterial with an 88 foot wide right-of-way. Adams Street is currently a four lane divided roadway and is fully improved along the project site with a curb, gutter, meandering walkway and landscaping. The intersection of Avenue 47 and Adams Street is currently a two-way stop in the east to west direction with through traffic in the north to south direction. Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 2 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 PROJECT PROPOSAL: The City of La Quinta is a co -applicant with Southern California Presbyterian Homes (SCPH) on this project. SCPH proposes to construct an 81 unit senior apartment complex with a multi -purpose room, kitchen facilities, a computer room, TV room, laundry facilities, equipment rooms, open space areas and parking (Attachment 2). A total of nine buildings are proposed. All of the units are to be affordable for very low and low income seniors. The main building (Building A) is one-story with a roof line height of twenty feet and a maximum height of twenty-four feet. It includes the manager's unit, office space, a mail room, multi -purpose room, kitchen facilities, rest rooms, and storage and maintenance space. The main building is approximately 5,550 square feet in size including the manager's unit which is approximately 770 square feet in size. The building features a portico entry with a gable concrete the roof supported by round columns. The remainder of the building includes a higher gable concrete tile roof, clear dual glazed windows, metal trellises, door and window trim, half dome dormers and decorative the vents. A terrace is located on the west side of the building with a metal trellis above and concrete pavers on the ground floor. The remaining eight buildings (Buildings B, C, D, E, F, G, H and 1) are separated into two, four -building "X" shaped clusters. Each cluster has 40 units (10 units per building). All of the units are one bedroom and approximately 560 square feet in size. The buildings are similar to each other with respect to architecture and floor plans but have minor differences in amenities such as a library, computer room, TV room, laundry facilities and mechanical equipment. Each cluster includes an interior common courtyard, concrete pavers and planters. Each of the units has a patio slab at the rear of the unit facing the landscaped areas. The buildings are all one story with a maximum height of seventeen feet. They have gable roofs with concrete tile, vents, half round dormers, clear dual glazed windows, decorative moldings, metal louvers and shutters (Attachment 3). All of the buildings are proposed to be painted with a variety of desert tones which help break up the building mass and architecture of the structures (Attachment 4). Access and Parking: Vehicular access is limited to a two-way driveway on Avenue 47, approximately 415 west of the centerline of Adams Street. Each driveway is 12 feet wide with a five foot wide island planter separating the driveways. The entry is accented with Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 3 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 concrete pavers and swinging wrought iron gates. Once inside the gates, additional wrought iron fencing is proposed around the uncovered visitor parking areas so as to limit access to visitors. Additional gates will be installed at each end of the visitor parking area allowing restricted access to project residents. Further south of the visitor parking area is a cul-de-sac which allows access to the portico of the main building. Two way access is provided on the property by a private loop street 28 feet wide. An emergency access 28 feet in width is provided on Avenue 47, approximately 715 feet west of the centerline of Adams Street. Double wrought iron gates will be provided at the entry. Perimeter parking areas are setback a minimum of 15 feet to a maximum of 60 feet from the project boundaries. Open parking and carport parking is provided for the residents on both sides of the loop street along the perimeter of the site. The carports are freestanding and the colors will match the proposed buildings. Section 9.150.060 of the Zoning Ordinance requires 1.2 covered spaces per unit plus 0.5 guest spaces per unit. With 81 units proposed the total required parking is 139 spaces (98 covered/41 uncovered). A total of 159 spaces are proposed resulting in 98 covered and 61 uncovered spaces. Landscaping• The eastern edge of the site facing Adams Street is already landscaped with trees, shrubs and ground covers. Also, an existing six foot high stucco wall is located along this edge. The conceptual landscaping plan for the project reflects a varied plant palette of water efficient trees, vines, shrubs and ground covers (Attachment 5). A mix of Mediterranean and Mexican fan palms and Date Palms are proposed at the entrance to accentuate the project entry. Additional Mediterranean and Mexican fan palms are also proposed at the cul-de-sac which would accentuate the front of the manager's unit/multi-purpose building. An abundance of various trees, shrubs, vines and ground covers are proposed to be spread out through the project in a random pattern and are situated to provide shade for buildings, common and parking areas. Trees include African Sumacs, California Peppers, Mesquite, Palo Verde, Citrus, Date Palms, Mediterranean Fan Palms, Mexican Fan Palms, among others. Vines and shrubs include Bougainvillea, Red Bird of Paradise, Desert Cassia, Deer Grass, Texas Ranger, Mexican Sage, and Yucca among others. Ground covers include purple and gold lantana, star jasmine, gazania, seasonal flowers and Bermuda grass. Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 4 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 Two on -site retention basins are proposed and are located at the southeast and southwest portions of the property. These areas will be landscaped and available for passive recreational use. In addition, walkways with decomposed granite are proposed throughout the western and southern project boundaries. Exercise stations are proposed to be installed along the walkway in the future to provide for active use by residents. Also, a swimming pool is proposed for the future and will be located just southwest of the main building. The project provides adequate landscape setbacks from the perimeter property lines which include twenty feet from the north, fifteen feet from the east, forty feet from the south and sixty five feet from the west. The applicant proposes a wrought iron fence along the entire north (Avenue 47) property line. Staff has determined that this is inconsistent with fence designs throughout the City. Therefore, staff recommends that the wrought iron fencing be a more visually attractive wall, or a combination of a block wall and wrought iron fence. Staff has added a condition to have a combination block wall/wrought iron fence installed along the northern boundary of the project site (Attachment 6). Lighting: Parking lot lighting fixtures along the perimeter driveway will be a low pressure sodium, shoe box type fixture with a clear flat tempered glass face with flourescent tubes and mounted on poles no more than twelve feet high. Parking lot lighting fixtures installed along the perimeter driveway closest to residential development will have a back shield deflector so as to reduce lighting glare on adjacent residential units. Carport lighting will also be a low pressure sodium, shoe box type fixture with a clear polycarbonate lens and flourescent tubes. The fixtures will be mounted underneath the roof canopies of the carports and spaced a minimum of 30 feet apart. Courtyard lighting will be a small ballast fixture with flourescent tubes mounted on the walls within the courtyards to illuminate the area during evening hours for pedestrian activity. Signage. The applicant has submitted a sign program which includes room and informational, exterior architectural, and project entry signage (Attachment 7). Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 5 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 Room and informational signage consists of four inch high by nine inch wide non - illuminated, high density acrylic plaques identifying the buildings and room numbers. Letters and numbers will be an Almond color with a Bronze background. Exterior architectural signage consists of three inch high, non -illuminated, high density acrylic letters identifying common buildings. Individual letters are proposed to be a Bronze color with the background being the building color. Project entry signage consists of individual wall mounted letters on two walls, one on each side of the entry. The walls are proposed to be approximately fourteen feet long and five feet -eight inches high. The walls of the signs will accent the combination block wall/wrought iron fence to be installed along the northern boundary of the project site. The wall materials will consist of concrete block and plaster. The color of the background will be the Stucco #3 color shown on the material board. The letters are proposed to be a combination of different sizes in height and have a bronze color. While the sign will not be internally illuminated, the applicant proposes to provide small up -lighting fixtures from within the landscaped planter. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC): At the April 3, 2002, ALRC meeting one of the Committee members was absent and another lives within 500 feet of the project site. Therefore, no recommendations are being forwarded to the Planning Commission. Lake La Quinta Homeowners Association: At the April 18, 2002, Lake La Quinta Homeowners Association meeting staff presented the project to the Association. While they are in support of the project they requested that a six foot high block wall be installed five feet north of the existing oleander hedge along the southern boundary. They also requested that the carports match the colors of the proposed buildings. With regard to the carports, Staff has added a condition (No. 77) to the Site Development Permit that the carports match the colors of the proposed residential buildings. With regard to the block wall Staff presents two alternative recommendations: 1. Build the block wall five feet north of the existing oleander hedge along the southern boundary, as requested by the Lake La Quinta Homeowner's Association. In this case the Lake La Quinta Homeowner's Association would purchase that portion of the land from the applicant and claim responsibility for maintaining that area between the block wall and the face of curb of Dulce del Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 6 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 Mar. In addition, the Lake La Quinta Homeowner's Association would agree 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 the Site Development Permit for the project. 2. Remove the oleanders and install a block wall along the southern property line, thereby relieving all parties of any responsibility as to any legal claims regarding that portion of land between the block wall and the face of curb of Dulce del Mar along the southern property line of the project site. Depending on which option the Planning Commission chooses, Staff will amend the conditions to the Site Development Permit accordingly. Public Notice: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 1, 2002, and mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site. To date, no comments have been received from adjacent property owners. Any written comments received will be handed out at the meeting. Public Agency Review: A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments. All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. 3. General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan. 4. Zoning Code: The proposed project is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code. 5. CEQA: Processing and approval of the permit application are in compliance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act. Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 7 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 6. Architectural Design. As designed and conditioned, the proposed project architecture is compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the city. The proposed design will lend itself to the surrounding environment by providing an attractive senior residential facility. The window and door openings are proportionate to the building and allow maximum light, and the dual glazed windows and doors lend visual interest. The building has been designed with appropriate architectural variation and detailing to break up the elevations with the gabled roofs, windows, patios, courtyards and entryway. 7. Landscape Design. The proposed project includes a variety of water efficient landscaping which is sufficient to soften the appearance of the buildings and provide visual interest. However, the extensive use of wrought iron fencing along the entire north property line is inconsistent with fence designs throughout the City. Therefore, staff recommends that the wrought iron fencing be a more visually attractive wall, or a combination of a block wall and wrought iron fence. Staff has added a condition to have a combination block wall/wrought iron fence installed along the northern boundary of the project site. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, approving certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact (EA 2002-444) according to the findings set forth in the attached Resolution; 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, approving CUP 2002-069, subject to findings and conditions; 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, approving SDP 2002-732, subject to findings and conditions. Attachments: 1. Site Location Map 2. Site Plan 3. Elevations Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 8 of 9 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 4. Color and Materials Board 5. Preliminary Planting Plan 6. Fence Elevation 7. Signage Plan Prepared by: Martin Magana Associate Planner Martin\SCPH\PCStfrptSDP2002-732scph-MM Page 9 of 9 ATTACHMENT #1 CASE MAP CASE No. EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 APPLICANT: SCPH PROJECT: LA QUINTA SENIOR HOUSING SITE LOCATION MAP ATTACHMENT #2 TAM"TWN& PROJWT AMA 4162N Onr • Mm A Dim OM etm • n^•• ar elm C. *.On on aW-M OM x 0 • wimp mr •IM oo NLDlb,• •,r1 O! OLDS I •• O!P - CAll1 pm RT•0 Or TOTAL T1101• OOr WAIVOCArm • •MLKI.PATIOA KAl Kl - rA1K►O4DAOOIAr MPO• os TOTAL iup e0 ►acorAft fs•AnD am PARCRO RORPM • IfAW617•/m WN r •PACL• -►fAKAaoV1lM ea0 •PACt• •PAR• Cora® • %OTC" MOD •PACG O .AXW TOTAL INIAO •PMR• PAI.OM PRONDW • COVEMP OR •PAR• • wooNleo N !AR• TOTAL PIlOVOlD 'ice •PAR• WM PLSA•e 00 K4M PLAK• roK AODMO UL DroMbl" -14 PI S 90 GRAND AYE"SM X SAN MCA Cvmm in No 4DW FAR 00 4DO CONVATAN►BRIANCE 01 CRY MNNINGSURMRTAL M DATE Q MAYM In rRoNa Na m 9 ATTACHMFNT #A A 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDF PPLICANT: SCPH iOJECT: LA QUINTA SENIOR Ht ARC • RANNMG 90 QMD AVM RX R M sm DRDQ CAIRam gm REval 6 MY RANMM AAMITAI 07., DAl! u IA" DRAWN BY PWxv Nn m mar A �t KEY NOTES. Q CONCRETE TILE q rQ77 CONCRETE TE.E q1 U EXTERWR PLASTER COLOR q Q E mvwR PLASTER cOL.OR a 0 EXTEVOR MASTER, COLOR'9 0 EXTERIOR PLASTER COLOR u Q EXTERWR PLASTER COLOR 7 Q TTLE VENT Q ► r- RAND DORe-MR ® DUAL GRAZED WNDOWS. CLEAR 0 PLASTER T•WLODW OR OR AM I2 NALR ROUND DOIR'ER I� METAL LOJVER I� METAL & UTTER m DUAL CMA� WNDOWD, CLEAR =A 2002-44.4/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 4PPLICANT: SCPH E 'ROJECT: LA QUINTA SENIOR HOUSING— :LEVATIONS •� ARCHWI 1R6 . PIANM 910 GRAND AVM SURE E UN M= C4900M 1ERR 0s0 aebv ra peRi NNo� �..uj 0. �. :. •�. 0: C uj .n.... REVISIONS CITY MANNING SLOW11AL Oe DAlf DRAWN BY PRO=Na oTo sHaIr k 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 'PLICANT: SCPH OJECT: LA QUINTA SENIOR HC EVATIONS ARCHMCMU • PIANNW 9M GWV AVWA RM M SAN OEM CANUM im 00 13EI1/ FAIL l� 0 �..CA- V. uj nvmm MY PuvMM SU MRAI Ul IAyl U3 wv cmvm EY 9 ATTACHMENT ROOF #1 TRELLIS STUCCO #1 ROOF #2 PAVER 4 + x lv STUCCO, #2 ATTACHMENT #5 9W91M H8X1E AAD WALL TO REMAN i•Ir SERAI J Oar ACCEYf PLANTS G nwe TREES — N Km 8PE•CA@V CANOIPfr TTE i °i i/ L FLANS LEGEND rrsw 8cumurta Harr e Me Ww" A 9-W" roIN G Pla�aaWlobtat fl-aa•ab Ti Pro eap"m fin T O .J as PATH WITH fiRti1E, EJCiiCISE 81 .en Now I twa n-aa 74' tarn• Z4• + Be 74• I aM wasgAte --12A I Ulm cTau TITAN trN 36/4.`—.j AN:•at• an puma !wait aeaat• i4• • Irorttpoct trsa i4• (.rytM wFA tow »laatwo N:oaehall• v aram T4-42 -E • k•nalr•-t 24•-6 ►4Yw 0Yp*mW lla Nair Cw.ww Naww PWMI I "Uwdx OwUlfare cmW Ia ]j:a::vEamrcw c 9v Ott. Mtl•RMaaalM Pak. ran " 02-069/SDP 2002-732 at• tlaxta•nran` ✓s'-14' vmm Syaal lataaana CgaiM N•nw PIMP Mtltw• gK""• SENIOR HOUSING �• GluNtfldf'1 awagutMts• I•Rtt was puEr 'CAPE PLAN T K O ASSOCIATES INC t.Naw.w•a . umove.m.E— mttr zcvsat-ar •mn aw m®'OOM Ms ors m La Quinta Senior Housing LA QUWA. a I � utaV14 a= =i t o� CI i u rt. ma- i REVEIONS NO DATE Tm th a0a Wa LA Q TA SENOR ICUS 1C waaT TlwE al.M W4 RMI WTE p7-W-01 aamwe ewEcraa aw EE .10alxYd ItpJ wl9w•a' il(ty-OMI �q ATTACHMENT #6 I%L CASE MAP CASE No. EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 APPLICANT: SCPH PROJECT: LA QUINTA SENIOR HOUSING FENCE ELEVATION ATTACHMENT #7 F 9 § 0N 0 f— �c z O z G) m W D r -0m _ 0 cn O z o O �m-�M� m oco = mco m m �,Kz D 07 020 CR m z r-O v D n � m m .0 X O v O 90 c m O cn r 03 7c n 0 z O O O r v cn mz v r m c u -0 m X 0 D cn m CASE MAP CASE No. EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 APPLICANT: SCPH PROJECT: LA OUINTA SENIOR HOUSING SIGNAGE PLAN O D 0 m �O m> "o 00 D r— cn z D G) m p D O D .-� c � z O � D .. _ n cn m © . z z 0 m w � z m z n = o X G) o cn C Qo � m ti ti n � z O r � m cj' n c O z m m cn m r- X O z N m n O r- O n x 0 m 0 X O X nrr~ �> � "_ C::4W=� �'biy m� d �c M � 0 �; 0 z G) m CASE MAP CASE Nm EA 2002-444/CUP 2002-069/SDP 2002-732 APPLICANT: SCPH PROJECT: LA QUINTA SENIOR HOUSING SIGNAGE PLAN m I PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-444 PREPARED FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-069 AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732. CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-444 APPLICANT: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PRESBYTERIAN HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 14T" day of May, 2002 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider Environmental Assessment 2002-444 for Conditional Use Permit 2002-069 and Site Development Permit 2002-732 to allow an 81 unit senior apartment complex, generally located at the southwest corner of Avenue 47 and Adams Street, more particularly described as follows: APN: 643-090-014, WHEREAS, said Environmental Assessment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended; Resolution 83-68 adopted by the La Quinta City Council) in that the Community Development Department has prepared an Initial Study (EA 2002-444) and has determined that although the proposed project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, there would not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the assessment and included in the conditions of approval for Conditional Use Permit 2002-069 and Site Development Permit 2002-732, and therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact should be filed; and, WHEREAS, 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 findings to justify certifying said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed project will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly, or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts were identified by Environmental Assessment 2002-444. 2. The proposed project will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal P:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso EA 02-444.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-444 MAY 14, 2002 community, reduce the number or restrict the range of rare or endangered plants or animals or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. 3. There is no evidence before the City that the proposed project will have the potential for an adverse effect on wildlife resources or the habitat on which the wildlife depends in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to less than significant levels. 4. The proposed project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals, as no significant effects on environmental factors have been identified by the Environmental Assessment. 5. The proposed project will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as development patterns in the area will not be significantly affected by the proposed project. 6. The proposed project will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as no significant impacts have been identified which would affect human health, risk potential or public services. 7. There is no substantial evidence in light of the entire record that the project may have a significant effect on the environment in that mitigation measures are imposed on the project that will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. 8. The Planning Commission has considered Environmental Assessment 2002-444 and said Assessment reflects the independent judgement of the City. 9. The City has, on the basis of substantial evidence, rebutted the presumption of adverse effect set forth in 14 CAL Code Regulations 753.5(d). 10. The location and custodian of the City's records relating to this project is the Community Development Department located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California, 92253. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: P:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso EA 02-444.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2002-444 MAY 14, 2002 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Environmental Assessment. 2. That it does hereby certify Environmental Assessment 2002-444 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum on file in the Community Development Department and attached hereto. 3. That Environmental Assessment 2002-444 reflects the independent judgement of the City. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 14" day of May, 2002, 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:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso EA 02-444.wpd Environmental Checklist Form 1. Project Title: Conditional Use Permit 2002-069, Site Development Permit 2002-732; La Quinta Senior Housing. 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Martin Magana, 760-777-7125 4. Project Location: Southwest corner of Adams Street and Avenue 47. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: City of La Quinta Southern California Presbyterian Homes 78-495 Calle Tampico 516 Burchett Street La Quinta, CA 92253 Glendale, Ca 91203 6. General Plan Designation: Medium Density Residential 7. Zoning: High Density Residential 8. Description of Project: (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off -site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary.) Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Permit to allow the construction of 81 senior -restricted multiple family dwelling units on 10.17 acres. The project proposes single story units, a central community room, a manager's unit and ancillary facilities including parking. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: Vacant desert lands South: Low Density Residential West: Low Density Residential East: Vacant desert lands 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) Not applicable PAMartin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Aesthetics Agriculture Resources Air Quality Biological Resources Cultural Resources Geology and Soils Hazards and Hazardous Materials Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use Planning Mineral Resources Noise Population and Housing Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the applicant. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 12 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. CAI I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature V Date T P:\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 2 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts: 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the reference information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g. the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project - specific factors as well as general standards (e.g. the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project -specific screening analysis). 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off -site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project -level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. 4) "Negative Declaration: Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVIII, "Earlier Analysis," may be cross-referenced). 5) Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). Earlier analysis are discussed in Section XVIII at the end of the checklist. 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion. 8) The analysis of each issue should identify: a) the significance criteria or threshold used to evaluate each question; and b) the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. P:\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 3 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: AESTHETICS: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (General Plan EIR p. III-159 ff.) b) Damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (General Plan EIR p. III-159 ff.) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Application materials) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Application materials) AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES:. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model prepared by the California Dept. Of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland) to non-agricultural use? (General Plan EIR p. III-21 ff.) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map) c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could individually or cumulatively result in loss of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? (Aerial photographs) III. AIR QUALITY: Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable Air Quality Attainment Plan or Congestion Management Plan? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X K4 X X K4 X X FN X P:\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 4 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): c) Result in a net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? (SCAQMD CEQA Handbook) d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (Project Description) e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? (Project Description) Iv. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.) b) Have a substantial adverse impact on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.) c) Adversely impact federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Either individually or in combination with the known or probable impacts of other activities through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.) d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.) e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (La Quinta Municipal Code; General Plan) f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact x x x x x x x x x ':\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 5 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): V• CULTURAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource which is either listed or eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places, the California Register of Historic Resources, or a local register of historic resources? ("A Phase I Archaeological Study for a Proposed Senior Housing Project...," prepared by HEART, May 2001) b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a unique archaeological resources (i.e., an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions, has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest or best available example of its type, or is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person)? (Letter dated April 5, 2002, Pacific West Archaeology, Inc.) c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (Master Environmental Assessment, Exhibit 5.9) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? vi. GEOLOGY AND SOILS: Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? (General Plan EIR p. III- 61 ff.) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (General Plan EIR p. III-61 ff.) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (General Plan EIR p. III-61 ff.) iv) Landslides? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff) b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff) c) Be located on a geological unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off -site landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact x x x x x x x X x x ':\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 6 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff) e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal system where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? (General Plan MEA p. 96 ff) vil. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? (Application Materials) b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? (Application Materials) c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (Application Materials d) Is the project located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites complied pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? (Riverside County Hazardous Materials Listing) e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip; would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? (General Plan land use map) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (General Plan MEA p. 94 ff) h) Expose people or structures to the risk of loss, injury or death involving wildlands fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (General Plan land use map) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact x x x x x x x x x x vill. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY : Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (General Plan EIR LJ p. I11-87 ff.) P:\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 7 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (i.e., the production rate of pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on - or off -site? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control? (General Plan EIR p. III-87 ff.) f) Place housing within a 100-year floodplain, as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.5) g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (Master Environmental Assessment Exhibit 6.5) Ix. LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? (Project Description) b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (General Plan p. 18 ff.) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 73 ff.) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact x x x x x x x x x 'AMartin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 8 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): X. MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the State Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? (Master Environmental Assessment p. 71 ff.) XI. NOISE: Would the project result in: F3f1 a) Exposure of persons to, or generation of, noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (General Plan MEA p. 110 ff.) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (General Plan MEA p. 1 10 ff.) c) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (General Plan MEA p. 110 ff.) d) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Master Environmental Assessment) e) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive levels? (General Plan land use map) POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? (General Plan, p. 9 ff.) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X Ft X KI X F7 X X P:\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 9 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials) XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) Police protection? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) Schools? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) Parks? (General Plan; Recreation and Parks Master Plan) Other public facilities? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) XIV. RECREATION: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? (Application Materials) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? (Application Materials) XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC: Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X X X X X X X KI ►Ll 'AMartin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 10 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? (General Plan EIR, p. III-29 ff.) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? (Application Materials) XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) e) Has the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project determined that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (General Plan MEA, p. 46 ff.) Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact X X X X X X X X X X X ':\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 11 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources) (Cont.): XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects of probable future projects)? d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSIS. Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X KI 0 FA Earlier analysis may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets. a) Earlier analysis used. Identify earlier analysis and state where they are available for review. No earlier analysis were used in this review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis. Not applicable. c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. See attached Addendum. ':\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 12 SOURCES: Master Environmental Assessment, City of La Quinta General Plan 2002. 3CAQMD CEQA Handbook. 3eneral Plan, City of La Quinta, 2002. -ity of La Quinta Municipal Code 'A Phase 1 Archaeological Study for a Proposed Senior Housing Project Located on the Southwest Corner of 47th Street (sic) and Adams Street," prepared by Historical, Environmental, Archaeological Research Team, May, 2001. _etter dated April 5, 2002, Pacific West Archaeology. P:\Martin\SCPH\EACklst.wpd 13 Addendum for Environmental Assessment 2002-444 I. d) The proposed project proposes single story buildings with parking around the buildings. The project is also designed to include recreational open space and retention basins on the western and southern property lines, which will provide separation between the parking lot and driveways and the single family residential units to the west and south. The separation results in a minimum distance of approximately 40 feet between the nearest parking area and the southern property line. Parking lots and driveways will be lit as required by the Development Code. The applicant will be required to meet the City's standards, which require that no light spill onto adjacent properties. These standards, and the project design, will lower potential impacts to a less than significant level. III. a) The proposed project will generate air pollution primarily from the operation of motor vehicles. The 81 apartment units could generate approximately 282 trips per day'. (Senior housing generates a lower trip rate than family housing.) Based on this trip generation, the project at buildout will generate the following pollutants. Running Exhaust Emissions (pounds/day) PM 10 PM 10 PM 10 CO ROC NOx Exhaust Brakes Tires 50 mph 7.28 0.28 1.49 -- 0.03 0.03 Daily Threshold* 550 75 100 150 Based on 282 trips/day and average trip length of 5 miles, using EMFAC7G Model provided by California Air Resources Board. Assumes catalytic light autos at 75°F. * Operational thresholds provided by SCAQMD for assistance in determining the significance of a project and the need for an EIR. The proposed project will not exceed any threshold for the generation of moving emissions, as established by the South Coast Air Quality Management District in determining the need for an EIR. The impacts to air quality relating to chemical pollution are not expected to be significant. Institute of Transportation Engineers, "Trip Generation, 6th Edition," for category 253, Elderly Housing - Attached. P:\Martin\SCPH\EAAdden.WPD Ill. c) The Coachella Valley is a non -attainment area for PM 10 (particulate matter of 10 microns or smaller). The construction of the proposed project has the potential to generate dust, which could contribute to the PM 10 problem in the area. In order to control PM10, the City has imposed standards and requirements on development to control dust. The applicant will be required to submit a PM 10 Management Plan prior to initiation of any earth moving activity at the site. In addition, the potential impacts associated with PM 10 can be mitigated by the mitigation measures below. 1. Construction equipment shall be properly maintained and serviced to minimize exhaust emissions. 2. Existing power sources should be utilized where feasible via temporary power poles to avoid on -site power generation. 3. Construction personnel shall be informed of ride sharing and transit opportunities. 4. Cut and fill quantities will be balanced on site. 5. Any portion of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading activities. 6. Watering of the site or other soil stabilization method shall be employed on an on -going basis after the initiation of any grading activity on the site. Portions of the site that are actively being graded shall be watered regularly to ensure that a crust is formed on the ground surface, and shall be watered at the end of each work day. 7. Landscaped areas shall be installed as soon as possible to reduce the potential for wind erosion. The recreational open space landscaping on the west and south side of the property, as well as the perimeter landscaping on Avenue 47 and Adams Street, shall be installed with the construction of the first building(s) on the site. 8. SCAQMD Rule 403 shall be adhered to, insuring the clean up of . construction -related dirt on approach routes to the site. 9. All grading activities shall be suspended during first and second stage ozone episodes or when winds exceed 25 miles per hour. With the implementation of these mitigation measures, the impacts to air quality from buildout will not be significant. P:\Martin\SCPH\EAAdden.WPD 2 V. b) Phase I and Phase II cultural resource surveys were conducted for the subject property2. The Phase I study identified potentially significant archaeological sites on the subject property. The Phase II analysis, however, determined that the loci found at the site were not significant. All test pits were properly excavated and documented, and reports prepared for review and approval by the Historic Preservation Commission. VI. a) i) & ii) The proposed project lies in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The property, as with the rest of the City, will be subject to significant ground movement in the event of a major earthquake. Structures on the site will be required to meet the City's standards for construction, which include Uniform Building Code requirements for seismic zones. The City Engineer will require the preparation of site -specific geotechnical analysis in conjunction with the submittal of grading plans. This requirement will ensure that impacts from ground shaking are reduced to a less than significant level. VI. b) The subject property is subject to severe wind erosion hazards. The City Engineer will require the preparation of PM 10 Management Plan to control the potential for blowing dust from the project site. In addition, the mitigation measures listed under Air Quality, above, will mitigate the potential impacts of soil erosion to a less than significant level. Vill. b) Domestic water is provided by the Coachella Valley Water District from wells in the Lower Thermal sub -basin. The project proponent will be required to implement the City's standards for water conserving plumbing fixtures and on - site retention, which both aid in reducing the potential impacts associated with groundwater. The proposed project will also meet the requirements of the City's water -conserving landscaping ordinance. These standards will reduce potential impacts to a less than significant level. Vill. c)&d) The construction of buildings and parking lots will result in less land being available for the percolation of water into the ground. The project has been designed to include two retention basins within the southern section of the 2 "A Phase 1 Archaeological Study for a Proposed Senior Housing Project Located on the Southwest Corner of 47th Street (sic) and Adams Street," prepared by Historical, Environmental, Archaeological Research Team, May, 2001. Letter dated April 5, 2002, Pacific West Archaeology. P:\Martin\SCPH\EAAdden.WPD 3 recreational open space on the site. The City Engineer will require that these retention basins retain the 100 year 24 hour storm on -site. This will control the amount of runoff which exits the site during a storm. The project's drainage plan will be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to the issuance of grading permits. These standards will reduce the potential impacts associated with surface water to a less than significant level. XI. a) The proposed project occurs in an area with lower levels of traffic, which are not expected to exceed the City's noise standards at buildout of the General Plan. Further, the project will be surrounded by a wall, which will reduce interior noise levels. Finally, the buildings proposed within the project site are a minimum of 70 feet from the wall. This distance will provide further noise attenuation. XI. c) The construction of the proposed project will result in temporary high noise levels which could impact residential development to the south and west. In order to reduce these potential impacts, the following mitigation measures shall be implemented: 1. All internal combustion equipment operating within 500 feet of any occupied residential unit shall be fitted with properly operating mufflers and air intake silencers. 2. All stationary construction equipment (e.g. generators and compressors) shall be located in the northeast corner of the site. 3. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours prescribed in the La Quinta Municipal Code. XIII. a) The proposed apartments will have an impact on public services and will be served by the County Sheriff and Fire Department, under City contract. Site development will generate property tax which will offset the costs of added police and fire services. The project will be required to participate in the City's Impact Fee Program, which helps to offset roadway improvement costs. Site development is not expected to have a significant impact on municipal services or facilities. PAMartin\SCPH\EAAdden.WPD 4 O O O� O M 0 d O H 09 a N O O N ►; cd 0 0 N 0 z a Y�I A U W d FA A U� aWUW OU U y b U cl OA O � � Cd O U bA U U a as aaaba a o� a o &H 00 b b 0 b � b U U U m U A GQ 04 N O o ° b d F a� bn O N � a H Q A U� �A wW�W OU U F o 0 0 U U U N N N U U U A A A �i W Z F. 00 b a � C U U 0 F �� 03 o a ~ ] 00P. En N w w .e O 0-4 EA rA O rA a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN 81 UNIT SENIOR APARTMENT COMPLEX ON A 10.17 ACRE SITE. CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-069 APPLICANT: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PRESBYTERIAN HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 14' day of May, 2002 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Southern California Presbyterian Homes approval of Conditional Use Permit 2002-069 to allow an 81 unit senior apartment complex located at the southwest corner of Avenue 47 and Adams Street, more particularly described as follows: APN: 643-090-014, WHEREAS, said Conditional Use Permit application has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2002-444), and determined that the proposed Conditional Use Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been certified; 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 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code to justify approval of said Conditional Use Permit: 1. Consistency with the General Plan: The proposed project is consistent with the goals and policies of the General Plan in that the design, height, scale and mass of the project is compatible with the Medium Density Residential (MDR) Land Use designation. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed project is consistent with the development standards of the High Density Residential (RH) Zoning District, including but not limited to, building heights, setbacks, parking, landscape design, and exterior lighting. 3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of CEQA, in that Environmental Assessment 2002-444 was prepared for this project with a recommendation for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. P:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso CUP 02-069.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-069 MAY 14, 2002 4. Surrounding Uses: Approval of the Conditional Use Permit will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare or injurious to or incompatible with other properties or land uses in the vicinity in that the proposed project will be compatible with existing and proposed development with regard to residential uses. 5. Architectural Design: The architectural design of the proposed buildings, including but not limited to, architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, is compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City, in that it lacks the bulky mass of a residential building due to the articulation, stucco exterior finish, desert tone colors, tile roofs, and trellises; the proposed buildings are adequately set back with multiple wall planes so as to minimize the appearance of a large structural mass. 6. Site Design: The site design of the proposed project, including but not limited to, project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment, trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site design elements such as scale, mass, appearance, and amount of landscaping are compatible with surrounding development and quality of design prevalent in the City in that the project meets the development standards imposed by the City's Zoning Code. 6. Landscape Design: As conditioned, the landscaping of the proposed project, including but not limited to, the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials, has been designed to provide visual relief, complement the buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between buildings, and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual continuity of the project. The proposed landscaping is compatible with the surrounding area in that the variety of the plant palette, placement of shade trees and decorative plants, provide an aesthetically pleasing and well functioning use of landscaping space. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Conditional Use Permit; 2. That it does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2002-069 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; P:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso CUP 02-069.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-069 MAY 14, 2002 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 14th day of May, 2002, 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:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso CUP 02-069.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2002-069 MAY 14, 2002 GENERAL 1. The conditions of approval for this Conditional Use Permit (CUP 2002-069) are binding with the conditions of approval of Site Development Permit (SDP 2002-732) for the same project. 2. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 3. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit is subject to compliance with Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code, as applicable. 4. The approved Conditional Use 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). 5. 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. The City shall promptly notify the developer of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 6. Development of this site shall be in conformance with the Exhibits approved and contained in the files for Conditional Use Permit 2002-069 and Site Development Permit 2002-732. P:\Martin\SCPH\PC CUP COA.wpd Page 1 of 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT PLANS TO ALLOW AN 81 UNIT SENIOR APARTMENT COMPLEX ON A 10.17 ACRE SITE. CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 APPLICANT: SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA PRESBYTERIAN HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 14T" day of May, 2002 hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Southern California Presbyterian Homes for approval of an 81 unit senior apartment complex, generally located at the southwest corner of Avenue 47 and Adams Street, more particularly described as follows: APN: 643-090-014, 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 83-68), in that the Community Development Department has conducted an Initial Study (Environmental Assessment 2002-444), and determined that the proposed Site Development Permit will not have a significant impact on the environment and a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has been certified; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code to justify approval of said Site Development Permit: 1 . 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 project is compatible with the Medium Density Residential (MDR) Land Use designation. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed project is consistent with the development standards of the High Density Residential (RH) Zoning District, including but not limited to, setbacks, architecture, building heights, building mass, exterior lighting, parking, circulation, open space and landscaping. 3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA): The proposed project is consistent with the requirements of CEQA, in that Environmental Assessment 2002-444 was prepared for this project with a recommendation for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact. P:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso SDP 02-732.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 4. Architectural Design: The architectural design of the proposed building, including but not limited to, architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, is compatible with surrounding development and with the quality of design prevalent in the City, in that it lacks the bulky mass of a residential building due to the articulation, stucco exterior finish, desert tone colors, tile roofs, courtyards and trellises; the proposed buildings are adequately set back with multiple wall planes so as to minimize the appearance of a large structural mass. 5. Site Design: The site design of the proposed project, including but not limited to, project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment, trash enclosures, exterior lighting, and other site design elements such as scale, mass, appearance, and amount of landscaping are compatible with surrounding development and quality of design prevalent in the City in that the proposed project meets the development standards of the City's Zoning Code. 6. Landscape Design: As conditioned, landscaping plan for the proposed project, including but not limited to, the location, type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials, has been designed to provide visual relief, complement the building, visually emphasize prominent design elements, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between buildings, and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual continuity of the project. The proposed landscaping is compatible with the surrounding area in that the variety of the plant palette, placement of shade trees and decorative plants, provide an aesthetically pleasing and well functioning use of landscaping space. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Site Development Permit; 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2002-732 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions of Approval attached hereto; PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 14t' day of May, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: P:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso SDP 02-732.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002- SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Martin\SCPH\PC Reso SDP 02-732.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 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 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. 2. Prior to the issuance of any permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary permits and/or clearances from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting the improvement plans for City approval. 3. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water), LQMC; Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ . A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs five (5) acres or more of land, or that disturbs less than five (5) acres of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than five (5) acres of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off - site grading being done in relation to this Site Development Permit. C. The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. Page 1 of 12 P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 D. The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management Practice ("BMPs"), 8.70.020 (Definitions), LQMC: 1) Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). 2) Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. 5) Non -Storm Water Management. 6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control. E. All of applicant's erosion and sediment control BMPs shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off site grading being done in relation to this project. F. All approved project BMPs shall be maintained in their proper working order throughout the course of construction, and until all improvements have been accepted by the City. 4. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire, or confer, those easements, and other property rights necessary for the construction and/or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services, and for the maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 6. The applicant shall offer for dedication all public street right-of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. 7. Unless the ultimate developed right-of-way can be documented, the public street right-of- way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) None - All off site street dedication is in place. 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. P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd Page 2 of 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 9. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of-ways as follows: A. Avenue 47 - 10 foot from the Right of Way/Property Line. The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall design is approved. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes. 10. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas shown on the Site Development Permit. 11. The applicant shall vacate all abutter's right -of -access to public streets and properties from all frontages along such public streets and properties, excepting those access points shown on the Site Development Permit. 12. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, ingress/egress, or other encroachments will occur. 13. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, any existing right-of-way, or access easement, which will diminish the access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to those properties, or shall submit notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 14. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of this Site Development Permit and the date of final acceptance of the on and off -site improvements for this Site Development Permit, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 15. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. Page 3 of 12 P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 16. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Engineering Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. Perimeter Landscape Plan: 1" = 20' B. On -Site Rough Grading Plan: 1" = 40' Horizontal C. Site Development Plans: V = 30' Horizontal D. On -Site Utility Plan: 1" = 40' Horizontal E. On -Site Landscape Plan: 1" = 20' Horizontal The plans shall be submitted a minimum of 8 to 10 weeks prior to the issuance of construction permits to allow adequate time for plan check and revisions. Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements; and show the existing street improvements out to at least the center lines of adjacent existing streets. "Site Utility" plans shall normally include all sub -surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to sewer lines, water lines, fire protection and storm drainage systems. "Rough Grading" plans shall include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover, or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. 17. The City maintains standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 18. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all complete, approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. PAMartin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd Page 4 of 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format which can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster - image files of the plans. GRADING 19. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 20. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 21. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, and C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16 (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions submitted with its application for a grading permit. 22. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 23. 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. 24. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the pads within this development. Page 5 of 12 P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 25. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any building pads within the project site by more than plus or minus three tenths of a foot from the elevations shown on the approved Site Development Permit, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 26. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 27. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), LQMC, Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. The design storm shall be either the 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 28. In design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rete shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise. 29. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leach field approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be designed to contain surges of up to 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. of landscape area, and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 30. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water (through underground piping and/or retention facilities) 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. 31. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 32. For on -site common retention basins, retention depth shall not exceed six feet and side slopes shall not exceed 3:1. Page 6 of 12 P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 33. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. 34. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 35. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 36. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 37. The applicant shall incorporate the existing open Swale along the westerly side of the site (from the underwalk drain on Avenue 47) and the existing open Swale along the southerly end of the site (from the underwalk drain on Adams Street) into the landscape theme. These swales shall be regraded to provide adequate capacity for the peak 100 year storm event and shall be treated with an approved erosion control material, i.e. turf, rip rap, concrete, etc. The swales shall be located within the drainage easements shall be maintained by the apartment complex association. UTILITIES 38. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.110 (Utilities), LQMC. 39. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 40. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development, and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are exempt from the requirement to be placed underground. 41. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd Page 7 of 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 42. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 43. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. 44. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entry (Avenue 47) approximately 470 feet from the westerly property line. This driveway shall have full right in/right out and left in/left out turning movements. The security gate for this project shall be located away from the property line a sufficient distance with the following access road design features: adequate stacking, a rejection turnaround feature, and a separate lane for guests. B. Secondary Entry (Avenue 47) approximately 110 feet from the westerly property line. This driveway shall have full right in/right out and left in/left out turning movements. 45. Pursuant to Section 9.150.080(A)(8)(b) (Parking), LQMC, the applicant shall provide 30- foot uninterrupted driveway throats into the parking lot, or alternatively provide a combination of a dedicated right turn deceleration lane and the drive throat that will equal a total of 30-feet. CONSTRUCTION 46. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphaltic concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include the test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include the most recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that the design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs have been approved. P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd Page 8 of 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 47. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 48. The applicant shall comply with Sections 9.90.040 (Table of Development Standards) & 9.100.040 (Landscaping), LQMC. 49. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 50. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit evidence that one of the following has occurred: A. Through a written agreement with the Lake La Quinta Homeowners Association, the applicant has agreed to pay for his share of the perimeter landscaping and irrigation water and maintenance on Avenue 47 and Adams Street along the project perimeter. B. The existing irrigation system has been modified along the landscaped frontage on Avenue 47 and Adams Street along the project perimeter to be self contained. Separate water meter(s) shall be set to meter the water usage for this project's frontage. The modifications shall be done in a manner to provide continued service to the adjacent landscaped areas. 51. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, setbacks and retention basins shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 52. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. PAMartin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd Page 9 of 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02 -__- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 53. Only incidental storm water will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. QUALITY ASSURANCE 54. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 55. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such or other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. 56. The applicant shall arrange for, and bear the cost of, all measurements, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program, but which may be required by the City, as evidence that the construction materials and methods employed comply with the plans, specifications and other applicable regulations. 57. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all AutoCAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. MAINTENANCE 58. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 59. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 60. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT (CVWD) 61. Appropriate fees, if any, shall be paid to the CVWD in accordance with their current regulations for service to the site. Page 10 of 12 P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 62. The site shall be annexed to Improvement District Nos. 55 and 82 of the district for sanitation service. 63. The applicant shall be required to install a lint trap for laundry room operations as part of the project. The size of the lint trap will be determined by the Riverside County Environmental Health Department and approved and inspected by CVWD. 64. Grading, landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted to the CVWD for review to ensure efficient water management techniques. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 65. Approved super fire hydrants shall be located not less than 25 feet, nor more than 165 feet, from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. 66. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8 inches from the centerline to the side that the fire hydrant is located, so as to identify fire hydrant locations during an emergency. 67. Minimum fire flow of 1500 gallon per minute (GPM) for a 2-hour duration. Fire flow is based on type VN construction and a complete fire sprinkler system. 68. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City's plan check procedures. 69. Buildings over 5,000 square feet are required to be equipped with fire sprinklers. Fire sprinkler plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 70. The applicant shall provide primary and secondary access for emergency vehicles. The applicant shall verify that all portions of the buildings are within 150 feet of an approved vehicle access point. 71. Any operation that produces grease -laden vapors will require a hood/duct system for fire protection. Hood/duct fire protection plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. 72. The required water system, including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building materials being placed on site. 73. 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. 74. Install a KNOX key box on each commercial building. Contact the Fire Department for an application. P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd Page 11 of 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 02-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-732 MAY 14, 2002 75. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code. CARPORT AND PARKING LOT LIGHTING 76. Carport lighting shall include low pressure sodium fixtures. Said fixtures shall be a metal shoe box type with a clear polycarbonate lens and flourescent tubes. The fixtures shall be mounted underneath the roof canopies and spaced a minimum of 30 feet apart or each carport unit. 77. The carport units shall match the colors of the proposed residential buildings of the project. 78. Parking lot lighting fixtures shall include a low pressure sodium fixture. Said fixture shall be a shoe box type with a clear flat tempered glass face with flourescent tubes and mounted on poles no more than twelve feet high. 79. Parking lot lighting fixtures installed along the perimeter driveway closest to residential development shall have a back shield deflector so as to reduce lighting glare on adjacent residential units. MISCELLANEOUS 80. The applicant shall install a combination block wall/wrought iron fence along the northern boundary of the project. The block wall portion shall be two feet high with masonry pilasters five feet -eight inches tall, and two feet square, every sixteen feet on center. The pilasters shall be capped with decorative brick. In addition, decorative wrought iron not exceeding three feet in height shall be installed between the pilasters on top of the two foot block wall. P:\Martin\SCPH\PC SDP COA.wpd Page 12 of 12 PH #D PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 14, 2002 CASE NOS.: SPECIFIC PLAN 99-036 (AMENDMENT #1) AND SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-734 APPLICANT: SKY WEST CORPORATE CENTRE GROUP LLC AND THE CITY OF LA QUINTA PROPERTY OWNER: UNDER VARIOUS OWNERSHIP (16 PARCELS) REQUEST: (1) AMENDMENT OF THE TEXT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A 36-ACRE SPECIFIC PLAN AND (2) REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL, LANDSCAPE, SITE, AND LIGHTING PLANS FOR A TWO- STORY OFFICE BUILDING ON 2.25 ACRES LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 800 FEET EAST OF ADAMS STREET AND ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CORPORATE CENTRE DRIVE LOCATION: ON THE NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 1 1 1 APPROXIMATELY 330 FT. EAST OF ADAMS STREET AND WEST OF DUNE PALMS ROAD ARCHITECT: PITTMAN GROUP ARCHITECTS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-383, PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 99-036 AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 7, 1999, BY RESOLUTION 99- 110. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS OR NEW INFORMATION IS PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. GASRPC SDP734SkySpecific Plan.wpd GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: COMMERCIAL PARK AND CP (COMMERCIAL PARK) AND REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR) WITHIN SPECIFIC PLAN 99- 036 SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: REGIONAL STORMWATER CHANNEL SOUTH: ACROSS HIGHWAY 111, LA QUINTA AUTO MALL AND VACANT COMMERCIAL PARCELS EAST: ACROSS DUNE PALMS ROAD, VACANT WEST: VACANT (FUTURE HOTEL), EXISTING SELF -STORAGE FACILITY AND FUTURE WELL SITE BACKGROUND: Specific Plan 99-036 (La Quinta Corporate Centre) was approved by the City Council on September 7, 1999, and involves 36-acres of noncontiguous property located on the north side of Highway 111 between Dune Palms Road and Adams Street (Attachment 1 - Site Plan). The Plan envisioned development of light industrial uses, retail/office uses, a fitness center, a self -storage facility, and gasoline service station, using a Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.35. The Mixed/Regional Commercial and Commercial Park designations were instituted to encourage the development of more intense commercial uses on the Highway 111 Corridor, and business park or quasi -industrial uses along the stormwater channel, respectively. Developments in the La Quinta Corporate Centre are the J. Paul Building (SDP 2000- 669), USA Gas Station (CUP 99-046), World Gym (SDP 2000-682), and Storage USA (SDP 2000-673; Phase 2 only). Concerning the style of architecture for new projects, the Plan states: ". . .contemporary desert based on California Mission, Spanish, southwest and inspired themes found in La Quinta." PROJECT PROPOSAL: 1. Specific Plan Amendment - The proposed amendment consists of land use and text changes. The text changes include updating the document based on completed work and discussions with future tenants (Attachment 2). As an example, staff has received a request to allow office uses for the industrial lots in Planning Area #1 which is currently not allowed. In terms of site plan changes, staff is recommending that G:\SRPC SDP734SkySpecif1c Plan.wpd .y language be added to the Specific Plan document which permits the Planning Commission flexibility to allow changes to overall development of the center during consideration of a Site Development and Conditional Use Permit applications. Property ownership changes are ongoing in the project and the reorganization of building masses is a problem under the existing document (Attachment 3). 2. Site Development Permit - The proposed two story office building is 32-feet in height to the top of the parapet. Both wings of the building total approximately 34,270 square feet of lease area (Attachment 4). Exterior tilt -up masonry walls are clad in stucco and painted using light desert color tones in off-white and brown. The south -facing building elevation consists of staggered facade elements in lengths of 24 feet and an accentuated entrance into the clerestory atrium which provides stairway access to the second level. To ascend to the upper level, the developer is proposing three interior stairwells and one elevator. Three wall columns, covered in 12-inch by 12-inch Canterra stone, accent the primary building entrance which has a decorative walkway that connects to Corporate Centre Drive. Horizontal copper banding is used over the main entrance between the three columns to accentuate this facade. Single glass door entries are proposed for each tenant space in combination with large fixed pane bronze tinted windows in heights of 7'-0" and 9'-0". The north, west and east building elevations consist of the similar architectural features found on the south facing facade, excluding enhanced atrium entry. Parking is provided around the proposed building and on Lot 3 to the west with two access driveways proposed on Corporate Centre Drive, an existing 64 foot wide public street that will eventually connect Adams Street to Dune Palms Road. On -site parking is a combination of open stalls and carports using spaces measuring 9'-0" wide by 17'-0" long on 26-foot wide and larger aisles allowing two-way access. Of the total parking area, approximately 23% of parking stalls are covered by wood trellises. The parking ratio for the project is one space per 231 square feet of floor area for a total of 148 spaces. One loading space is also proposed at the rear of the building. The proposed conceptual landscaping plan includes a plant palette consisting of a variety of specimen trees, shrubs and groundcover. To augment the specimen shade trees (Blue Palo Verde, African Sumac, and Sweet Acacia), palm trees (California Fan) in heights of 24' are being used on accent north and south side building entrances. Five gallon shrubs (six varieties) and one gallon groundcover (three varieties) are shown on the plant list, but not specified on the plan. The landscape plan proposes perimeter and parking lot landscaping and small planters in front of the building. A 36- inch high meandering berm is proposed for the Corporate Centre Drive parkway which will be partially covered using turf. Pedestrian walkways around the building are concrete while a variegated walkway using colored concrete and stone is proposed for the south side building entrance and its connection to Corporate Centre Drive. GASRPC SDP734SkySpecific Plan.wpd F q Additional information on the plan that is not defined is the placement of large granite boulders. A 6'-0" high tan slumpstone masonry wall is planned for the site's perimeter boundaries and is planned to be used to construct one trash enclosure. Twelve foot sections of the perimeter wall will be open using two inch square aluminum pickets along the north side of the development to match the newly built J. Paul Building on Dune Palms Road. Security lighting consists of 18' high pole mounted fixtures (175 watt metal halide) for the open parking areas and under canopy lighting (70 watt) for carports. Fixture types are hooded to reduce light glare. A sign program was submitted, showing nonilluminated 18" high channel lettering in brass/copper finish for building signs. One freestanding stucco monument sign measuring 4'-0" high by 12'-0" long (48 sq. ft.) is proposed to be placed at the west entrance driveway on Corporate Centre Drive reading "Sky West Corporate Centre" in brass letters. No lighting information was submitted. Pursuant to SP 99-036, the Planning Commission is required to review and approve tenant sign program during consider of the building plans. Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) The Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed this request at its meeting of May 1, 2002, and on a 3-0 vote, adopted Minute Motion 2002-015 recommending approval, subject to conditions (Attachment 5). Conditions #40 and #58 of SDP 2002-734 address the Committee's concern to: 1) screen roof mounted mechanical equipment and parking areas, 2) cover perimeter walls with vines, and 3) use weather resistant materials to construct carport structures. Public Notice - This request was advertised in the Desert Sun Newspaper on May 2, 2002, and mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the project site. To date, no correspondence has been received. Public Agency Review: A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments. All written comments received are on file with the Community Development Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to recommend approval of the specific plan amendment can be made, as noted in the attached Resolution. Those findings being that the amendment GASRPC SDP734SkySpecific Plan.wpd is consistent with the General Plan, compatible with zoning on adjacent properties, and is suitable and appropriate for the property. Findings necessary to approve the Site Development Permit per Zoning Code Section 9.210.010 can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution with the exception of the following Finding: 1. Sign Program. As conditioned, the developer's monument sign shall be redesigned to comply with Sign F of Exhibit 15 of SP 99-036 before a permit will be issued by the Community Development Department. Design changes that are needed are curved top with logo insert and the use of stylized sign letters. Condition #12 of the SDP 2002-734 is proposed to ensure that the three parcels are merged to allow development of the project. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_, recommending to the City Council, approval of Amendment #1 for Specific Plan 99-036, subject to conditions. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ approving Site Development Permit 2002-734, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. SP 99-036 Planning Area Exhibit 2. April 16, 2002 Letter from Robert Wood 3. Revised Specific Plan Document 4. Sky West Corp. Site Plan 5. Draft ALRC Minutes of May 1, 2002 6. Large Architectural and Landscaping Plans (Commission only) Prgpl"red by: r . Greg Troutddil, Associate Planner G:\SRPC MP734SkySpecific Plan.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-____ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A MULTI -USE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL CENTER ON 36± ACRES LOCATED GENERALLY BETWEEN ADAMS STREET AND DUNE PALMS ROAD AND NORTH OF STATE HIGHWAY 111 CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 99-036, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: SKY WEST CORP. CENTRE GROUP LLC AND CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 141h day of May, 2002, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to review of an Amendment to the development standards and design guidelines for the La Quinta Corporate Centre on 36± acres located generally between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road and north of Highway 111, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 649-020-049 thru -065 (16 noncontiguous parcels) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 71h day of September, 1999, approve Specific Plan development standards and design guidelines allowing retail, office, industrial and associated land uses on 36± acres by adoption of Resolution No. 99-111. 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 Specific Plan Amendment: 1. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan, and the Land Use Map for the General Plan and supports the development of regional commercial and commercial park uses north of Highway 111 to the Stormwater Channel, as conditioned. 2. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment 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. 3. The proposed Specific Plan Amendment is compatible with the City's Zoning Ordinance in that it supports the development of commercial and industrial uses in the Regional Commercial and Commercial Park Zoning Districts, respectively. G:\ResoSP99-036# 1 LQCorp.doc/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Specific Plan 99-036, Amendment #1 Sky West Corp. Centre Group LLC and City of La Quinta May 14, 2002 4. Development of the proposed amended Specific Plan is compatible with the parcels on which it is proposed, and surrounding land uses as an extension of existing commercial uses along Highway 111. The project will be further reviewed through the Site Development Permit process, allowing for use -specific mitigation at that time. 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 the Conditions of Approval for the proposed Specific Plan Update; 3. That it does hereby reconfirm the conclusion that Environmental Assessment 99- 383 assessed the environmental concerns of this Specific Plan pursuant to City Council Resolution No. 99-110; and 4. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 14th day of May, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California 007 G:\ResoSP99-036# 1 LQCorp.doc/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Specific Plan 99-036, Amendment #1 Sky West Corp. Centre Group LLC and City of La Quinta May 14, 2002 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California 008 G:\ResoSP99-036# 1 LQCorp.doc/printed PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 99-036 (AMENDMENT #1) - LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE SKY WEST CORP. CENTRE GROUP LLC AND CITY OF LA QUINTA MAY 14, 2002 GENERAL 1.Prior to issuanee of the first Site Develepn9emt Permit all neeessary arnendm9em" to the Specifie Plem sholl be submitted to the Gity and these Genditions-04 Approval shfali be appended to the Speeifie Pia�. (This update will be completed by the Community Development Dept.) 2. The applicant/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 specific plan amendment. 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. 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant/developer shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside County 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 01r119 G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed ' 1 Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 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. 4. The applicant shall comply with the terms and requirements of the infr .stru..t.._,. fee pfegr Development Impact Fee in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. PROPERTY RIGHTS 5. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall acquire or confer required or necessary property rights including easements and rights of way. 6. 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. 7. Rights of way required of this development shall comply with the City's General Plan as follows: A. Highway 1 1 1 - the remainder of applicant's 70-foot half of a 140-foot right of way plus additional if required by Caltrans or the design of the improvements. B. Dune Palms Road - the remainder of the applicant's 44-foot half of an 88- foot right of way plus additional width at Highway 1 1 1 to accommodate dual left turn lanes. The additional width section shall be 60-foot half - width from Highway 111 to 300 feet north and taper from that point northerly to 44 feet. C. Industrial Road/Corporate Centre Drive - 64-foot right of way from western boundary (connecting to industrial road within SP 98-033) to Dune Palms Road. If right of way across the "Not A Part" property is unavailable, the applicant shall, by separate deed, grant temporary right of way for construction of cul-de-sacs at the road's termini at that property. The temporary grant shall automatically expire when the industrial road is completed and the cul-de-sacs removed. D. North/South Cul de sac - 64-foot right of way. 010 G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 8. Street right of way geometry for culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cut- backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, 801 and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 9. Dedications or grants shall include additional widths as necessary for corner dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved construction plans. 10. If the City Engineer determines that street rights of way are necessary prior to development of this property, the applicant shall grant the rights of way within 60 days of written request by the City. 1. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if a meandering wall design is used): A. Highway 1 1 1 - 50 feet B. Adams Street, Dune Palms Road, Industrial Road/Corporate Centre Dr., and Cul De Sac - 10 Feet Setback requirements apply to all frontage including sites dedicated or granted for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall dedicate or grant blanket easements for those purposes. 12. The applicant shall dedicate or grant easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures. 13. The applicant shall dedicate or grant abutter's rights of access to public streets from all frontage except access points shown on the approved site plan. 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. 14. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and landscape architects, as appropriate. Plans shall be O11 GACondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 15. 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. 16. When final public street plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate Auto cad files of the approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard Auto cad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic Auto cad 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 Auto cad or a file format which can be converted to Auto cad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 17. Depending on the timing of development of the specific plan area and the status of off -site improvements at that time, the applicant may be required to construct improvements, to reimburse others who construct improvements that are obligations of this development, to secure the cost of the improvements for future construction by others, or a combination of these methods. In the event that any of the improvements required herein are constructed by the City prior to their construction by the applicant, the applicant shall reimburse the City for the cost of those improvements. 012 G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 18. Prior to issuance of any further pefrnit for on site site grading or building construction permits, the applicant shall construct any remaining or deferred improvements and satisfy obligations required by these conditions, Caltrans and/or utility authorities or furnish an executed, secured agreement to do so. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. 19. 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 utilities and other 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. 20. If on -site improvements are phased with multiple administrative approvals (e.g., Site Development Permits or maps), all obligations for public improvements shall be satisfied or secured prior to approval of the first phase unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 21. If the applicant fails to construct improvements or satisfy obligations in a timely manner or as specified in an approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to halt issuance of building permits or final building inspections or otherwise withhold approvals related to the development of the project until the applicant makes satisfactory progress on the improvements or obligations or has made other arrangements satisfactory to the City. GRADING 22. The applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and a 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. The plan must be approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 23. 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. 013 G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La auinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 24. The applicant shall endeavor to minimize differences in elevation at abutting properties. 25. 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. 26. The applicant shall maintain cleared or graded 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. 27. 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 28. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 29. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or disposed of in the same manner as on -site storm runoff. 30. Nuisance water shall be retained on site and disposed of in a manner acceptable to the City Engineer. 31. If the applicant proposes discharge of stormwater to the Whitewater Drainage Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's effluent 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 of 014 G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 land within the specific plan area excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification and the assignment of responsibility (if any) shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. UTILITIES 32. The applicant shall comply with legally -enforceable requirements of utility authorities. 33. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all proposed 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. 34. Existing aerial utilities and all proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 35. 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. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 36. The City is contemplating adoption of a revised infrastructure fee program. Any property within this specific plan which has not received final development approval when the program takes effect may be subject to the program as determined by the City. 37. The applicant is responsible for the following street improvements which shall conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. Dimensions and features shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction if different from those listed. A. Highway 1 1 1 - The north half (58 feet) of a 1 16-foot street improvement including landscape median, 50 percent of the traffic signal modification at the project main entry and an eight -foot sidewalk. 01_5 G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 B. Dune Palms Road - Construct half -width street improvement plus six-foot sidewalk. Half street shall be 48-feet from the Highway 1 1 1 curb return to a point 285 feet north and from that point taper 55:1 northerly to 32- foot width. The applicant shall re -stripe traffic lanes and modify the traffic signal at this intersection as required including, but not necessarily limited to, installation, relocation or reconfiguration of poles, arms, heads, and traffic sensor loops. C. Industrial Road (Corporate Centre Dr.) - 40-foot travel width (between curb faces) from Adams Street to east boundary of hotel site plus 5-foot sidewalks. The applicant shall have full responsibility for any required traffic signals or a fair share responsibility if adjacent developments utilize signals for access. If right of way is available across the "Not A Part" property, the applicant may be required to construct that portion of the road subject to reimbursement. If not available, the applicant shall construct cul de sacs at the industrial road's termini at that property. D. Bike Path - Construct a "Class A" Bike Path along the south embankment of the Whitewater Storm Channel (within the Channel right of way) from Adams Street to Dune Palms Road along the project property line, subject to CVWD approval. E. Parking Lot - The on -site parking lot shall conform with the provisions of the LQMC, General Plan and Zoning Ordinance unless otherwise specified in the Specific Plan. Bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features in the approved plans may warrant additional street widths as deemed necessary by the City Engineer. 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 and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. 39. Culs de sac, knuckle turns and corner cutbacks shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. low G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 40. 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). 41. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, street name signs, and sidewalks. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 42. 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 equivalent to the following: Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" 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" 43. 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. 44. General access points, turning movements of traffic and internal circulation are subject to the following: A. Main Project Entry - On Highway 1 1 1 midway between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road and aligning with the Auto Center's main entry on south side of Highway 1 1 1 - Full turning movements allowed with traffic signal installation. B. Secondary Accesses on Highway 111 - As allowed by Caltrans and approved by the City Engineer. Right-in/right-out only. Minimum spacing of 250 feet between curb returns of any adjacent driveways or streets. 017 GACondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 City staff shall support the applicant's efforts to add a driveway in excess of the CalTrans standard. C. Access Drive on Dune Palms Road - Minimum spacing of 250 feet between the access drive curb return and the Hwy. 1 1 1 curb return. D. Access drives from arterial streets (Highway 1 1 1, Adams Street and Dune Palms Road) shall not have parking spaces taking direct access therefrom and shall not be intersected by a parking aisle or another parking accessway for a minimum distance of 82 feet from the curbface of Highway 1 1 1, and 50 feet from the curbface of Dune Palms Road. E. Industrial Road/Corporate Centre Dr. - Access locations as depicted in the Specific Plan. Access drive geometries shall comply with current City standards and policies. 45. The applicant shall submit an interior circulation plan for review and approval of the City Engineer. The plan shall be drawn to scale and include dimensions, curve data and corner radii for main interior circulation routes. 46. Prior to approval of any final map that subdivides land, or any lot line adjustment that adjusts the size of existing lots with the Specific Plan area, reciprocal access easements shall be provided as necessary to implement the circulation patterns approved by the Specific Plan. The easterly portion of the Specific Plan area shall provide at least two internal access routes within the parking lots leading to the abutting property located to the west which is not a part of this Specific Plan. If the applicant desires to construct an access route to the signal on Highway 1 1 1 at La Quinta Drive, the applicant shall obtain an executed reciprocal access easement and agreement. The location and language of the access easement shall meet the approval of the City Engineer and the City Attorney. The easement provision may include a requirement for the abutting property owners to reimburse the applicant a pro-rata share of the commercially reasonable cost of construction and maintenance of the shared access routes (including signal if applicable). Such provisions shall provide for arbitration of disputes regarding the provision of the agreement. W11 GACondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 LANDSCAPING 47. The applicant shall provide landscaping in required setbacks. 48. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit plans to the Community Development Department. When plans are approved, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner prior to final signing by the City. 49. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18-inches of curbs along public streets. PUBLIC SERVICES 50. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by Sunline Transit and/or the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 51. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 52. 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. 53. 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 and specifications. 54. Upon completion of construction, the applicant. shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all public improvement plans which were signed by the City Engineer. 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. 019 G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 MAINTENANCE 55. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, sidewalks, and drainage outfalls. The applicant shall maintain required public improvements until expressly released from this responsibility by the appropriate public agency. FEES AND DEPOSITS 56. 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 CONDITIONS 57. All water mains and fire hydrants providing required fire flows shall be constructed in accordance with the appropriated sections of CVWD Std. W-33, subject to the approval by the Riverside County Fire Department. 58. All roads need to be a minimum of 20 feet unobstructed width for emergency access. 59. Specific access plans shall be submitted for review. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS 60. Any Site Development Permit applications submitted to the City for review shall substantially conform to the text and exhibits contained in the Specific Plan. The Planning Commission can consider site plan changes to each planning area during review of a developer's project. 61. Any land use or combination of land uses proposed for the Regional Commercial portion of the site shall demonstrate, as part of the Site Development Permit process, that the development standards and square footage for the proposed land use or group of land uses will not exceed the square footage specified on page 3 of the Specific Plan, Section 1.20.2. In addition, any industrial lot developed in Planning Area 1 shall conform to the development standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance. Should a land use or group of land uses exceed the maximum square footage shown on page 3 of the Specific Plan for C,a G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed 0 " Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 commercial uses, or in the Zoning Ordinance for industrial uses, a Specific Plan amendment and associated environmental review shall be required. 62. The maximum square footage proposed for the project shall not exceed 0.35 FAR cumulatively, excluding RV storage site and well site. Each proposed land use, or phase of land uses, shall demonstrate their conformance with the FAR requirement as part of the Site Development Permit process. 63. The two-story portion of the 53,000 square foot office building in Planning Area 4 shall be located a minimum of 150 feet from the Highway 1 1 1 property line. The building height mtay shall be reduced to a maximum of 22 feet in height, to conform with the standards for Primary Image Corridors. 64. Parking for each proposed phase or building of the proposed project shall conform to the City's Zoning standards in effect at the time of Site Development Permit review. Parking requirements shall be reviewed with each Site Development Permit application. Should shared or reduced parking be requested, calculations for same shall conform to the City's formulas and standards, as contained in the Zoning Ordinance. In no case shall parking for the regional commercial center be less than a total of 1,366 spaces, as required in the Specific Plan. 65. Each building or buildings proposed for construction shall be required to pay the school mitigation fee in effect at the time of construction, prior to the issuance of a building permit. 66. Prior to the approval ef the first Site Development Permit, The tenants and property owners shall asseeiation, which will.be responsible for the maintenance of parking areas, interior roadways, sidewalks, landscaping and other common area amenities. through a common association. • •- - - ---- 141111 --- A ALOVERma-W 211 a- am : (Completed) 68. The signage program and associated exhibits shall be modified to reflect the following: A. Sign D shall not exceed 100 sq. ft. in total area. �3 GACondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 B. Sign G shall not exceed 100 sq. ft. in total area. C. Sign F shall not exceed 50 sq. ft. in total area. D. No additional monument signs shall be permitted, except for Industrial Lot users. E. All tenants shall be permitted one wall -mounted sign and one under - canopy sign meeting the regulations of Section 9.160 of the Municipal Code. Only channel lettering building signs are allowed. Individual building tenant signs shall not exceed 50 square feet in overall size, including logo emblems. Exterior building mounted signs shall be limited to first floor level tenants. Businesses located above the first floor level shall be restricted to directory signs placed at main building entries and courtyards. F. Gasoline ID and price signs (one per street frontage), meeting the regulations of Section 9.160 of the Municipal Code. All proposed signs shall be made a part of the Site Development Permit under which the sign will be constructed. All Site Development Permit applications involving signage shall submit an analysis which demonstrates consistency with this Condition of Approval. A Sign Program shall be submitted for any multiple tenant building. Each sign program shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 69. Any area of the site which is graded, but which is not to be developed as part of the phase under construction, shall be turfed to limit blowsand hazard and provide an aesthetically pleasing vista. No building permits will be issued unless compliance with this condition is met. 70. The applicant shall comply with the mitigation measures contained in EA 99- 383 (City Council Resolution 99-110). 71. Drive -through restaurants shall not be open to the public between the hours of 2:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. 72. A development application for the 15.52 acre property (APN: 649-020-006) in the middle of the specific plan area shall necessitate an amendment to the plan, pursuant to General Plan Land Use Program 4.3. 73. Restaurants that have seating for 100 people or more may sell alcoholic beverages to their customers with a State ABC license. 74. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened by roof parapets so that they cannot be viewed from adjacent properties. Prior to occupancy of any G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Conditions of Approval - Recommended Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) - La Quinta Corporate Center May 14, 2002 future building, a visual inspection shall be made from all sides of the building from a distance of 800 feet to confirm that the roof parapets conceal any roof mounted equipment. C-)23 G:\CondSP99036#1 LQCorp2002.wpd/printed PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ARCHITECTURE, LANDSCAPE, SITE, AND LIGHTING PLANS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A MULTIPLE TENANT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL BUILDING, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-734 APPLICANT: SKY WEST CORPORATE CENTRE GROUP LLC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 141h day of May, 2002, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Sky West Corporate Centre Group LLC to approve the architecture, landscape, site, and lighting plans for a two-story building in the Commercial Park (CP) Zone District within Specific Plan 99-036, located approximately 800 feet east of Adams Street and on the north side of Corporate Centre Drive, more particularly described as: Assessors Parcel Numbers: 649-020-056 through -058 Lots 3-5 of Parcel Map 29351 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee, on May 1, 2002, at a regular meeting, recommended approval of the architectural and landscaping plans, subject to conditions; and WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of°The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the Community Development Director has determined this request has been previously assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 99-383, prepared for Specific Plan 99-036, for which a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified by the City Council on September 7, 1999, by Resolution 99-110, and that no changed circumstances, conditions or new information has been provided that would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental assessment pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of said Site Development Permit pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code: Consistency with General Plan. The proposed light industrial office building is in a Commercial Park designated area which encourages uses such as warehousing and storage, office/warehouse, high technology, and automotive repair which is consistent with the policies and goals of Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1). GAResoPC Sdp734SkyWest2002.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Site Development Permit 2002-734 Sky West Corporate Centre Group LLC May 14, 2002 Page 2 Projects in a Commercial Park area shall be developed in a "campus -like" setting which is the overall intent of the master planned 36+ acre development. 2. Consistency/ with Zoning Code. The proposed office building is consistent with the development standards of the Commercial Park (CP) Zoning District, and has been designed to comply with the development standards of Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) with regard to setbacks, building height, exterior lighting, and parking requirements. Future land uses for the proposed building shall be consistent with the land use table contained in SP 99-036 for the Commercial Park District. 3. Architectural Design. The proposed architectural design of the office building is consistent with the adopted design guidelines of Specific Plan 99-036 in that facade elements are staggered and different materials are planned to enhance the architectural style used in adjacent buildings. The proposed atrium entrance compliments the two -wing building complex and enhances the streetscape view of the multistoried structure. Although the building is 32 feet high, being located in the center of Lots 4 and 5 provides a building scale transition to surrounding commercial land uses and to Corporate Centre Drive. Buildings up to 35 feet high are allowed in a Commercial Park District. 4. Site Design. As conditioned, the proposed project site is designed to be consistent with the circulation pattern for Planning Area 1 in Specific Plan 99-036 and complements surrounding commercial land uses. Public access to the proposed office building will be adequate in that vehicular and pedestrian access will be via hardscape surfaces surrounding the building. The proposed project is physically suitable for the 2.25 acre property and only requires two access driveways on Corporate Centre Drive. 5. Landscape Design. As conditioned, the proposed landscape plan is consistent with the landscape guidelines of Specific Plan 99-036 in that the proposed plant list complies with the master plant list and accent treatments for the La Quinta Corporate Centre. A variety of plant materials will provide screening of parking areas and building facades to lessen the impact of the two story building mass. The proposed project would not be disruptive to existing and future commercial uses because site improvements consist of adequate planting areas. 6. Sign Program. As conditioned, the proposed signs for the tenants are consistent with Chapter 9.160 of the Zoning Code and SP 99-036 in that channel lettering is planned. Building signs are non -illuminated and constructed using brass and 02 GAResoPC Sdp734SkyWest2002.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002- Site Development Permit 2002-734 Sky West Corporate Centre Group LLC May 14, 2002 Page 3 copper. A freestanding monument ID signage is allowed pursuant to the guidelines and conditions of La Quinta Corporate Center Specific Plan. 7. Lighting Design. As conditioned, exterior lighting for security is consistent with the City requirements to provide a variety of lighting types with cutoff fixtures ensuring glare is not created. 8. Infrastructure. There are adequate provisions for water, sanitation, and public utilities and services to ensure that the proposed use would not be detrimental to public health and safety, in that the site is in a developed urban area where services 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 Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That the project is in compliance with the provisions and conditions of Specific Plan 99-036 (Amendment #1) and Environmental Assessment 99-383 as designed; and 3. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 2002-734 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 14'" day of May, 2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California 024 GAResoPC Sdp734SkyWest2002.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2002-_ Site Development Permit 2002-734 Sky West Corporate Centre Group LLC May 14, 2002 Page 4 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California C�'7 GAResoPC Sdp734SkyWest2002.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2002-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2002-734 SKY WEST CORPORATE CENTRE GROUP LLC MAY 14, 2002 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 Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to the issuance of any permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain the necessary permits and/or clearances from the following agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting the improvement plans for City approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS 3. Prior to the issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire, or confer, those easements, and other property rights necessary for the construction and/or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services, and for the maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. 4. The applicant shall offer for dedication all public street right-of-ways in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and/or as required by the City Engineer. GAcondSDP734 SkyWest.wpd/greg Printed May 7, 2002 Page 1 of 9 5. Unless the ultimate developed right-of-way can be documented, the public street right- of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: A. PUBLIC STREETS 1) NONE - ALL DEDICATIONS HAVE BEEN MADE 6. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public right-of-ways as follows: A. NONE - 10' PERIMETER LANDSCAPE SETBACKS ALONG CORPORATE CENTER DRIVE HAVE BEEN MADE 7. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas shown on the Site Development Permit. 8. The applicant shall vacate all abutter's right -of -access to public streets and properties from all frontages along such public streets and properties, excepting those access points shown on the Site Development Permit. 9. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, ingress/egress, or other encroachments will occur. 10. When an applicant proposes the vacation, or abandonment, any existing right-of-way, or access easement, which will diminish the access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide an alternate right-of-way or access easement, to those properties, or shall submit notarized letters of consent from the affected property owners. 1 1 . The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any portion of the subject property between the date of approval of this Site Development Permit and the date of final acceptance of the on and off -site improvements for this Site Development Permit, unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer. 12. The applicant shall prepare and process a Parcel Merger application and supporting documents to merge Parcels 3, 4 and 5. No building permits shall be issued until such parcel merger is recorded. 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. (i:\condSDP734 SkyWestmpd/greg Printed May 7, 2002 Page 2 of 9 13. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans), LQMC. 14. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the City. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. Perimeter Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' Horizontal B. Site Development Plans: 1 " = 30' Horizontal C. On -Site Utility Plan: 1 " = 40' Horizontal D. On -Site Landscape Plan: 1 " = 20' Horizontal The plans shall be submitted a minimum of 8 to 10 weeks prior to the issuance of construction permits to allow adequate time for plan check and revisions. Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. "Site Development" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements; and show the existing street improvements out to at least the center lines of adjacent existing streets. "Site Utility" plans shall normally include all sub -surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to sewer lines, water lines, fire protection and storm drainage systems. 15. The City maintains standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee, established by City resolution, the applicant may purchase such standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes from the City. 16. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the AutoCAD files of all complete, approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall be saved in a standard AutoCAD format so they may be fully retrievable through a basic AutoCAD program. At the completion of construction, and prior to the final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall update the AutoCAD files in order to reflect the as -built conditions. G:\eondSDP734 SkyWest.wpd/greg Printed May 7, 2002 Page 3 of 9 Where the improvement plans were not produced in a standard AutoCAD format, or a file format which can be converted to an AutoCAD format, the City Engineer will accept raster -image files of the plans. GRADING 17. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements), LQMC. 18. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 19. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer or architect, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, and C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16 (Fugitive Dust Control), LQMC. All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions submitted with its application for a grading permit. 20. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 21. 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. 22. Building pad elevations shall be consistent with the mass grading elevations as shown on the approved mass grading plans for PM 29351. 23. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad G:\condSDP734 SkyWest.wpd/greg Printed May 7, 2002 Page 4 of 9 certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 24. "Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for The La Quinta Corporate Centre. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner." The existing storm drain located between Parcels 4 and 5 shall be relocated to be outside the proposed building envelope in an acceptable manner. The existing easement shall be vacated and new easement(s) dedicated for the new storm drain alignment. The new connection to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel will require CVWD approval and permits. 25. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. 26. When an applicant proposes discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program, and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such discharge. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative parcel map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make provisions in the final development CC&Rs for meeting these potential obligations. UTILITIES 27. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.1 10 (Utilities), LQMC. 28. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all aboveground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 29. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. G:\condSDP734 SkyWestmpd/greg Printed May 7, 2002 Page 5 of 9 The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 30. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 (Parking). Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by the City Engineer. 31. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the following: A. Primary Entries Two (2) entries from Corporate Centre Drive are allowable as shown on the site development site plan. Both entries will have full turning movements. 32. Pursuant to Section 9.150.080(A)(8)(b) (Parking), LQMC, the applicant shall provide 30-foot uninterrupted driveway throats into the parking lot, or alternatively provide a combination of a dedicated right turn deceleration lane and the drive throat that will equal a total of 30-feet. CONSTRUCTION 33. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphaltic concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include the test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include the most recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that the design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs have been approved. 34. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPING 35. The applicant shall comply with Sections 9.90.040 (Table of Development Standards) & 9.100.040 (Landscaping), LQMC. G:\condSDP734 SkyWest.wpd/greg Printed May 7, 2002 Page 6 of 9 36. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks. 37. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Community Development Department (CDD), prior to plan checking by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by CDD, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the City Engineer. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the City Engineer. 38. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 18 inches of curbs along public streets. 39. Only incidental storm water will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to Section 9.100.040(B)(7), LQMC. 40. The landscaping plan shall indicate the following design elements: A. The trees used throughout the site shall be eight to ten feet in height with a minimum container size of 24" box and a minimum trunk caliper size of 1 .5-inch per SP 99-036. B. A dense hedge of five gallon shrubs shall be planted in front of the first row of parking stalls on the south side of the project, and within planter islands. C. Granite rock boulders shall be placed randomly along frontage of the site. D. Perimeter walls shall be partially covered with vines planted every fourth parking stall in lieu of shrubs being installed in the small planters. Decomposed granite or small sized gravel shall be used for groundcover of these planter areas, subject to final approval by the Community Development Department. QUALITY ASSURANCE 41. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures that meet with the approval of the City Engineer. 42. The applicant shall employ, or retain, qualified engineers, surveyors, and such of other appropriate professionals as are required to provide the expertise with which to prepare and sign accurate record drawings, and to provide adequate construction supervision. (i:\condS[)P734 SkyWest.wpd/greg Printed May 9, 2002 Page 7 of 9 MAINTENANCE 43. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance), LQMC. 44. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 45. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits), LQMC. These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. FIRE DEPARTMENT Conditions are subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve (12) months. Final conditions will be addressed when architectural building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding the meaning of the Fire Department conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. 46. Approved super fire hydrants, shall be located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along vehicular travel ways. 47. Blue dot reflectors shall be placed in the street 8-inches from centerline of the side that the fire hydrant is on, identify the fire hydrant locations. 48. Minimum fire flow of 2,000 g.p.m. for a four-hour duration. Fire flow is based on type VN construction and a complete fire sprinkler system. 49. Building plans shall be submitted to the Fire Department for plan review to run concurrent with the City plan check. 50. Water plans for the fire protection system (fire hydrants, etc.) shall be submitted to the Fire Department for approval prior to issuance of a building permit. 51. 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. 52. Any operation that produces grease-ladden vapors will require a hood/duct system for fire protection. G:\condSDP734 SkyWest.wpd/greg Printed May 7, 2002 Page 8 of 9 53. The required water system, including fire hydrants, shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on the site. 54. The 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. 55. Install a Knox key lock box on each building. Plans must be submitted to the Fire Department for approval of mounting location/position and operating standards. 56. Install portable fire extinguishers as required by the California Fire Code. MISCELLANEOUS 57. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 58. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the following items shall be taken care of: A. The final exterior lighting plan shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval that includes specific details of the fixtures for the landscape lighting and exterior security lighting, including photometric drawings. Pole mounted lighting shall be adequately shielded to prevent glare from being cast onto adjacent properties and placed so that tree growth does not interfere with the lighting needs of the site. B. Americans with Disabilities Act provisions shall be met, including providing an accessible path of travel from the building entrance to public sidewalks. C. All roof mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened by roof parapets so that they cannot be viewed from adjacent properties. Prior to occupancy of the proposed building complex, a visual inspection shall be made by the Community Development Department from all sides of the building from a distance of 800 feet to confirm that the parapets conceal any roof mounted equipment. D. Weather resistant materials shall be used to construct carport structures (e.g., metal, glu-lams or para-lams, etc.). 59. Minor amendments to the plans shall be approved by the Community Development Director. Major changes to the overall design of the development shall required Planning Commission review. 60. The building address shall be placed on the freestanding monument sign. 61. In the event that the permittee violates or fails to comply with any of the Conditions of Approval of this permit, no further permits, licenses, approvals, certificates of occupancy shall be issued until such violation has been fully remedied. ci:\condSDP734 SkyWest.wpd/greg Printed May 7, 2002 Page 9 of 9 ATTACHMENTS [ 'd ''S $ '1 '6Z NOLLQ�S sere-sas rre V rwu-aas taw a ruo-saasa rtvumm sxasa XWd fog arms 'A rroenn umde►i 7 '" Bld olpood$ 6}8.lod.l0c),8;UIno 8, DWAR ans arm / oWNZMora ILW / a'xwmr " -lar' --�50 } I C-3 'OM SILYIOOSSY amY HJJNS 'OXHINft % Attachment 1 s s i 0 a won SKYWEST CORPORATE CENTRE GROUP LLC 3550 WEST 6T" STREET, SUITE 400 LOS ANGELES, CA 90020 April 16, 2002 City of La Quinta Attn: Greg Trousdell 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253-1504 Attachment 2 EC E WE V� APR 16 2002 Ref: Parcels 3,4, & 5, Corporate Centre Drive; #2002-734 Dear Mr. Trousdell, Pursuant to your comments in the March 20, 2002 letter, item 13 page 3, regarding Site Development Permit 2002-734, Skywest Corporate Centre Group LLC is requesting a Specific Plan Amendment for the proposed 34,303 Sq. Ft. Professional Office Building. According to table 801- " Permitted uses in a non-residential districts for a CP area", we are requesting the following additional uses for our proposed project: a. General and Professional Offices b. Medical offices --physicians, dentists, optometrists, chiropractors, and similar practitioners. C. A site monument sign; 4'0' High X 12'0' Long at Entrance. These additional uses would enhance the surrounding area and compliment the adjacent property owners. We appreciate your review of the proposed project and will provide to you any additional information that may be needed prior to the hearing date. Respectfully submitted, Ro ert Wood • Construction Manager; Skywest Corporate Centre Group SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA Q(1INTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Attachment 3 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner SECTION 1 - SUMMARY 1.10 - PURPOSE The purpose of this The La Quinta Corporate Centre Specific Plan is to set forth the detailed development principles, guidelines, and programs to facilitate the development of a 36-acre site located on the south north side of Highway 111 between Adams Street and Dune Palms Road. This Specific Plan is intended to meet the requirements for a Specific Plan as set forth in State law. The State of California authorizes cities and counties to adopt Specific Plans as an appropriate tool in implementing their General Plans. Such a plan is to include the detailed regulations, conditions, programs, and any proposed legislation that is necessary for the systematic implementation of the General Plan. The Specific Plan provides the linkage between the General Plan, the general goals and policies of the City, and the detailed implementation of that plan with tools such as Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances, and the like. The Government Code Section 65451 sets forth the minimum requirements of a Specific Plan and states: "A Specific Plan shall include a text and diagram or diagrams which specify all of the following in detail: 1). The distribution, location, and extent of the uses of land, including open space, within the area covered by the plan. 2). The proposed distribution, location and extent and intensity of major components of public and private transportation, sewage, water, drainage, solid waste disposal, energy, and other essential facilities proposed to be located within the area covered by the plan and needed to support the land uses described by the plan. 3). Standards and criteria by which development will proceed, and standards for the conservation, development, and utilization of natural resources, where applicable. 4). A program of implementation measures including regulations, programs, public works projects, and financing measures necessary to carry out paragraphs (1), (2), and (3)." The Specific Plan shall include a statement of the relationship of the specific plan to the General Plan. The establishment of specific performance, design, and development standards is set forth to guide the development of the subject property in such a way as to implement the General Plan while maintaining some flexibility to respond to changing conditions which may be a factor in any long term development program. The document also acts to augment the City's Zoning Ordinance by providing particular design guidelines, a tailored list of allowable, conditionally allowable, and prohibited uses for the site, and unique development standards. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 1 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA UINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 1.20 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.20.1 - The Land The La Quinta Corporate Centre is a proposed mixed commercial development on 36 acres of property located Stfeet approximately 330 feet east of Adams Street and north of Highway 111 within the City of La Quinta. The property is delineated by the City's General Plan as Commercial Park and Mixed/Regional Commercial and is Zoned Regional Commercial (CR) with a Non -Residential Overlay. This Zoning type allows a wide range Of adopted Zoning eFdinenee (Appendix The site is vacant except for newly constructed buildings in Planning Area 1 and 4. and exhitill." Elf acte-is ties of thile stabilized sand dune ffffn8tiOMS found in this peft of the Goachelle Valley. The site is " L­` has some dune fffffl8tiOMS With an elevational diffmnee of up to et Areas of the site have been mass graded thereby removing large changes in grade elevations across the various parcels. Preliminary pad heights for future building have been established based on plans approved by the La Quinta Public Works Department. The site has nearly 1,700 feet of frontage on Highway 111 and comes within 330 feet of Adams Street on the west side and abuts Dune Palms Road on the east side. Property to the south, across Highway 111, is either involved with however the La Quinta Auto Mall Specific Plan (Specific Plan 97-034) has been approved an the s , or vacant. Property to the west is currently vacant but a hotel and restaurant complex development has been approved for the site under Specific Plan 98-033. The property to the north, across the CVWD flood control channel is the La Quinta High School. To the west, abutting the site is a small self -storage facility of 3.96 acres. Further to the west across Adams Street is the Wal-Mart Center (Specific Plan 89-014, One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center). The Home Depot Center (Specific Plan No. 96-027, Jefferson Plaza) is located to the east of the site by approximately 1,200 feet. The project site is shown on the aerial photograph in Exhibit 2. Commercial and business park use of the subject site was analyzed in the City's General Plan EIR that was approved in 1992, and updated on March 20, 2002. The Natural Resources Element of the General Plan identified the subject property as being potential habitat to the Coachella Valley Fringed Toed Lizard and within the approved Habitat Fee area. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 2 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 1.20.1 a - The Ownership There are fide 16 underlying parcels. The following individuals own or have eont"4-of Exhibit 1 indicates the existing parcel configuration in 1999 and Exhibit 7 the proposed existing parcel configuration. 1.20.2 - The Project The La Quinta Corporate Centre is a multi -phased multi -use complex. The property location is one of prominence for the City of La Quinta and as such the development ideas and standards will complement the City's image as the Gem of the Desert. The multi -use retail center will contain a variety of uses, the summary of proposed regional commercial uses and building sizes, totaling 332,400 square feet, is as follows: Proposed Built Multi -tenant industrial/office users - 91,600 square feet 47,000 sq. ft. Retail floor area - 79,300 square feet 0 sq. ft. Mid -rise office building - 113,000 square feet 0 sq. ft. Financial space - 6,500 square feet 0 sq. ft. Fitness center - 30,000 square feet See below Service station - 2,000 square foot (approximate) See below The following uses are a part of the overall site development but are not included in the retail/office calculations: 1. One gasoline service station (2,940 sq. ft. USA Petroleum on 1.3 acres) 2. Nine industrial lots on 6+ acres (15,500 sq. ft. World Gym on 1.2 acres; and proposed Sky West project on 2.25 acres) 3. One self and RV storage facility (99,976 sq. ft. Storage USA on 3.8 acres) 4. One CVWD well site Special Note: See Condition of Approval # 61 Exhibit 5 depicts the conceptual site plan for the proposed development. The La Quinta Corporate Centre will be integrated through reciprocal access easements for access and parking with the adjacent developments, including the recently approved Hotel One -Eleven Specific Plan, which is directly west of the site and the Oppl`Oxifflately site. The allowable, conditionally allowable, and prohibited uses shall be generally as set forth in the Zoning Code regulations, the modifications are noted in Section 2.60.2.1. A separate property owners association will maintain the common area improvements. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 3 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner The main site access will be from Highway 111 at La Quinta Centre Drive. The entrance, which will be signalized, will include landscaping, center identification including a water feature within the setback area but outside of the public right of way. Two minor driveways are also located on Highway 111. The project will be phased to suit market conditions with on and off site improvements phased to accommodate the demands of each proposed stage of development. The improvements will be completed prior to the occupancy of any building within that phase. Highway 111 improvements may be phased. The phasing will depend on the development schedule and will be coordinated with CalTrans. Additional information on phasing can be found in Section 2.20. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 4 '�3 L 'H "S S '-L '6Z NOLLOaS u81d Ol,UOOdS GAWOO a}BaOd.JOC) 8}ulnp 8-I ddW S,HOSS�3SSV eeaz-M xrd / rigs -oar (Dul YNDNdym PVAP-SS3JE 7NSOAM SDNIDdS RIYd rob EMS ''AYr MOdAl1'J FJM N►d S Z" DM.UMS DN97 / DNldl$9N(DNS 7WJ / DMNNYld 'ONI S3.LVIOOSSy QNV ILLINS '02flfAr'f L Pq!L4X--3 co W J� OIL F-0 0co (� W W Z I 0 0d: 1n- ■' t a N<< t t U t t<< i<<< N qL 41, n'r. J� 1 . ..... ,qp xumtv, .41 A 1 Ao SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 1.20.3 - THE PROCESS 1.20.3.1 - Relationship to the General Plan Implementation of development within The La Quinta Corporate Centre Specific Plan area is intended to carry out the goals and policies contained in the General Plan of the City of La Quinta in a planned and orderly fashion. All development within The La Quinta Corporate Centre Specific Plan shall be consistent with the provisions of the La Quinta General Plan. The Land Use Map of the General Plan for the site is shown in Exhibit 3. The project relationship to General Plan policies and objectives is located in Appendix One. More specifically the main Elements of the General Plan, which will be implemented upon the development of The La Quinta Corporate Centre, are: • Land Use - The General Plan delineates the Highway 111 corridor for Mixed/Regional Commercial (M/RC) land uses. A portion of the site adjacent to the storm channel is designated Commercial Park (CP). The proposed project is consistent with the approved general plan designations. use plam assigns a ROOF Ame Ratio (FAR) for the regiamal commercial poFti of the project at 0.31, whieh is below the 9.35 FAR listed fOF WRG uses On the A Floor Area Ratio (FAR) of 0.35 is required within the specific plan area. • Circulation - The Circulation Element of the General Plan outlines the design and location of required street improvements to complete the transportation system in the City. The La Quinta Corporate Centre will complete portions of two important links in the City's circulation network, Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road. Included in the improvements will be sidewalks, bicycle links, bus stops, and signal improvements. In addition to the roadway improvements, the project site has frontage on two designated image corridors; a Primary Image Corridor along Highway 111 and a Secondary Image Corridor on Dune Palms. Compliance with these special roadway corridors improvements will complement and evoke the unique identity and character sought by the City of La Quinta. • Environmental Conservation - The Specific Plan outlines the use of drought tolerant planting and irrigation techniques to further the City's policies of water efficient landscaping and preservation of the water quality through best management practices for surface water containment. The plan will also include the development of roadways, water, sewer and flood control improvements. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 7 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 1.20.3.2 - Relationship to Zoning and Development Process The property is already properly planned and zoned for most of the uses projected for the site. Exhibit 4 depicts the Zoning designations on the site and the surrounding parcels. The City of La Quinta requires a Specific Plan to establish an overall master development plan in the circumstance of the CR Zoning classification. Fellewitethe ----r----- -- ---- -r--...- . .-...., - . .... ..... 1.1-V ..- -- Nivvv.�o�u lV uC-il�, III LTTri iffiPleffleMtEltiMpfeeeSA Individual development applications will be processed under normal City requirements at the time of the application for Site Development Permits (architecture, landscape architecture, signage, final grading, etc.) as well as any special provisions authorized pursuant to this Specific Plan. The Planning Commission can consider site plan changes to each planning area during review of a developer's project. Those uses that may require Conditional Use Permits as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance of the City of La Quinta shall submit such an application unless otherwise modified within the Plan. Such conditional uses could include mixed use commercial and residential, wholesaling, vocational schools, bars and taverns, among others. - ; ;!PLMLWIMWJML.�MOANILWI.M&1-1@LW SIN - -- •i - - . - Iq.IJL- -- - ; -- ConditionIS IS paFeelibuilding she!' eanform to the one huMdFed fifty(150) setback. Deleted by .. 1.20.3.4 - Relationship to Other Agencies In addition to City approvals, permits will be required by CalTrans for the work along Highway 111, and by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) for moderate extensions to water and sewer lines as well as levee improvements. Other GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 8 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner infrastructure extensions will be required by the Imperial Irrigation District (electrical power), General Telephone Gampan Verizon Communications for telephone service and Medieene AOL Time Warner for cable TV service. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 9 EXHIBIT 3 City ®f La Quinta General Plan Adopted: March 2002 a Roads — - - - Township/Range Sections �- �— Railroads City Limits ®m a Planning Area #1 n sm mme Planning Area #2 ® ® o City Sphere of Influence Residential Land Uses 0 VLDR Very Low Density rep to 2 dulac LDR Low Density up to 4 dulac MDR Medium Density up to a dulac MHDR Medium -High Density up to 12 dulac HDR High Density up to 16 dulac 0 Hillside Overlay ® Agriculture Overlay Other Land Uses 1 Indusblal/Light manufacturing MC Major Community Facilities P Park Facilities OS Open Space G Golf Course Open Space W %%tencourse/Fkmd Control P Floating Park Designation Z\— North SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE SUM Exhibit 4 - Zoning Map '?.0c z LEGEND RESIDENTIAL I F -Ll Very Low Density Residential OIL] Low Density Residential ItC Cove Residential I R—M l Medium Density Residential Al s Medium High Density Residential High Density Residential VILLAGE DISTRICT _I Village Core NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS - Regional Commercial i_ e Community Commercial CN Neighborhood Commercial *I Tourist Commercial Office Commercial MC Major Community Facilities Commercial Park SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS 1PR Parks and Recreation -.. ----' §�] Golf Course F1 Open Space D Floodplain OVERLAY DISTRICTS i Hillside Conservation Overlay E_l Nonresidential Overlay _- Equestrian Overlay Special Zoning Symbols 0-A � sa.0 ap am ax as as ar MAI MRO, SMrM AND ASSOCIATES, INC. Pknningl MY Enghreerbtg/Land Surwying 777 East Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 301, Palm Springs, California 92262-6784 Telephone (760) 320-9811 / FAX (760) 323-7893 / e-mail MSAcelps@aol.com sees -sae rri / rrea car exc a sea: 'M L 14 "S S. '1 '6Z NOLLOaS reca-acaaa 7waroam xawa r*a ui8ld oipoed S ea;uaC) ejsjodro� Biuinp e-I IOs aunr AVA NOAAW EiLtD27, 1, OMAaea(ra dM / 007aMDJO 'nw / aXUMVU I G=f 4- 1 n 'OKI 'SB.LYIOOSSY ONY H.LIHS '09HIh7t7T w t = 'S L '!! S S '.l `6Z NOLLO=-38 sae<-sss ne / life-= loos/ ZAW.U= '814:DUlOOdS A}BJOCIJOO E}ulnp te, wsa-ague maromr� AMMVt T 4 !aC ±A!/eS JYA R Ar Z%MGMd 7 AA1 s 8 a . ,� aMASAMnS aM7 / OM7=Ama TAM / DMMMd �' d ONI sy-IYIJOSSY ativ Iaums 'OUSUMY 9 I!q!yx=l co W 0 e J ZQaZW�Q$Q�j[QQ mLLO221 ` w = _ _ _ = a = _ _ _ _ _ w = = _ ._ SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Exhibit 7 - Proposed Existing Parcels AS PREPARED FOR ASSESSN:NT PURPOSES ONLY. NO LIABILITY FOR THE ACCURACY OF TH: DATA SHOWN. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL YPLY WITH LOCAL LOT -SPLIT OR BUILDING SITE ORDINANCES. 604 46 r I — DATA: RS 8/I4, RS IS//13, CYCND R/W R5 1/92, RS 9/48, RS 14/43, R5 51/91 SEC.29 T.5S.,R.7E CITY OF LA QU I NTA 604 O6 14 GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 14 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner SECTION H - SPECIFIC PLAN 2.10- PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.10.1 -The Site The site is 36 +/- net acres, comprising five various parcels under two separate ownerships, located adjacent to the northeast corner of Highway 111 and Adams Street within the City of La Quinta. The site is virtually paFtially vaeant with only an abandon structum located at the southeasteffl portion of the sate. This StFUCttlFe, whieh was Fnest Planning A c r e s/ S q u a r e Goneeptuat Base Zoning Proposed Uses Area Footage FAR PA 1 12.22 acres .35 Commercial auto body & 532,303 sq. ft. except the Park services, RV & storage self storage, facility (.50) hardware & supply, fitness center, general office, limited medical PA 2 7.30 acres -.25 .35 Mixed/Regional general retail, 317,988 sq. ft. Commercial food service, support service & financial PA 3 3.00 acres 45 .35 Mixed/Regional general office 130,680 sq. ft. Commercial PA 4 11.41 acres -.9 .35 Mixed/Regional general office 144,600 sq. ft. Commercial 2.10.2 - Site Plan The site plan will feature extensive and coordinated landscape buffers to both Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road. These buffers and the significant building setbacks will GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 15 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner complement the City's planning efforts to unify the Highway 111 streetscape. The Plan will provide for integrated architecture, landscape architecture and signage concepts as well as cooperation with the adjacent parcels for internal circulation and shared access. The building footprints and land uses indicated should be considered as a concept. The Plan contains a summary of permitted land uses and the precise location and land use type will be determined during the individual site development review. The intensity of the proposed plan is anticipated to be less than the approved General Plan allowance for the site. -- - -- -: - -IMPAM »rairi��:=.limit:��:�:�i+i.�ri:.LI ' • - - _.._ .�... ....� . .. _�_ . �..�_ .. _... .�.. .... .... .. ... ...... ..... . ... ..... .. .....,y..,. .�,. ....... u � w� vow Planning Areas will not exeeed .35 . The breakdown of the conceptual floor area ratio (FAR) by Planning Area is as follows: PA 1 (Industrial Lots) 12.22 acres - .35 FAR p mpmsed* 532,303 sq. ft. land area** 186,306 sq. ft. floor area (possible) *except for the self -storage, which is proposed at .50 FAR **Well site not included PA 2 (Regional' Commercial) 7.30 acres - .25.35 FAR proposed 317,988 sq. ft. land area 79,300 111,295 sq. ft. floor area PA 3 (Regional Commercial/Office) 3.00 acres - .45.35 FAR proposed 130,680 sq. ft. of land area 60,000 45,738 sq. ft. of floor area PA 4 (Regional Commercial) 11.41 acres - .29.35 FAR proposed 497,020 sq. ft. of land area 144,500173,956 sq. ft. of floor area `ut\i1g��..f■LL�\������► i- 1�.J`L�1'1'I�I�J �►1lt�l��l�\i p7\a4.1�:[:/►�i�f�l�- ---- O- IeweFFfl The project, on a cumulative basis, shall not exceed 0.35 FAR, pursuant to Condition #62 of City Council Resolution 99-111. The Planning Commission can consider site plan changes to each planning area during review of developer's project. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 16 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 2.10.3 - Landscape Plan The landscape concept follows a "desert oasis" theme emphasizing water efficient materials exhibiting color and form and a minimal use of turf areas. The main entry area on Highway 111 will incorporate water features into the landscaped setback but not within the public right of way. The property owners association will maintain this feature. Parking areas in the center will feature the concept of a high canopy tree form to reduce the conflict between landscape elements and project graphics. The on -site storm water drainage will be directed to the adjacent storm channel. The landscape pattern will also incorporate pedestrian friendly access to encourage movement to the different uses within the site. 2.10.4 - Utilities Utility extensions will be moderate with most utilities existing at the perimeter of the site. Some upgrades will be required by the individual utilities. The timing of Highway 111 improvements will be at the discretion of CalTrans working with the City Public Works Department. Section 2.50 delineates the necessary utility improvements. 2.10.5 - Art in Public Places The requirement for Art in Public Places will be satisfied in accordance with Chapter 2.65 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2.20 - PHASING 2.20.1 - Phasing Description As currently scheduled, the project will probably be constructed in multiple phases. Each phase will contain building pads and perimeter improvements as well as any necessary internal circulation improvements. Because of the concerns usually raised about phased development and the undesirability of public improvements being unfinished, the improvements necessary for each phase to stand alone will be completed prior to the occupancy of any building within that phase. The 1 fighway 111 frontage is also likely to be phased. Build -out will occur over time as the pad areas are leased and site development plans are approved. The initial phase of development will contain the westerly portion of the main on -site circulation improvements, lighting, and infrastructure as well as perimeter improvements such as walls perimeter landscaping, and signs. The site will be rough graded in phases and finish grades will be established after approval of the site development plans for each phase. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 17 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Phased off -site improvements will include the frontage of Highway 111 (curb/gutter, landscaped parkway, median and infrastructure extensions), Adams Street (curb/gutter, landscaped median, landscaped parkway and infrastructure extensions), and the frontage along Dune Palms Road (curb/gutter, landscaped parkway and necessary infrastructure extensions). 2.20.2 - Infrastructure Phasing The infrastructure development will include the frontage of Highway 111 (curb/gutter, landscaped parkway, and necessary infrastructure extensions) and the frontage of Dune Palms Road (curb/gutter, landscaped parkway, and infrastructure extensions). Utilities will be extended to the site as necessary. The improvements will be phased according to the on site development. Any necessary encroachment permits will be obtained. Exhibits 8, 9 and 10 depict the location and scope of infrastructure improvements. 2.30 - Grading 2.30.1 - Grading Plan Portions of the site may be mass graded as a part of the initial site preparation to accommodate the phased development of the site and the internal road system. The rough pads will be established within each phase for the various end -users and related commercial or industrial sites. Grading easement or permission to grade will be secured if grading on adjacent properties is necessary to accommodate a particular phase. It is estimated that the grading operation will move approximately 200,000 cubic yards (raw cut) and 140,000 cubic yards (raw fill). Due to shrinkage and phasing it is anticipated that there will be a balance of soil on the site. Exhibit 11 depicts the rough grading and drainage concept for the property. 2.30.2 - Erosion Control The project will comply with the City's erosion control ordinance. The grading operations shall include adequate provisions for wind and water erosion control during as well as after grading operations have ceased. This will include treatment of the pad sites that may remain undeveloped. The details of erosion control shall be included in the project's Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and PM 10 Plan. Pre -Grading: The portions of the site to be graded shall be pre -watered to a depth of three feet prior to the onset of grading operations. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 18 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner During Grading: Once grading has commenced, and until grading has been completed, watering of the site and/or other treatment(s) determined to be appropriate shall be ongoing. Post Grading: All disturbed areas shall be treated to prevent erosion for the term that the area will remain undeveloped. Wherever feasible, final landscape and irrigation shall be installed. 2.30.3 - SWPPP/NPDES/PM 10 Since the Coachella Valley experiences periods of moderate to heavy wind' conditions, wind-blown dust and sand is a concern with mass grading operations, especially for those sites in excess of five acres. Because of health concerns, the Environmental Protection Agency has instituted a plan in the valley to curb excess PM 10 (small particle dust). The City also participates in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System program. The grading concept for the project will involve mass grading the entire site and fine grading of the first phase of construction. The City of La Quinta requires SWPPP, NPDES and PM 10 plans to control the wind and water born erosion associated with such grading operations. The project will comply with the City's requirements relative to these programs. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 19 Z Id "S S '. L `6Z NOLLOBS ORA-= ire / rrea-oas ) aeros�ae Ma-aeaae rreaaRM soeauds Mra 31al of;loedg eJ;ueo ajsJod.JoC:> 'e}ulnp 9-1 roe Suns xrr xowro zuneam a Au o"Marrrs am" / oNrav mm" mw / OMAwnr usld aOIA-JGS -40Mas •gym svzvroossv avv Hjjjrs •oxaLvrw ,r-% 71."11 ■%O w:: w_= s w w w t t s t t t w t `6Z NOLLOE3S sass-cas sr� / rrae-oas Pose! arms"" reel-ZMZSB VZANa lrp SJMBdS A7Yd �'Bld a!;l�adg a d;uap a;�ajod�op -B;ump 8-! rss AMS 'arr MOAM'J Wnear,L a ue DNrAZMS QM7 / OMSl8MDV8 7W.7 / BMNM M UB'd ;901Ar ;9S ,.. 0118M 'ONI `SS.LVIOOSSY QNV HUMS 'OM91,VIYM 6 PCl! L4X=4 s w Q< t w< t w t w< t NEW t '6Z NOLLOaB roes -sac nd / rim-= 1RLY-E8M81 17NdfQ01IJ dS Rlldalk IBlpj olioedg a}9.JOdJoC:> E}UInQ e-1 1O8 AUW 'r'A N LM Z'a'&ff'j S AM enacMM OM / a =WaW Wo / OMYNrrd SU01}03$ 880jo *6puv j PUB }Q04 ma samoossv vnrr Hims 'ovfrwm wl V OL I!q!L4X=-1 B c = m m w m w It t w w w t w w ff SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 2.40 - DRAINAGE/FLOOD CONTROL 2.40.1 - Hydrology The majority of the site lies in flood Zone C according to the FIRM maps. The easterly portion is designated Zone B. Zone C includes areas that are not considered to be subject to flooding during a 500-year event. Zone B areas have the potential to flood during a 100-year event and the FEMA regulations require that the building pad elevations be raised one foot above the base flood elevation. The adjacent channel will be lined per the standards of CVWD. This improvement will remove potential flood hazard from the site. There are no tributary flows that have to be accommodated in the development of the site. 2.40.2 - Flood Control Master Plan The stormwater drainage system in the City of La Quinta is administered by the CVWD. Generally speaking, the system consists of improvements to the natural drainage channels that run through the City. The development of property will include provisions to conduct stormwater into these channels. The City or CVWD requires no drainage fees, however, as stated above improvements will be required to line the adjacent flood channel. 2.40.3 - On -Site Stormwater Retention Due to the site's location adjacent to the stormwater channel, no on -site retention will be required. Stormwater will be conducted directly to the channel. 2.40.3.1 - Nuisance Water Nuisance water attributed to the project will be collected and directed to areas within the landscape. A series of dry wells will be installed to percolate this water. The amount of nuisance water is expected to be reduced due to the use of water efficient landscape and irrigation materials. 2.50 - UTILITIES The La Quinta Corporate Centre is well served by utilities and is situated in a corridor planned for a relatively intense scope of commercial development. Some minor utility extensions are anticipated in conjunction with the project. During the research investigation for development of this Specific Plan, Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) was contacted. The District has indicated that there is sufficient capacity in G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 23 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner the utilities to accommodate the project and the needs of the immediate users in the area for both water and sanitary sewer. 2.50.1 - Sewer Plan Sanitary sewer facilities for La Quinta are provided by CVWD. The nearest main is an existing 18-inch line located westerly of the site in Adams Street. Another main, 15" in size is located approximately 1,800 feet east of the site. To the extent feasible, the flows from the site wile gravity flow to the main in Adams Street. No up -sizing of this facility will be required. In the event that the flow cannot be directed to the existing line in Adams Street (because of elevation differences), an extension of the line located easterly of the site will be required. The lack of contiguous parcel ownership may create a delay in serving the three most northeasterly parcels of Planning Area One. These are industrial lots that will be offered for sale and individual development. The timing of their development will be dependent on the easterly parcel developing and extending the sewer line to reach the site. As an alternative, an easement through the adjacent parcel for the extension of the sewer line could be obtained. If adjacent development (across Dune Palms Road) will be utilizing this easterly main, up -sizing to an 18" line may be necessary. Exhibit 8 shows the schematic design for sewer facilities. 2.50.2 - Water Plan Water service for La Quinta is provided by CVWD. Existing water service is provided via three mains: a 12" main located on the south side of Highway 111, an 18" line in Dune Palms Road and an 18" main in Adams Street. CVWD will require an 18" main that connects the Adams Street main to the main located in Dune Palms Road. So that there will be no disruption to circulation on Highway 111 this connection will be made in the proposed public street that traverses the northerly portion of the site. An on -site loop system will be created to maintain adequate levels of service and to meet fire flows demands. Exhibit 9 shows the schematic design for water service. 2.50.3 - Electrical Plan The Imperial Irrigation District provides electric facilities in La Quinta. The nearest service location is on Dune Palms Road, north of the Whitewater River Channel. The District indicates that the design of the electrical service will depend on final load calculations for the overall project. The District will require the installation of underground facilities through the center to join with future projects to the east. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 24 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 2.50.4 - Other Utilities The Southern California Gas Company provides natural gas services. The nearest service is a three-inch gas line approximately 35'-0" west of the centerline along Adams Street. The line ends approximately 18 feet south of the CVWD flood control channel. A four -inch gas main is located approximately 75 feet north of the centerline of Highway 111 and ends approximately 48 feet into the site. These lines will be used to provide service to the site. AOL Time Warner Med4 At e, with the nearest facilities located in Highway 111, provides television cable service. Service will be extended to the site from this point of connection. Verizon Communications General Telephone Gampan will provide telephone service. Fiberoptic cable will be available at the corner of 48' Avenue and Adams Street. Verizon Communications G-TE expects to serve the project from this location. Waste Management of the Desert provides waste disposal service. Plans for incorporating recycling facilities shall be considered with the development. Community Development Staff upon submission of Site Development Plans shall review facilities for compliance with City ordinances. 2.60 - LAND USE 2.60.1 - Land Use Plan The CR and CP development standards contained in the City of La Quinta Zoning Ordinance shall be followed except where specifically modified by this Specific Plan. The Plan establishes development standards for the entire site including an integrated design for the Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road frontages. These standards will include considerations for building siting, architecture, lighting, landscape, public art, and parking. These guidelines are intended to be consistent with the La Quinta General Plan goals, policies, and objectives. The key General Plan provisions are reiterated in Appendix One. The proposed plan anticipates a range of users including but not limited to, retail and food services, a health fitness club, service commercial, medical offices, general office (commercial and industrial) and industrial storage. The site has been divided into four Planning Areas according to major user types (See Exhibit 6). G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 25 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdel% Associate Planner ♦ Planning Area 1 (PA 1 ) - is dedicated to commercial/industrial development on individual lots. The goal of this Area is to provide farge 0.5+ acre lots that have necessary circulation and commercial services nearby for industrial users. The uses anticipated could range from retail to storage to auto painting to general offices. Planning Area One is located along the stormwater channel at the northwesterly end of the site. ♦ Planning Area 2 (PA 2)- is located on the westerly side of the site. The area is devoted to retail businesses. The Highway 111 frontage and outlying pads will be dedicated to retail and restaurant development. ♦ Planning Area 3 (PA 3) — is located adjacent to the main entry along Highway 111 and is dedicated to office park development. ♦ Planning Area 4 (PA 4) - is dedicated to multiple tenant industrial/office, storage, general office and support uses. This Planning Area is located along the eastern side of the site adjacent to Dune Palms Road. There is a possibility that the self -storage use may locate within this planning area. The proposed location, in PA 1, adjacent to the existing facility may not be an acceptable marketing strategy and an alternative location within the Plan may be necessary. Planning Area 4 is intended to provide support industrial uses and would be a compatible area for the self -storage use as opposed to the retail/office nature of PA 2 or PA 3. The Planning Commission can consider site plan changes to each planning area during review of a developer's project. 2.60.1.1 - Industrial Development - Planning Area One This planning area includes individual lots available for commercial or industrial development. The Plan provides for uses, which are compatible with the City's CP Zoning designation and devoted to custom light industrial development. Lot sizes range from 0.53 acres to 1.05 acres in size. Development on the individual lots would occur in accordance with the design parameters and permitted uses of the Specific Plan and the processing procedures of the City of La Quinta. The Gity standard faf FAR withim the GP zoning is.50. While this one exeeption, the self-StOfflge f-seility. The FAR for this feeility could be .50 if Anticipated uses include the following: storage yards, hardware and contractor's supply, automotive specialty repair and services such as GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 26 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner windshield replacement, glass tinting, stereo sales and installation and the like. A fitness center is also desired within this Planning Area. Permitted uses can also include general offices and medical uses. 2.60.1.2 - Commercial Development - Planning Areas Two, Three & Four Planning Area 2 includes service commercial uses such as nail salons, dry cleaners, copy services, real estate and financial offices and food services (both full service and take-out) for the needs of the shoppers and workers located within the immediate vicinity. Major users could also include a drug store and clothiers. Planning Area 3 will include a mid -rise office building. Planning Area 4 will provide a park -like setting for general office users along the Highway 111 frontage and a mixture of the users found in the other two areas. There will be offices, both general and medical and industrial related users such as blueprint or copy services, engineering and design services. 2.60.1.3 - Parking Standards The City of La Quinta Zoning Ordinance sets forth standards for parking for various land use types. The Ordinance leaves open the opportunity to demonstrate that an alternative standard may be more appropriate for a new development concept; based on either on sharing parking between uses, or a determination based on alternative parking demand calculations. The industrial lots within the Plan will meet the City's regulations with respect to parking unless alternative standards are approved with each site development applications. The total number of parking spaces being provided for the regional commercial is 1,366 spaces, this exceeds the City's regulations. However, the distribution throughout the site is not the same as if the land uses were occurring on standalone parcels. The area of the Plan that is the most limited is the area around the fitness center. This localized deficiency is not seen as critical to the overall functioning of the site. The City's requirements for a fitness center are significant, more so than in surrounding cities. Applying the standards from other valley cities indicates that there should be sufficient parking in the area. Secondly, the mixture of uses (service commercial and food service) will allow the workers already on -site to use the retail businesses reducing off site trips and parking demands. (See Condition #64) GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 27 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Fitness Center Parkina Demand CITY TOTAL RATIO Cathedral City 105 spaces* one space/250 sq. ft. for the first 8,000 and one/300 sq. ft. thereafter Indio 150 spaces one space per 200-sq. ft. of floor area La Quinta 200 spaces one space per 150-sq. ft. of floor area Palm Desert 200 spaces one space per 150-sq. ft. of floor area Palm Springs 75 spaces one space per 400-sq. ft. of floor area *(There is no standard so general retail was used.) 2.60.2 - Development Standards The uses and development standards within the La Quinta Corporate Center shall be generally in accordance with the provisions of the La Quinta Zoning regulations. Should conflict occur between the regulations and the Plan, the provisions of the Plan shall prevail. Where ambiguity occurs the Zoning regulations shall prevail. 2.60.2.1 - Permitted/Conditional and Prohibited Uses The City's Zoning Ordinance delineates the range of allowed, conditionally allowable and prohibited uses for each zoning classification. A limited number of deviations from these standards are proposed within the Plan. This Specific Plan modifies the Zoning Ordinance list of allowable and conditionally allowable uses as follows: A modified Table 801 from the City's Zoning Ordinance, which includes the changes listed below is included as Appendix Three. Planning Area One (PA1) - CP Zone: Planning Area One shall be developed in a manner consistent with the CP zone subject to the following modifications. The following are additions/modifications to the CP zone list of "Principle Uses" which would be permitted in Planning Area One of the La Quinta Corporate Centre: Retail Stores up to 25,000 sq./ft. (limited to sales of merchandise that supplement and relate to the primary businesses of the CP zoning designation (small equipment and tool sales, plumbing, electrical and contractor's sales yards, auto parts and the like). Plant nurseries and sales, wholesale and retail, without onsite propagation. Showrooms/catalog stores with onsite inventory not to exceed 75% of the GFA. Animal hospitals, clinics and pet grooming Reservoirs and water tanks G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 28 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdeh, Associate Planner Automobile repair specialty shops (i.e., window tinting, stereo sales and installation, etc.) Automobile repairs, body work and painting Health and fitness centers Contractor's storage yards General business offices Medical offices (2,000 sq. ft. or less per tenant) The following are additions/modifications to the CP zone list of "Prohibited Uses" which would not be permitted in Planning Area One of the La Quinta Corporate Centre: Restaurants, greater than ,%G 2,000 square feet with conventional seating Restaurants, drive through Golf Courses and Country Clubs Museums and art galleries Social clubs and senior centers Churches, temples and other places of worship Private elementary, intermediate and high schools Planning Areas Two. Three and Four (PA 2. 3 and 4) - M/CR Zone: Planning Areas Two and Three shall be developed in a manner consistent with the CP zone subject to the following modifications. The following uses are additions/modifications to the CR zone list of "Principle Uses" which would be permitted in Planning Areas Two, Three and Four of the La Quinta Corporate Centre: Veterinary clinics/animal hospitals Health clubs and fitness centers over 5,000 square feet Automobile service stations, with or without mini -market Day Care facilities Self -storage (PA 4 only) The following additions to the CR zone list of "Principle Uses" which would not be permitted in Planning Areas Two, Three and Four of the La Quinta Corporate Centre: Wholesale, warehouse and commercial distribution centers in excess of 5,000 sq. ft. Truck or equipment rentals New or used sales of automobiles, trucks, recreational vehicles or boats Automobile, truck, recreational vehicle or boat service centers Contractor's or equipment storage yards GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 29 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Central cleaning or dry-cleaning laundry plants Communications facilities, towers or antennas as a primary use Sign making Fortune telling and palmistry Sexually -oriented businesses Private elementary, intermediate and high schools Senior housing Land use determinations may be reviewed by the Community Development Director as set forth in Section 9.20.040 of the City's Zoning Ordinance. SUMMARY OF STANDARDS BY PLANNING AREA Maximum Bldg. Height Setback — Hwy. 111 single story Setback — Hwy. 111 multi story Setback - Image Corridor Setback - Perimeter Streets & cul-de-sacs Setback - Interior property lines within the project Setback — Exterior property lines adjacent to the project Maximum Plan FAR PA 1 PA 2 PA 3 PA 4 35' 50' 50' 50' n/a 50' 50' 50' n/a 150' 150' 150' n/a 20/10 20/10 20/10 20/10 20/10 20/10 20/10 0 0 0 0 10, 5' 0' 5' 0.35* (0.50 FAR may be permitted for the self -storage site) 2.70 - DESIGN GUIDELINES 2.70.1 - General Architectural Theme The desired architectural style of the project is contemporary desert based on California Mission, Spanish, southwest and inspired themes found in La Quinta. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 30 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg TrousdeH, Associate Planner 2.70.2 - Building Materials and Colors A. Stucco: hand smoothed or vertical -raked textures preferred. B. Masonry: flagstone, adobe or Spanish -style brick, split -faced, fluted, or slumpstone-faced block. C. Wood: exposed, heavy timber, rough sawn beams, glu-lam beams and peeler poles with stain finish (transparent or opaque). D. Glass Block and Stained glass. E. Weathering Metals: copper, iron, bronze used as accents and detail areas. F. Off-white to medium earth tones. Wood surfaces shall be stained using medium to dark earth tones and complementary southwest colors (aqua, teal, terra cotta, and whitewash). The Planning Commission has the authority to approve substitute building materials and color tones during consideration of the specific development project. 2.70.2.1 - Building Forms Building forms, where possible, shall exhibit some stepping both in plan and elevation. This may include the use of covered pedestrian areas adjacent to the buildings and elsewhere as appropriate. 2.70.2.2 - Prohibited Forms Formula, strongly themed or "corporate" architecture is prohibited. As an example, golden arches over the roof of a McDonald's restaurant building is not permitted. 2.70.2.3 - Roofs Hip, gable and shed roof designs or combinations thereof consistent with the general architectural theme are acceptable and encouraged for main building masses. Acceptable roofing materials for pitched roofs include clay tile, and weathering metals. Where clay tile materials are used, a multi -hued mixture of earth tones (terra cotta, buff, olive, and the like) shall be used. Roof parapets should vary in height to create an interesting roofline. Although the use of clay tile and weathering metal roofs is recommended throughout, it is not specifically required for secondary or service -building roofs provided other roof designs are not incompatible with the general architectural theme. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 31 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 2.70.2.4 - Equipment Screening Roof mounted mechanical equipment, duct -work and vents shall be screened from view by an architectural device consistent with the building design (e.g., stucco parapets, etc.), provided the design features are approved by the City's Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC). 2.70.2.5 - Fencing and Walls Automobile service areas and service shops, shall be effectively screened from view by masonry walls of the same or complementary materials as the main building walls. Permitted Materials Stucco -covered frame construction Stucco -covered Masonry Block Wood as a decorative item Brick or masonry blocks Cultured or river stone Wrought Iron or tubular steel 2.70.2.6 - Outdoor Storage Screening Prohibited Materials Chain Link Wood (25% or more) Security type materials (barbed or razor wire) Vehicle or materials storage associated within any use in the plan shall be screened from public view by means of a solid 6'-0" high masonry wall (i.e., stucco wall or other type of decorative block material) up to six feet an heigM amd-landscape Areas around the outside of a storage facility shall be landscaped using trees, shrubs, and vines, subject to review and approval by the City's Architecture and Landscape Review Committee. 2.70.2.7 - Site Lighting All lighting shall be designed and located so as to confine direct light within the project boundaries (including landscape buffer areas located along the street frontages). Since the City of La Quinta has generally maintained low lighting levels, this lighting for this project shall be consistent with lower lighting levels wherever practical. Security lighting, if required, shall be approved with each site development review. General: All lighting will comply with the City's Outdoor Lighting Ordinance. The lighting systems shall be designed and installed so fixtures are mounted perfectly horizontal with no tilt to the mounting, or exposed lighting sources. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 32 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg TrousdeH, Associate Planner All poles (up to 24'-0" high) used shall be of a decorative or non -glossy finish, such as paint powder coating or an anodized surface. No shiny metal poles or fixtures shall be permitted. Forty-eight inch high bollard lighting is encouraged for traffic entrances and pedestrian sidewalks. Parking and Loading Areas: On -site lighting source for display or parking lot lighting shall be metal halide fixtures (e.g., 175 watt bulbs) mounted on square tubular steel poles, finished as stated above. The maximum height for any light source shall be of 24 feet or less above finish grade. All lenses shall be of a flush design. Lighting levels shall be an average of one footcandle with a ratio of average light to minimum light of three to one. Under lighting of internal drive aisles is allowed, provided parking stalls are adequately lit and the lighting plan is approved by the Community Development Director. 2.70.2.8 - Noise The operation of the industrial users could include repair and service of automobiles, trucks and include other heavy equipment. It is the intent of this Specific Plan that the layout and design for users, which have the potential to generate noise, will be designed to the extent possible to contain the noise generated. The layout shall orient the openings to the interior of the sites away from other users. The noise standards established by the City shall be applied throughout the project. Roll -up service doors shall not be visible from adjacent public streets. A second design requirement will be the prohibition of a general usage public address (p.a.) system. There are a variety of communication systems available that can replace p.a. type devices for most applications. These alternatives include pagers, and personal telecommunication systems. Any roof mounted telecommunication equipment shall be screened from view by roof structures. The siting of a monopalm telecommunication antenna in the project requires Planning Commission review and approval. However, no monopalm shall be located within 150 feet of Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road, nor exceed a height antenna height of 80 feet from finished grade. A monopalm antenna shall not be located within 800 feet of another cellular telephone site. Other types of freestanding communication towers are not permitted unless they are aesthetically pleasing to the off -site viewer (e.g., light pole -style antenna, etc.). GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 33 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 2.80 - CIRCULATION The La Quinta Corporate Centre proposes to develop the adjacent street system in a manner consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan Circulation Plan and also in accord with CalTrans requirements. The property is located on Highway 111, a State highway designated by the City's General Plan as a Major Arterial requiring a half street width of 70 feet. The site also abuts Dune Palms Road, which is designated as a Secondary Arterial, requiring a half width street of 55 feet. Additional right-of-way dedication and street improvements for the streets will be Fequired as a condition of approval of the project. The timing and design of improvements for Highway 111 will be coordinated with CalTrans. All necessary encroachment permits will be obtained. The project proposes to share access and circulation with the hotel/restaurant project, which abuts the subject property on its west boundary. The Hotel 111 Specific Plan approved by the City Council on February 23, 1999, incorporates the concept of shared access with this site. The property to the east shall ultimately continue with the circulation pattern set forth in the Plan by continuing the Corporate Centre Drive unnamed industrial street, providing reciprocal access and parking and by completing the entry on Highway 111. There are four entry points to the site from Highway 111. The main entry of the La Quinta Corporate Centre aligns with the main entry of the La Quinta Auto Mall project. The primary on -site circulation meanders west -to -east through the site. Parking areas and minor circulation aisles are connected to this main aisle. Depending upon the site development plans additional connections may be made to connect the commercial portion with the individual lots located along the north boundary of the project. The internal drive also connects to the Hotel 111 site at the west boundary. The La Quinta Zoning Ordinance requires provisions be made for bicycle parking based on land use. The Plan will comply with the City requirements for bicycle parking. Loading spaces required are pursuant to Section 9.150 of the City's zoning ordinance. The plan does not propose any alteration to the City's requirement for loading spaces. The location and number of spaces will depend on the ultimate users and this issue will be addressed through the individual site development permits. 2.80.1 - Off -Site Circulation System The existing conditions around the site include partial improvements on both abutting public streets. The General Plan standards for improvements that will be required in conjunction with this project are consistent with other recent road improvements in the vicinity. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 34 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg TrousdeH, Associate Planner The construction of the required improvements will continue the process of implementing the adopted General Plan Circulation Plan. Exhibit 11 shows the proposed cross sections for the streets affecting the project. In addition to pavement, curb, gutter, median and sidewalk/bike path improvements, financial participation in the traffic signal planned at the project's main access point (Highway 111 and La Quinta Centre Drive) is anticipated. As stated in earlier sections the phasing of the public improvements will be commensurate with the level of development that they are intended to serve. Occupancy of any structure within the plan will be contingent upon completion of the necessary public improvements. 2.80.2 - Public Transportation Demand Management Bus turnouts and shelters shall be provided as a part of the project's public street improvements pursuant to requirements of SunLine Transit, the Public Works Director and CalTrans. Prior to issuance of building permits for individual Site Development Permits, applicants shall submit a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Plan to the Public Works and Community Development Departments. The plans shall address capital improvement and operational standards as set forth in the City's TDM Ordinance. Any transit -related improvements required by the Sunline Transit Agency as a condition to development will not constitute compliance with the plan submittal requirements. 2.80.3 - Site Circulation and Unnamed Industrial Drive (Corporate Centre Drive) Corporate Centre Drive shall serve the properties on the north side of the project using a 64-foot right-of-way. site.poFtien of the projeet. Due to existing development constraints at the western end of the The roadway intersection with Dune Palms Road and Adams Street is located more than 600 feet from the intersection of Highway 111 providing ample room for stacking and maneuvering of larger vehicles often associated with industrial users. This roadway will also allow the industrial lots to be served by direct access to Adams Street and Dune Palms Road, separating the large vehicle traffic from the mixed -use portion of the site. Until such time as the middle parcel (15+ acres) is developed, a cul-de-sac will be located at the westerly and easterly terminus of the industFiai Food Corporate Centre Drive. The commercial center circulation plan is depicted on the overall site plan. The commercial center will develop its own internal circulation system, which will provide reciprocal access between all adjacent parcels including the previously approved Hotel GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 35 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg TrousdeE, Associate Planner 111 Specific Plan (98-033). A main vehicle corridor will traverse the commercial portion of the site in an east -west direction. However, the final circulation design will depend on the ultimate users and the configuration of buildings. The internal access for the commercial center will be accessed via a main entry from the signal at Highway 111 and by three minor driveway locations around the perimeter of the center. Once on the property, users will be able to visit the different portions of the site by using the internal roadways without exiting onto a public street. The interior roadway design will use proper engineering principles including but not limited to, adequate distance between intersecting drives and eliminating conflicts between backing vehicles and travel lanes. The plan anticipates cooperation in extending the on -site circulation system including the completion of the main access from Highway 111 upon development of the adjacent parcel. The completion of the circulation system includes the east half of the main access from Highway 111, the industrial roadway and the commercial area parking and circulation network. 2.90 - LANDSCAPE CONCEPTS The landscape concept follows a "desert oasis" theme emphasizing water efficient materials exhibiting color and form. Parking areas in the commercial center will feature the concept of a high canopy tree form to reduce the conflict between landscape elements and project graphics. The project will feature extensive streetscapes along Highway 111 and Dune Palms Road. The City of La Quinta has adopted streetscape program for Highway 111. It is the intent of this Specific Plan to complement that effort within the landscaped setback area by incorporating design principles into the guidelines for the project. The adopted design theme is included as Appendix Four. 2.90.1 - Landscape Development Standards The La Quinta Corporate Centre will meet the minimum standards for landscape improvements, including parking lot shading as set forth in the City's Zoning Ordinance and other relevant documents. The trees used throughout the site shall be eight to 10 feet in height with a minimum container size of 24" box and a minimum trunk size of 1.5-inch caliper. Shrubs shall be a minimum of five gallons in size, unless specifically approved otherwise. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 36 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner 2.90.2 - Landscape Palette Landscape materials selected for detailed landscape plans (other than Highway 111) shall be chosen from the materials listed below. The plant palette for the Highway 111 frontage is contained in the Highway 111 Design Theme Plan contained in Appendix Four. 2.90.3 - Landscape Maintenance A landscape maintenance handbook shall be established to develop standard maintenance practices for the overall project. Of particular concern, is to allow tree forms to fully develop in the parking lot areas in order to achieve the required percentage of shading as set forth in the Zoning Ordinance. The landscape for the commercial center shall also be under a single maintenance contract managed by the center or by the Property Owners Association in the event that multiple ownership exists. 2.90.4 - Landscape Improvements The site development permit applications will address the specifics of the landscaping with the exception of the Highway 111 frontage, which will follow the City's adopted design theme. MASTER PLANT LIST TREES ACACIA SMALII ACACIA STENOPHYLLA CERCIDIUM FLORIDUM CERDIDIUM PRAECOX GEIJERA PARVIFOLIA LYSILOMA THORNBERI SOPHORA SECUNDIFLORA PALMS CHAMAEROPS HUMILIS WASHINGTONIA FILIFERA WASHINGTONIA ROBUSTA PHOENIX DACTYLIFERA ARECASTRUM ROMANZOFFIANUM BRAHEA ARMATA SWEET ACACIA SHOESTRING ACACIA BLUE PALO VERDE SONORAN PALO VERDE AUSTRALIA WILLOW FEATHER BUSH TEXAS MOUNTAIN LAUREL MEDITERRANEAN FAN PALM CALIFORNIA FAN PALM MEXICAN FAN PALM DATE PALM (ACCENT ONLY) QUEEN PALM (ACCENT ONLY) MEXICAN BLUE PALM (ACCENT ONLY) G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 37 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg TrousdeE, Associate Planner SHRUBS CAESALPINIA PULCHERRIMA CASSIA SPECIES ENCELIA FARINOSA JUSTICIA SPICIGERA LEUCOPHYLLUM C. SPECIES NERIUM OLEANDER'PETITE PINK' NOLINA PARRYI RAPHIOLEPIS (.'SPECIES' SALVIA G. 'SIERRA LINDA' SIMMONDSIA CHINENSIS THEVETIA PERUVIANA XYLOSMA CONGESTUM 'COMPACTA' GROUNDCOVER ANNUALCOLOR ACACIA R. 'DESERT CARPET' BACCHARIS CENTENNIAL DALEA GREGGII LANTANA MONTEVEDENSIS LANTANA M. 'GOLD SPOT' OENOTHERA BERLANDIERI ROSMARINUS O. 'LOCKWOOD FOREST' SANTOLINA VIRENS VERBENA RIGIDA PALM SPRINGS 'GOLD' WILDFLOWERS DESERT WILDFLOWER MIXTURE RED BIRD OF PARADISE CASSIA BRITTLE BUSH MEXICAN HONEYSUCKLE TEXAS RANGER DWARF OLEANDER DWARF MEXICAN GRASS TREE INDIA HAWTHORN SAGE JOJOBA YELLOW OLEANDER DWARF XYLOSMA SEASONAL FLOWERS TRAILING ACACIA BACCHARIS PROSTRATE INDIGO BUSH PURPLE PROSTRATE LANTANA YELLOW PROSTRATE LANTANA MEXICAN PRIMROSE DWARF ROSEMARY GREEN SANTOLINA VERBENA GRAVEL TAILINGS CALIFORNIA POPPIES, VERBENA, ETC. Special Note: Palm trees inside the development shall be untrimmed to provide a roosting site for bats per General Plan Biological Resources Program 3.3. The use of lawn shall be limited to parkway and art piece areas, subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission and/or City Council. 2.10 - SIGNS The City shall approve a comprehensive sign plan for each building complex prior to the issuance of building permits. A preliminary sign concept including location, general size, materials and lighting, shall be submitted with each site development plan or conditional use permit application. The main principles of the comprehensive sign plan shall be compliance with the sign regulations of the La Quinta Zoning Ordinance, except as otherwise set forth herein. Only channel letter building signs are permitted. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 38 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner - ;- ; - --: :::--: ---;- -- ;- - FRZi;- - ; -- -- MWIWI is-: MMA &VA:: - :- ::: :.-: - -: ; ---:- -- ; - - - - -- „ ---- ; -- -- VA center idemtification. (Strikeout pursuant to Condition of Approval #67) re Vial MM -- The concept being presented represents an integrated approach to center identification for such a large parcel. Overall center identification is achieved with an entry statement on Highway 111 and entry monumentation on each of the secondary street frontages. These "Centre" identification signs will create an address for the individual tenants who are not permitted to have freestanding identification signs. if the umderlyimg pare .. .. _ Quinta Corporate Centre plan proposes has four signs, two on Highway 111 and two on • . •(Exhibit 2.10.1 -Signs for the Commercial Center As the leasing program develops and the tenants are identified, the major tenant identification signs may be subject to alteration, which would require approval by the City of La Quinta Planning Commission. The appropriate signage for the ultimate user(s) of this portion of the project will be determined upon development of detailed site development plans. The concept for tenant signs throughout the Corporate Centre shall include a single - sign allowance per user located on the building. Alternative locations may be considered based on the most effective use of graphic identification. The multi -tenant buildings shall integrate a concept for signs into the architectural scheme. Freestanding signs may identify the center, freestanding (single user) buildings or a combination of both. No individual tenants, located within a multiple tenant building may be identified by a freestanding sign, except that single tenants with more than 10,000 gross (leased floor) area may be identified on the complex signs. All freestanding signs shall be of a monument style. Within the regional commercial portion of the Plan, a service station site has been identified. The sign identification for this type of user shall include the mandatory State GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 39 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner of California pricing signs, which may be freestanding and located in the landscape setback area and identification on the building or canopy. The commercial center will have a center identification sign along the Highway 111 frontage. In addition there will monumentation at the west and east secondary access points on Highway 111. In general, monument signs shall conform to the City of La Quinta standards, except that single tenants with more than 15,000 gross (leased floor) area may be identified on the complex signs. Exhibits 12 through 18 depict the sign locations and design concepts for the project identification signs. Final monument sign designs may be altered to reflect the detailed architectural character of the Centre. 2.10.2 - Signs for the Industrial Center Generally, the sign provisions for the individual industrial lots shall be in accordance with the City of La Quinta sign regulations of the Zoning Ordinance. The structures with multi -tenant use shall follow the pattern of the commercial portion of the development in that the multi -tenant buildings shall integrate a concept for signs into the architectural scheme, which shall become the basis for the comprehensive sign plan for the building. The signs shall be approved with each site development plan or conditional use permit review. Freestanding signs for the single -user properties shall be in conformance with the City of La Quinta standards, ensuring design graphics match those contained in Exhibit 15 of the Plan. 2.10.3 - Signs — Area Calculations Sign applications within the La Quinta Corporate Centre shall be processed in conformance with Condition of Approval #68. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 40 `6Z NOLLOaS sees-sas SYd /tree -oar oa�l aKoada� WLD-a0aae 7NYQ07YJ 117Id "DW o11lo0dS ®J;UAO 6}ieJod ioo u;ulnp 8, ros auras xn ,vary, UNOW a cu oratanana Mn / VAMMoaor MW / aanamd UBIJ UIpBJ:) -reu!wIj-GJd Ow SWYI,)ossy atvr 1ELLINs 109HADW U I!gIyx=-1 t t = Q t t S = f w t w w t t w t w 'a L *H ''S s '1 `6Z NOLLOaS �d oi�oadg a.a}uap a�8.aodaop �a}uinp a, sja�5uo:C> ur5iS in 7.L lia[Ux=4 edvz-sac rid / 1196-02c (094) "OR.9= I&M-99376 Y MfOdllY.7 i9MNdS' T7V'd roc M=S kYtl NOAAW Wnblir.9 T ZU O mauaMc ONYI / ONfc84NIONS WD / ON7NNYfd '.gAfl saivioossy QNV Hjjxs 'oyaLtam 6� NZWKWUNERN man Mumma 'E3 L U ''S S '.L '63 NOI LOSS reIc] OW04adS a.a}ua:D 011e.40da00 'ejuinp is-1 seat-eas srr / rme-oaa (oaA) zm"a ►ata-aaaaa rw O"o 5rr 2 my ,or alms .IYA NOrNW WORM 7 "..L DMUaAMM CM / OMn=MDAB w4" / Amm"'r ONI saz,vrOOSSY QMV HUMS OMJrArrYN NO w w w w w w '6Z NOLLOFIS case-cac aY.t / rrsa-sac fostl zx"a a: sacs-aoaaa nNB0.frm -svmm" TIYa uB1d oi;ioadS aalua0 0118-tod.ao0 -e}uinp ,e-1 rac YAMS (YA NaANYJ ZUIlalrrl 9 4u DMLt3A8rL4 aNYr / OMPMNI9Na 7MM / 9AfWirYfd S j �:C> U O � < � � vc-+ �NI SS�LVIDOSSV aNV H.LIIYS '0"4m Y?e' ❑ Q z - W W W U Q A W X U W Z �_ Q F- LL O D Z Z .. O (� m J' Q C x O u III :c m u m u m m m■■ KKK us '-L '6Z NOLLOEgS u�epd or;ioadg oa;uaO a;'8-JodaoC) 'e;uinp -e-I Sj ;ac>UO:z) unis _ w w w O : w U ¢ Q! O LL; w z F 4 z o 111 z - x o O• y �o caoA-= m / rraa-oac (DDA) irmolu m )a p-aYaaa naramYJ Isvmxds mrd roc seas Arr NOAAW zuoenrc 7 AAA DNIASANas amn / omrammioNs 7IAID / aximmnd 'oNj 's=vioossv QNV Huns 'otl3i4ArrVjY v- Q c IU ,pl w w ¢ w X 0 U w Z_ n .O IL I :4 Z o .a U Z c yJ m J i� Q O , U x o co ri -O . 0 18 .-. Z 'M `S 9 '. - `6Z NOLLOaS ceao-cas M / rrsa-= (ODL) MYOHdZ c rsac-avaae rnmamn Womms mra usid of;ioadS a.r}ua0 a}tsaodaoo-eluin('Q 8—j roc ssms xrr Ma&M umearc •a e" ONUSA ns aM / svass=W very / MaWnf S a O 1.1 O u 1 S DAr1 samoOssV QNEP HZIIPs 'oX.IrnrrYN 9L I!a!uX--q Q 0 Q 0 U) z 0 o z 0 U m W H Q _z J W m 2 X W ., r" s s m� m a w t t t t w w SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner APPENDIX ONE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 47 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner APPLICABLE GENERAL PLAN POLICIES The General Plan of the City of La Quinta was adopted in 1992 and includes Goals, Objectives and Policies that were deemed by the City necessary to properly implement the plan. The key policies that affect the development of the subject property are as follows: LAND USE ELEMENT OWN FERWWAIWAM-- -- - - -- -- - --W P_qM r_- tr_v_-w 5- - - - -- - „ The MiRG eategoFy she'! provide areas for businesses sewimg the entiFe regiom with a tFade area typiesily exceedimg 100,000 people. Businesses allowed to laeate the MRG aFeEts shall inelude majef r-etail eornmercial tenants associated with — . i8i mall, off -price retail outlet and/ar'pawer centeF.' etheF businesses peffmitted comfneFeial ladgimg uses, entertaimment uses, as well as auternabiie uses of a Fegia natuFe, n9ey also be ." Policy 1.2: "The City will encourage an integration of a wide range of support services at employment centers, including child care, occupational health, fitness facilities and convenience retail shops." The Plan provides a variety of building types, sizes and locations so that there is maximum flexibility in attracting businesses appropriate for the M/RC classification. A Floor Area Ratio of 0.35 is planned within the 36-acre development. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 48 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Policy 2.1: "Residential development shall not be permitted within 600 feet of Highway 111 in the Regional Commercial designation, except as allowed in the nonresidential overlay in the Development Code." The Plan complies with the Non -Residential Overlay by not permitting residential uses. "RAIMfN __A The ___ ecategefy shall be applied to land haidimgs which are lly leFger them 20 acres in size. Properties smaller then 20 aeFes within the Non- �Res ide ntial E)veF!By area shall be lifnited t- - - . ai uses. PFoperties sfnaileF than 20 aeres outside of the Non Residential e—verlay she'! be single use, either e0mme Policy 4 - Specific Plans of Land Use shall be required for all projects of 20 acres or more before any land divisions. The Plan complies with this policy. Weas shall stipulate phasing of comstmetiam and Fespensibility fOF public f8eility �emts." General Land Use Policy 6 - "In -fill development shall be encouraged by placing capital improvement projects in the developed areas of the City as top priorities." The Plan proposes project and infrastructure phasing in Section 2.20. Policy 10: "The City shall maintain its "dark sky" ordinance." The plan proposes low-level landscape lighting and down focused lighting within the parking areas. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 49 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT - - - - -wf - - - - - -- ; MA : aw - - - - - - ; _ - LUMUT � __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ :1•/:Ill.::[�=�'1'1■1:11�J!•/�ail�f■\.11■►�l1t►P lKy�1.�1: : . � ; = : of the Riverside County Congestion Management Plan " Policy 1 - "Establish and maintain a master plan of roads, which sets forth detailed improvement plans and schedules for implementation, to assure minimal levels of roadway segment and intersection operations at V/C ratio of 0.80 and LOS D, respectively." A traffic study has been completed for the Plan and the improvements proposed will preclude the Level of Service from being below level "D". Policy 3 2.1.5 " The Gity she!! adopt design standaFds fOF 811 stFeets an seeoFdanee with city of La Quinte she!! be designed On aeealdanee with the standffds presemt On Table Policy 1.1: "Initiate and complete a master plan of roads, which includes targets for ultimate rights - of -way and pavement widths and provides a schedule for securing right-of-way and constructing improvements consistent with the projected needs and standards set forth in the City Circulation Element and Program EIR." The public road sections will comply with the City adopted road sections. - - -- - --- - - -- - - - - ME 36f.611MWL�.RL.7.1 -- - --. - WAL N MWTT; WIN - -- -- -;; -- - ;0FA0 ; ._ ���":r�.rr..�R..�/irii�.//c..'�I:�i�:��. n�G►ti�'��r./i/►:�:�.�il�.:��:►ti•.►sn:=:�ic: u�a:�:l%ri�:�:�•1: GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 50 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner liability.established warrants and pref,.essional analyses in order to assufe traffic safety and " Policy 2.2: "Review new and redeveloping project along Washington Street, Adams Street and Highway 111 with the intent of limiting access and aligning and/or consolidating access drives in a manner which minimizes conflicting turning movements and maximizes the use of existing and planned signalized intersections." A traffic study has been completed for the Plan, surrounding and adjacent developments. When warranted, traffic signals will be installed on Highway 111. Access points will be located and comply with best practice methods. - - --orn -:: -- Policy 6: "Develop and encourage the use of continuos and convenient bicycle routes and multi -use trails to places of employment, recreation, shopping schools, and other high activity areas with potential for increased bicycle, equestrian, golf cart and other non -vehicular use." The plan complies with Exhibit 3.10 of the General Plan. • - -- -- - - -- -- - - -- - - - -- Policy 2.3: On Major Arterials, the minimum intersection spacing shall be 1,060 feet for commercial projects. "Intersection spacing may be reduced to 500' at the Whitewater Wash Channel and La Quinta Evacuation Channel. The design speed shall be 60 mph. Left turn median cuts may be authorized if turn pocket does not interfere with other existing or planned left turn pockets. Right in/right out access driveways shall exceed the following minimum separation distances (in all cases, distances shall be measured between curb returns): — more than 250' G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 51 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner on the approach leg to a full turn intersection; — more than 150' on the exit leg from a full turn intersection; — more than 250' between driveways. All access configurations shall be subject to City Engineer review and approval." The plan complies with these provisions by minimizing the amount of individual driveways and the use of medians. The access points have been consolidated along Highway 111. In addition to the main entrance there are four minor access points along the 2,300 feet of frontage. The landscape concept will comply with the City's adopted design theme for Highway 111. In addition the Plan provides for landscape design enhancements along Dune Palms Road. Turf should be used in a manner consistent with citrus trees —sparingly and in high visibility locations. Primary image corridors shall include street traffic signals, street lighting systems, street furniture, bus shelters, street name signs, and noise berms/barriers, which are designed in a coordinated and consistent theme unique to La Quinta. At key intersections, primary image corridors shall include treatments which may include special roadway paving, hardscape/screen wall arrangements and displays of public art. RB - .. .. ... 110- ...... - ---------- - - - 4 ; witvl-9rwwy-lw ME . -- - :UmIS - - - --- - -- • -- - - --- --------- --- ----- - . . . . . . -- •- • - 7=i misor; GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 52 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner .. . . . .. . .. .. .. .. Rr IM...i, 1,; 5 -: • - - : : : :-- :- .:i :LL;, L;,-i is Wks PIMPTV The Plan will comply with adopted design standards. The landscape concept will comply with the City's adopted design theme for Highway 111. In addition the Plan provides for landscape design enhancements along Dune Palms Road. Turf should be used in a manner consistent with citrus trees —sparingly and in high visibility locations. G:\SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 53 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner establish 8PPFOPFiate building height limits to eMSUFe a low density eharaeteF and appearamee." Policy 14: "The City shall maintain building height limits along Primary, Secondary, and Agrarian Image Corridors in its Development Code." The maximum building height along the image corridors will be 22 feet (excluding architectural projections) within the Highway 111 corridor (i.e., first 150 feet) and of 35feet -el sew;eFe., unless otherwise allowed by the Planning Commission. Buildings outside of the height restricted area may be up to 35 feet high. Policy 3 4.1.11 "Landseeped setbael(s are i9ecessary to ensure a high quality and if : Policy 13: "In order to preserve the aesthetic values on the City's streets, minimum landscape setbacks shall be as follows": Highway 111 — 50 feet Secondary Arterial — 10 feet The plan complies with this policy. Biological Resources Policy 3: "Native, drought-tolorant desert plant materials shall be incorporated into new development to the greatest extent practical. Invasive, nonnative species shall be discouraged." The plan complies with this policy. Turf should be used in a manner consistent with citrus trees —sparingly and in high visibility locations. Policy 3-4.1.17 "The Gity's streetseape quality she'! be improved by timdergreumd+ng of utilities whereveF " Public Utilities Policy 3: "All utility and electric wires up to 34.5 kilovolts serving new development shall be installed underground." The utilities to the site and within the site will be located underground. Public Utilities Policy 4.1 "To the greatest extent practical, all new utility equipment boxes, including but not limited to traffic signal equipment, and electrical and telephone equipment, shall be located either under ground, or away from street corners and effectively shielded from public view. Undergrounding GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 54 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner of these facilities is preferred." Project conditions will be imposed to comply with this policy. Paliey35.1.1 "The Gity sheN coordinate with Sumline T-Fansitte establish transit stap.9 " Policy 4: "Encourage expansion of ridership and the service area of the public transit systems operated by the Sunline Transit Authority within the City." The plan will provide for transit stops and facilities to be determined during review of development applications. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION E'erME-14T Paleontologic Resources Policy 1: "The City shall require the preparation of paleontologic resource analyses by a qualified paleontologist for all development proposals which occur in areas of High Sensitivity." A cultural resources report has been submitted to the City for review. The mitigation measures contained in EA 99-383 shall be met, as prescribed. WO 1 —0 1 IMF a M-1 w1WIWII&�WMMWAM -1 - �_of_moww- G:1SP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 55 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner Resources Program 1.3: "Mitigation plans prepared as part of paleontologic resource analyses shall be implemented as part of mitigation monitoring and reporting programs." The plan will comply with the mitigation measures proposed in the cultural report and City Council Resolution 99-110. Cultural Resources Element Policy 3.2: "The city shall use its regulatory power to ensure the proper protection of cultural resources and avoid or minimize adverse effects on such resources from private projects that require discretionary city actions." The plan will comply with the mitigation measures proposed in the cultural report and City Council Resolution 99-110. W. ------------- element On the over-all design, which has beem appr Gity-. (See Condition INFRASTRUCTURE AND PUBLIC SERVICES ELEMENT ram . I - -s I - r 11 T1- _ ! !-A _L_11 -_ -.t-_ 11-- ._ ___. J_. __1__.-__-A --.7.d--J--.-1- -- -_J Ghenn.°' Flooding and Hydrology Policy 5.1 (2"d paragraph): "New development immediately adjacent to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel shall continue to have the option of discharging 100-year stormwater flows directly into the stormwater channel." The Plan will convey stormwater to the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel as well as install levee lining adjacent to the project as defined under the improvement plans presented to the City Council in 1999. AIR QUALITY ELEMENT -- - -::- -9 r..... - - - .: - -- - GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 56 SPECIFIC PLAN THE LA QUINTA CORPORATE CENTRE AMENDMENT #1 Prepared by Greg Trousdell, Associate Planner - - - - - ; -- ;� - - ill 14 IN Ili ftl • - - MINIM - •---- --- -- - -- -- - -- " Air Quality Policy 6: "New development shall be designed and constructed in a manner which minimizes the emission of project related pollutants." An air quality report has been submitted and the mitigation measure will be incorporated into the plan. Air Quality Program 7.2: "Continue to support and implement the provision of the State Implementation Plan for PM10 in the Coachella Valley." Dust control measures have been made part of the plan. Policy 9 8.2.5 "The Gity shall administer the provisions of the existing eUtdooF illumination E)rd*namee (Dark Sky erdinanee) to help lifnit night tifne eneri " Energy Policy 2: "The City shall promote the development and use of alternative, clean, renewable energy resources." The plan proposes low-level landscape lighting and down focused lighting within the parking areas. Security lighting for buildings and parking areas shall be metal halide, unless otherwise approved during review of the development plans. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 57 " Air Quality Policy 6: "New development shall be designed and constructed in a manner which minimizes the emission of project related pollutants." An air quality report has been submitted and the mitigation measure will be incorporated into the plan. Air Quality Program 7.2: "Continue to support and implement the provision of the State Implementation Plan for PM10 in the Coachella Valley." Dust control measures have been made part of the plan. Policy 9 8.2.5 "The Gity shall administer the provisions of the existing eUtdooF illumination E)rd*namee (Dark Sky erdinanee) to help lifnit night tifne eneri " Energy Policy 2: "The City shall promote the development and use of alternative, clean, renewable energy resources." The plan proposes low-level landscape lighting and down focused lighting within the parking areas. Security lighting for buildings and parking areas shall be metal halide, unless otherwise approved during review of the development plans. GASP36 LQCorpText2002.wpd-Greg 57 9.80: PERMITTED NONRESIDENTIAL USES ).80.040 Table of Permitted Uses. .. A. Uses and Structures Permitted. Table 801: "Permitted Uses .in Nonresidential Districts", following, specifies those uses and structures which are permitted witEn. each nonresidential district. The letters in the columns beneath the district designations mean the following: 1. "P": Permitted as a•princinal use ti,,ithin the district. 2. "A": Permitted only if accessory to the principal use on the site. 3. "C": Permitted as a principal or accessory use if a conditional use permit is approved. 4. "M": Permitted if a minor use permit is approved. 5. "T": Permitted as a temporary use only. 6. "V: Prohibited in the district. B. Uses A'ot Listed in Table. Land uses which are not listed in Table 801 are not permitted unless the Community Development Director or the Planning Commission determines that such use is within one of the permitted use categories listed preceding (e.g. principal use, conditional use, etc.) in accordance with Section 9.20.040. TABLE 801: PERMITTED USES IN NONRESIDENTIAtDISTRICTS .,DISTRICT P = Principal Use M = Minor Use Permit 4 ^ •' T a o ; .• G ' F A =Accessory Use T = Temporary Use Permit EE aE Jv EE C= Conditional Use Permit X= Prohibited Use �,E o Ea A o� o o t o �° o ti 0 0. LAND USE I CR CP I CC I CN CT CO MC Retail Uses Retail stores under 10,000 s /ft floor area per business P A P P A A X lRetailstores'. up to 25,000 sq . f t. P P P P X X. X Retail stores', over 10 0, 0 0 0 sq . f t. C X C X X X X Food, liquor, and convenience stores under 10,000 sq/ft P- A P P A A X floor area, open less than 18 hours/day' ' Food, liquor, and convenience stores under 10,000 sq/ft C- X- C C C X X floor area. open 18 or more hours/day' ' Other than convenience stores. Items sold may include clothing, groceries, meat, drugs, jewelry, sundries, office supplies, pets, furniture, appliances, hardware, building materials (except lumber yards), and similar retail items. : With no consummion of alcohol on the premises. M 9.80: PERMITTED NONRESIDENTIAL USES TABLE 801: PERMITTED USES IN NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS fi .: y� 'DISTRICT '� P = Principal Use ?A = Minor Use Permit A = Accessory Use T = Temporary Use Permit R " " %! EP.El: C=Conditional Use Permit X= Prohibited Use E 'e4 EE. ai .tE. . o: >oa o o ' 5o P a .o a: o a; r LAND USE J* CR -CP CC' CN CT CO IMCI Plant nurseries and garden supply stores, with no C P C. C X X X propagation of plants on the premises, subject to §9.100.120 (Outdoor Storage and Display) Showroom/catalog stores, on site inventory P P. P X X X X not to exceed 75% GFA General Services Barber shops, beauty, nail and tanning salons and similar P A P P P A X uses Miscellaneous services such as travel services, photo PWAPP P A X developing, videotape rentals, shoe repair, appliance repair. and similar uses Laundromats and dry cleaners -- except central cleaning PPPX X lantsPrinting, blue rinting and co services PPPet grooming P P X X Office Uses and Health Services Banks P X P P P P X General and professional offices P ^fir P P P P C Medical offices -- physicians, dentists, optometrists, P 3f . P P. P P X chiropractors, and similar practitioners 'P Medical centers -- four or more offices in one building X P X Sur icentersfiMedical Clinics X P X WX Hospitals X XConvalescent hog itals X X C DENTL4L U: USE IN N ONRESDDENTT kt DISTRICTS = � : Y, TABLE 807: pEg'gITTEA :• , . .Y.s..r^l�c'M< : =Principal Use ,h7=hiinorUsePermit `.R " " ``,.. �F `. E ' �:•"'"•'` WU o Y em ora Use Permit T=� P r7 o e E E E: x>p ;. :Q.o MEN.. A=Accessory Use Use Permit X = Probibited Use ' " " e _�, gee'. .� Ewa :Fa. C =Conditional h CR CP CC CN •C'r. CO` 1 AND USE ics/an'nnzl hospitals, and pet boarding C P C C X X Enn1 rinl:in�,and EntertainmentUses greater than 1000 sq. ft. p X P PPX P A p X p A ive-thru P P p e take-out with ancillary seating, such P P P Restaurants, counter sho s and similar as Fogurt, ice cream, zs C C X C C C Bars, taverns, and cocktail loun es C C X X C X Dancing or live entertainment as a rinci al use A X C C C C Dancing or live entertainment as an accessory use . C X C X Theaters, live or motion picture C X Recreation Uses X C X Bowling, ool or billiard centers as a principal use A A A A A A Pool or billiard tables as accessory use (3 tables or less) C X C C C X Game machines, 11 or more (as either a principal 91 accessory use) A A' • A . A Game machines as an accesso use, ten or fewer. machines A X X . X C A Golf courses and country clubs (see GC District permitted X uses, Cha ter 9.120) C P C X X A Tennis clubs or com lexes M M M M Health clubs, martial arts studios, and dance studios, 5000 M s /ft floor area or less C C C Health clubs, martial arts studios, and dance studios, over C �P C 5000 s /ft floor area P P C P p Libraries . VA A X A v e e X X C A X- 9.80: pipwITTED NO,YRESIDENTIAL USES TABLE 801: PERMITTED USES IN NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTng- .:.DIS'TRTCT p =Principal Use M = Minor Use Perm R ;,. o �' :•' "�y r A =Accessory Use T=Temporary Use Permit E :E a E g ;? E E q 4. a., '.E- o' `:, C= Conditional Use Permit X=Prohibited Use tip; aC.. ..� o 0 0uRr- { CR :CP• CC CN CT NCO: MC . LAND USE Museum or gallery displaving sculpture, artwork or r X P P P P � crafts, including schools for above I p P p p p P P parks. unlighted lavfields, and open sace X X X X X X C Lighted lavfields Bicycle. a uestrian and hiking trails P p p p P P P X XX X C X X ` Indoor 'slot or rifle ranges C X X X C X X Miniature golf/recreation centers Assembly Uses I I C p C C X X I C Lodges. union halls I Churches, temples and other places of worshi .0 X C C X C X C C C X X X X Mortuaries and funeral homes I Public and Semi -Public Uses P Fire stations . Government offices and police stations p P• ' P P P P P Communication towers and equipment, subject to Chapter C C C C C C C 9.170 X X M Electrical substations M M M X X X Zvi Water wells and um ing stations X p X X X. X M Reservoirs and water tanks I Public flood control facilities and devices P P P P P P P C X X X X• X C Colle es and universities Vocational schools. e.. barber. beauty and similar C C C X X C C Private elementary. intermediate and high schools • 9.80: PEF,,IIITED NONRESIDENTIAL USES PERMITTED USES IN NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS--'Z: M TABLE 801: '� { �' ~ •ram DISTRICT r#= # 4 P M = Minor Use Permit Principal Use a a—' p "� = = � "• �•• hz°•"`` Accessory Use T = Temporary Use Permit o E�6 U= s < C = Conditional Use Permit X = Prohibited Use c �� F '° `" -r` LAND USE cx CP Cc CN CT CO; MC I C C I C' X C X C Private swim schools C X C X C X C Train. bus and taxi stations X X X, X C X C Helicopter ads 1 d' al shelters (with indoor X I C X: I X X I X C Public or private kenne s an anim or outdoor et boarding) Residential, Lodaina, and Child Care Uses Townhome and'Njultifamily dwellings as a prima use *if put of a mixed use project Residential as an accessory use, e.g. caretaker residences er §9.100.160 Child day care facilities, centers and preschools as a rinci use, subj. to 9.100.250 (also see Accessory Uses' al Senior grou housing, subject to §9.100.260 Rooming and boarding houses Single room occupancy (SRO) hotels, sub'. to 9.100.270 Emergenc shelters Transitional shelters for homeless persons or victims of domestic abuse ' Mixed-useprojects: residential and office/commercial Hotels and motels Timeshare facilities, subject to 9.60.280 $ed and breakfast inns Caretaker residences '* X X X X 7xEx :r § 9.80.020 or 9.80.030 C C C I C C Tc-Fc C C I C C X C C C X X X X X X C X X X X X X C. X X X X X X P P P P P P P C X X X X X C C X X C. X X X C X C X C X X C X C X C X X X X X X X X X; M M M M M M Lli a' 9.80: pEnI17TED NONR-ESIDENTL4L USES TABLE 801: PERM=D USES IN 3� ONRESIDBNTIAL DISTPJCTS-'. �DISTRICT P=Principal Use 1�1 it Minor Use Perm_n: "E :T Tempor2ry UsePermit A = Accessory Use -R9 Use Q)ndItIon2l use Permit X Prohibited U • E E. g 4 E E. 11�043' C C5 . LAND USE cR 'CP 'CC-C- RCN CT-; :CO. "MP Automotive Uses (subject to §9.100.120, Outdoor Storage and DIsplay) Automobile service stations, with or without minima rt x x x C Car washes x x x x x z transmission repair Auto body repair and paintin, Auto repair specialty shops, providing minor auto C C C x x x x tire sales/service, muffler, brake, tube and maintenance: -- not including major engine or drivetrain tune-up svcs re air x X x Auto and motorcycle sales and rentals x Truck. recreation vehicle, and boat sales x x x x C x x x x x Truck and/or equipment rentals with no repair or parts installation on the P P P C x x x Auto parts stores, remises Auto or truck storaEe yards, not including dismantlin x C x x x x x Private parking lots/garages as a principal use subject to C C C x C C x Cha ter 9.150. Parking *arehousing and Heavy Commercial Uses (subject to §9.100.120, Outdoor Storage and Dis lay) Wholesaling/distribution centers, with no sales to x P x x X. x consumers x x X General warehouses, with no sales to consumers x P x Mini -storage warehouses Lumber yards, outdoor (see retail stores for indoor lumber X C x x x x x sales) x x x x Pest control services ' 9.80: PERMITTED NONRESIDENTIAL USES. TABLE 801; PEMMITTEA USES IN NONRESIDENTZUL DISTRICTS"% J,p. .\1;A •`l. i{:• •�v�'rY\: .h •••t�i2 :.:;r,�r}•YZr • ht�:y ••.�. r; .� -•k :..� •:i�: •. :ram S #.. 'rJ CT Y. . �.A{ }.,: • .. `•�^ hl=hl�iiorUsePerriit: ` :r �: Kr Principal Use .;:'.°::: :- py' yy' }}(Y Use :T=Tempora4 se Permit {:ate•' s� � • �� � ,A �. >E C .=Accessory .—.e = Conditional Use Permit X = Prohibited Use; , ,. o •tU :, .t: r4 ...w:•,:y .• .,fir,•. 'c T. `t:Y :#:: 'CR `CP CC'. CN` :CT CO`' iYtG LAND USE {;,: X P X X X X X Plumbing repair shops Contractor, public utility and similar equipment/storage TXX X X X X C yards X C C X X X X Central cleaning or laundry plants Communication or relay facilities/antennas as primary use C I C C C C C I C . Industrial and Research Uses Indoor manufacture and assembly of components or X P X X X X X finished products from materials such as cloth, fiber, fur, glass, leather, stone, paper (except milling), plastics, metal, ' and wood P P X X X X X Research and development P P X X X X X Recordiri studios X P X X X X X Bottlin lants p p X X X X X Sian makin , except sandblastina Sign makin¢, including sandblasting X P X X• X X X Recycling centers as a primary use, collection and sorting X C X X X X C . only, subject to §9.100.190 Offshe hazardous waste facilities, subject to 9.100.230 X _ C X X X X Accessory Uses and Structures Portable outdoor vending uses (such as flower stands, M M M M M M M hotdog stands, etc.), subject to §9.100.100 M X M X A M A Swimmingpools as an accessoryuse M X M X' A M A Golf or tennis facilities as an accessory use A A A A A A A Signs. subject to Chapter 9.160 A A Fences and walls. subject to 49.100.030 . M 80: PERMITTED L USES wa D uSES IN NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS::. �. y TABLE 801: pERl'Yl IT�`E t "DISTRICT • hY = bi a Permit inor Us _ = • yra.. ` � • $ = � ` ` � `' 1ro,u. "��' a-`-' P =Principal Use Permit T =Temporary Use P �x oY QY s Y U• �'£ y �•�.. A=Accessory Use Use Permit X =Prohibited Use C = Conditional CR CP CC ChI' CT 'CO:' 1YiC LAND USE Antennas and satellite dishes, subject to 59.100.070 A A A A A A A A A A A A A X A X A Reverse vending machines subject to §9.100.190 I A X X A Recycling dro off bins, subject to §9.100.190 A A A A A A A Incidental products or services for employees or businesses, such as child day care, cafeterias, and business su2port uses Other accessory uses and structures which are customarily associated with and subordinate to the principal use on the tent with the purpose and intent of premises and are consis the zoning district, as determined by the Director. Tem orary Uses Christmas tree sales, subject to §9.100.080 Halloween pumpkin sales. subject to §9.100.090 Stands selling fresh produce in season, subj. to §9.100.100 Sidewalk sales, subject to §9.100.130 Tem ora outdoor events, subject toga .100.140 Construction and guard offices, subject to §9.100.170 Use of relocatable building, subject to §9.100.180 Other Uses x X C X X X X Fortune telling and almist X X X X Sexually -oriented businesses. subject to §9.100.080* X X X s overla district. * Property must also be located within the SOB (Sexually Oriented Business) r or Planning Per §9.20.040, Direct Other uses not listed in this Table. Commission to determine whether use is AIAIAIAIAIAIA T T T T X X T T T T T X X T T T T T X X T T T T T. T T X T T T T T T T T T T '(' T T T T I T T T T T T Attachment Gm �Qj� a � g� 4➢ e d ��ab mLL Sa $ Q8n S i 3a vo b 0 (3 Iq (�� P 0 •r 0 '4� Co Ui Co Co V Co J +1 Co LU rt Q ZV CoVQ �Q? aQ OC 0 d C 4 � �i Attachment 5 MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA May 1, 2002 I. CALL TO ORDER 10:00 a.m. A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Committee was called to order at 10:07 a.m. by Principal Planner Fred Baker who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Dennis Cunningham, Bill Bobbitt, and David Thorns. C. Staff present: Management Analyst Debbie Powell, 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 CALENDAR: A. Principal Planner Fred Baker asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of April 3, 2002. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Thoms/Bobbitt to approve the Minutes as submitted, with Committee Member Cunningham abstaining. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2001-734; a request of Sky West Corporate Centre Group LLC to review architectural and landscaping plans for a multiple tenant two story light industrial building located on the north side of Corporate Centre Drive and east of Adams Street. 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. G AWPDOCS\ARLC\5-1-02.wpd 1 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes May 1, 2002 2. Committee Member Thorns asked staff to clarify their concerns in regard to the landscaping. Staff stated the representation was acceptable, but more definition in the plant pallet was needed. Committee Member Thorns noted the palms were proposed for 24 feet. Staff confirmed they would be 24 feet. 3. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the applicant would like to make a presentation. Mr. Robert Wood, representative of Sky West Corporate Centre Group, stated he was available to answer any questions. 4. Committee Member Bobbitt asked how the AC units would be hidden on the flat roof. Staff explained the applicant would need to explain. 5. Committee Member Cunningham asked if there was a condition to make sure this is addressed. Staff stated it was contained in the Specific Plan. Discussion followed as to examples of problems where it had occurred. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if there was any concern with the carport detail showing wood. Committee Member Cunningham stated he would recommend they convert it to steel as there is no maintenance, but this can be cost preventative. Therefore, he would only make it a recommendation and not a condition. 7. Committee Member Thorns asked the height of the vertical element. Also the post is a 4 by 4 and seems too small. Mr. Wood stated they are steel posts and 3 x 3 joists. Mr. Wood stated they are looking at the composite beams. 8. Committee Member Thorns asked if staff would be reviewing the final landscaping plans. Staff stated yes. Mr. Wood gave an explanation of what the plant list would consist of. 9. Committee Member Thorns stated the area between the parking spaces and the wall is never maintained and he would suggest vines be planted on the inside and decomposed granite on the ground. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 2002-015 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2001-734, subject to the conditions as submitted and amended: G:\WPDOCS\ARI,C\5-1-02.wpd 2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee Minutes May 1, 2002 A. Mechanical equipment to be hidden and not seen from the street. B. Vines to be planted along the interior planter wall in lieu of shrubs along the perimeter walls on every fourth parking stall. C. Add shrubs to the interior islands. D. If possible use steel on carports in lieu of wood as an options. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 2001-736; a request of Tenet Care California, Inc., for review of building elevations and landscaping plans for a 25,486 square foot medical facility located on the east side of Washington Street between Avenue 47 and Avenue 48. 1. Committee Member David Thorns withdrew due to a possible conflict of interest and withdrew from the meeting. 2. Principal Planner Fred Baker presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 3. Mr. Dan Kilabrew, RTKL Architects for the project, gave a presentation on the project and introduced Margo Thibeoult, Mainiero Smith, engineers for the project and TGA, landscape architect. 4. Committee Member Cunningham asked if this project had been presented to the homeowners at Lake la Quinta. Mr. Kilabrew stated it was and had been well received. They are trying to reflect the use of the building as being user friendly. Committee Member Cunningham stated it is fresh and dynamic look and gives regional architecture to the site. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the introduction of the different architectures approved for Washington Street, has added to the eclectic look of the street. It is an excellent presentation and the landscaping plans looks good. G:\WPDOCS\ARI.C\5-1-02.wpd 3