Loading...
1999 04 13 PCcF`y OF PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California April 13, 1999 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 99-024 Beginning Minute Motion 99-004 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. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION A. Presentation of a Resolution of Appreciation to Steward Woodard. V. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes for March 9, 1999 B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Item ................... ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-375, SPECIFIC PLAT 98-034, AND PARCEL MAP 29052 Applicant........... Lundin Development Company Location............ Northwest corner of Jefferson Street and 50`h Avenue Request ............. Recommend approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration o environmental impact for development principles and desig] guidelines of a 111,000 square foot shopping center and subdivisiol of 12.5 acres into seven parcels and one remainder parcel. Action ............... Request to continue. B. Item ................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-647 Applicant........... Century -Crowell Communities Location............ To be constructed on Tanglewood, Riviera Way, and Canterbury ii PGA West. Request ............. Approval of architectural and landscaping plans for four nev prototype residences. Action ............... Resolution 99- C. Item .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-619, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant.......... RJT Homes, LLC. Location .......... North side of Calle Tampico, west of Park Avenue, and east o Calle Rondo in La Quints Fairways Request ........... Approval of development plans for two new prototype single famil: houses ranging in size from 1,984 to 2,004 square feet unde Specific Plan 83-001 Action .............. Resolution 99- D. Item .................. TRACT MAP 28838, AMENDMENT #1 Applicant.......... Rielly Homes Location........... On the east side of Madison Street south of Airport Boulevard. Request............ Recommend approval of an Amendment to a Final Mal reconfiguring the shape of various single family and common lot adjacent to the intersection of Legends Way with Muirfield Avenu and Troon Way under Specific Plans 83-002 and 90-017. Action .............. Resolution 99- E. Item .................. SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025, TIME EXTENSION Applicant.......... Mr. John Green, et.al. Location .......... South of 58`h Avenue and bisected by the future extension c Jefferson Street. Request ........... Approval of a time extension for the development principles any design guidelines of a master planned community of 277 singl family houses on 331 acres. Action .............. Resolution 99- PC/AGENDA F. Item .................. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-377, ANT CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-043 Applicant.......... Airtouch Cellular; Joe Richards Location .......... 78-080 Calle Estado Request ........... Approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmenta impact, and wireless antennas with related equipment for cellula telephone service on an existing building within the Village Cori (VC) Zoning District. Action .............. Resolution 99- , Resolution 99- VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Item ................... SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-648 Applicant........... Century -Crowell Communities Location............ South of Desert Stream Drive on the west side of Dune Palms Roac in Tract 27519 (Aliso Del Rey). Request ............. Approval of three new prototype residences and landscaping plans. Action ............... Resolution 99- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commission report on the City Council meeting of April 6,1999 IX. ADJOURNMENT PC/AGENDA MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA March 9, 199.9 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Chairman Tyler who led the flag salute. B. Chairman Tyler requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to excuse Commissioner Kirk. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. Il. PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTIONS: A. Chairman Tyler presented Wayne Gardner with a Resolution of Appreciation. It was moved and seconded Abels/Butler by Commissioners to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-021 recognizing Mr. Gardner for his work on the Planning Commission. B. Chairman Tyler announced that a Resolution of Appreciation was also being adopted for Mr. Steward Woodard even though he was unable to attend the meeting. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners AbelsButler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-022 recognizing Mr. Woodard for his work on the Planning Commission. V. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Tyler asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of February 23, 1999. Commissioner Robbins asked that the Minutes be corrected on Page 2, Item 7 to change the word "develop" to "developed". Chairman Tyler asked that Page 2, Item 5 be corrected to state, "....south of Highway 111 is not in the same category." CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC3-9-99.wpd Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1999 There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Abels/Robbins to adopt the Minutes as corrected. Unanimously approved with Commissioner Butler abstaining. B. Department Report: None. VI. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Site Development Permit 99-646, a request of a request of Centex Homes requesting approval of four new prototype residential units located along Columbine and Meadowbrook, west of Madison Street, southeast of PGA West Boulevard. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio 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 Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing the applicant stated he was in attendance to answer any questions the Commission may have. 3. Commissioner Butler complimented the applicant on his presentation as it was one of the best presentations he had seen. 4. Commissioner Abels asked if the material used for the garage doors was fiberglass. Mr. Haag stated it is a fiberglass sandwich that can resist heat, bending, and the thermal elements of the desert. 5. Chairman Tyler asked if they were using a roll up or tilt door for the garages. Mr. Haag stated it was his understanding it would be the single panel roll up door. 6. Commissioner Butler asked about the entry gates as mentioned by the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee. Mr. Haag stated the question was whether there was a connection between this tract's product that is being reviewed and the entry gate. The fact is they are separate issues. KSL is intending to install three gates; two on Madison Street (one east on Madison Street and one heading west which would be on Weiskopf), and the gate that addresses the Centrex tract is at the terminus of PGA Boulevard at the Resort Clubhouse. This will be a residential gate just beyond the Nicklaus Gate. It is not part of this application. 7. Chairman Tyler asked if Meadowbrook does or does not join Madison Street. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC3-9-99.wpd Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1999 Mr. Haag stated Meadowbrook does not. There is a small tab of Winged Foot that extends down and hits Weiskopf and that is the point where the southern gate on the western side of Madison Street occurs. 8. There being no further discussion with the applicant, Chairman Tyler asked if there was any other public comment. There being none, the public participation portion of the public hearing was closed and open for Commission discussion. 9. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Abels to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-023 approving Site Development Permit 99-646, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as recommended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Abels, Butler, Robbins, and Chairman Tyler. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Kirk. ABSTAIN: None. B. Site Development Permit 99-647; a request of Century -Crowell Communities for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for four new prototype residential condominium plans located in Tract 21846-3 and Tract 24317-1 in PGA West. 1. Chairman Tyler opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio 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 Tyler asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Kent Armstrong, representing Century -Crowell Communities, stated that due to discussions with the Homeowners' Association (HOA) they were adding two pools to the existing pool for a total of three. In addition, they are in the process of purchasing the center peninsula on Riviera at Canterbury for the purpose of constructing the third pool. 3. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that what is before the Commission is architectural review of the residential prototypes for compatibility. The swimming pools are not an issue before the Commission. It is an issue between the developer and HOA. 4. Chairman Tyler asked why the house at the northern -most corner was turned the other way. Mr. Armstrong explained it was to accommodate a house on an irregular lot. Chairman Tyler asked if the access gate was going to stay. Mr. Armstrong stated no, they do not know what will be happen at this location, but they intend to landscape that portion of the land they own. CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\PC3-9-99.wpd Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1999 5. Chairman Tyler asked staff if this tract should have the same condition placed on them that was placed on the MSG tract regarding improving the condition of the temporary wall as it is the same wall. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated they are all paying their portion of the infrastructure which the wall is a part of. This is an old condominium map, therefore, the payments for this portion are a condition of the condominium map. 6. Ms. Maggie Headrick, 54-655 Riviera, stated she was concerned about the density of the properties both on Riviera and Tanglewood. She understood there would be 54 freestanding homes on Tanglewood and now they are hearing there will be 73 units with a minimum size of 2,000 square feet. She also understood there were to be 19 freestanding homes on Riviera and now she hears there will be 20. This is too many. It will cause overcrowding and not enough open space which are both issues. The homes across the street are larger. She did not understand why they are not discussing these issues at this meeting. How can they be freestanding units and condo lots and not have minimum frontage. It will lead to high density. Her concern is about density and aesthetics along Tanglewood and Riviera and the effect this will have on their property values. 7. Ms. Carolyn Hunt, 54-527 Riviera, stated they have been residents since 1990. At the time they bought their homes, the information told to them was that the site known as Canterbury Island was to be a pool site. She realizes the pools are not an issue, but it was their understanding that this area was a part of the land purchase by KSL and they expect a pool at that location. Currently, they have to go 22 units to use a pool and this is not acceptable. 8. Mr. Michael Walker, General Manager for PGA West Residential Association, stated Mr. Armstrong has not, as of yet, provided the HOA and the Architectural Committee with a detailed set of plans for the appropriate review as to whether or not they comply with the governing documents or the architectural compatibility of the Association. Second, he has not provided a detailed landscaping design plan for the areas adjacent to the golf course. Third, he has not provided a detailed plan showing the exact location of swimming pools and spas and specific details as to whether the pools will be of equal to, or larger than the existing pools and spas throughout other locations at PGA West. Fourth, he has not obtained approval from HOA or Architectural Committee regarding the design and appearance of the chimney caps as requested by the ALRC. Mr. Armstrong has attended the last two meetings of the Board of the HOA and presented the same information as presented at this meeting, but they have not determined whether or not it will be approved by their Architectural Board. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC3-9-99.wpd Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1999 9. Mr. Dick Lutz, 54-424 Tanglewood, stated the pictures that were distributed to them is different from those they received so he is confused as to what is being approved at this meeting. Staff stated they are approving the architectural elevations only. Mr. Lutz stated that since Canterbury Island is not under the ownership of the developer, it is not appropriate to show a pool when it is not known whether or not there will be a pool at this location. The developer should revise his submittal. Even though the Commission is only approving the architectural elevations, the pool issue needs to be addressed because the number of units placed on this land will be directly affected by the number of pools that will be installed. 10. Mr. Jay Kune, 55-435 Tanglewood, stated he has watched the quality of growth of this City since 1991. The additions that have occurred and are proposed shows a market feeling for an upgrading of what is now a "tickie- tackie" in many of the areas where he lives. He strongly opposes this kind of development that Mr. Armstrong is suggesting in which he places no architectural design; just a row of structures to desecrate what could be a wonderful piece of property. He requested the Commission require some type of architectural challenge, similar to those being proposed by Centex. 11. There being no further public comment, the public comment portion was closed and open to the Commission for discussion. 12. Chairman Tyler explained the Commission is representing the City and often in gated communities there are issues between the developers and the homeowners which are over and above what the City considers. We have heard the pools fall into that category. He can understand the residents concerns, but these issues are to be addressed between the HOA and developers. As to Canterbury Island, again, this is not an issue before the Commission. 13. Commissioner Robbins asked if density was an issue under a compatibility review. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated it was not when you have an approved tract map. The unit count has been approved. Commissioner Robbins asked if this unit count was what was approved by the prior developer. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the unit count is approved under the Specific Plan for the whole development. PGA West is allowed 5,000 units and they have not developed that many units. Mr. Kent Armstrong stated this site was originally approved for condominium units that were four to six-plexes which is many more units than what they are proposing. 14. Commissioner Robbins stated that the plans submitted for their approval are lacking in their ability to allow the Commission to make any decision on what is submitted. He asked staff if there were an guidelines for what is to CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC3-9-99.Wpd Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1999 be submitted for review. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the Commission requested reduced copies be submitted instead of the larger plans. 15. Commissioner Butler stated he concurred with Commission Robbins in regard to the plans that had been submitted for review, but asked staff if the Architectural Review Committee for PGA West have any serious input into modify the elevations to make them more compatible with their community without the Commission being involved in those choices. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that what is approved by the Commission is what the building permits will be issued on. Commissioner Butler asked if they were still subject to the HOA review. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the City does not have any way of knowing what their internal requirements are; they may or may not have more stringent, or not so stringent requirements. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the City does not enforce the HOA or Architectural Committee requirements. Commissioner Butler stated that this is an approved project within an approved community and from the standpoint the Commission has any latitude if the developer believes the plans are adequate for what they were originally approved for, then the Commission is limited to what they can require. Staff pointed out that should the Commission approve these designs and the developer be required to change those approved drawings based on the HOA and/or their Architectural Committee, then the developer will have to return to the Planning Commission for approval of those changes. Normally, the developer has already obtained HOA approval prior to submittal to the Planning Commission, but that is not the case in this instance. 16. Chairman Tyler asked if this project was a compatibility review. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated it was a review to see that it is compatible with other prototypes at PGA West. 17. Commissioner Abels stated that if there is a concern between the HOA and the developer, maybe the Commission should continue this request to allow the developer time to work out the differences with the HOA. 18. Chairman Tyler stated he had visited the site and the proposed homes on Canterbury that face the existing homes on Riviera, are a stretch of the imagination to say that what is proposed will be compatible with what is existing. Tanglewood is less of an issue because those units are the clustered multi -family units. He would like the developer to follow the routine that has been followed in the past to have the developer obtain HOA approval before submitting to the Commission. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC3-9-99.wpd Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1999 19. Mr. Armstrong stated the purpose of this review was to give him direction on his working drawings and detailed plans. He has met with the Association and the Board of Directors during those meetings indicated to him that he was on the right tract. The units from a preliminary point of view are fine. Where does he proceed from here. Should he prepare working drawings so he can be denied. Chairman Tyler stated the issue is not whether or not he should prepare working drawings. The issue is whether or not the elevations shown are compatible with the existing units that will be right across the street. 20. Commissioner Butler stated the question is whether the elevations and what is being presented as the facade for this development is what the HOA are concerned about. The square footage is within their range and not a question. 21. Commissioner Abels stated that the Commission would like to know is that the HOA and developer are in agreement with the plans. The Commission can approve the plans as submitted, but they would like to continue the project to allow the additional time to allow the developer time to resolve the elevation drawings with the HOA. 22. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to continue Site Development Permit 99-647 to April 13, 1999. Unanimously approved. VII. BUSINESS ITEMS: None. VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: A. Chairman Tyler informed the Commission of the invitation to attend the Second Annual Community Picnic on Saturday. May 15, 1999, from 10:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m.. IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Chairman Tyler gave a report on the City Council meeting of March 2, 1999. B. Chairman Tyler reminded the Commissioners to get their Statement of Economic Interest returned to the City. C. Chairman Tyler reminded the Commissioners to have their travel arrangements completed for the League of California Cities Planner's Institute. D. Staff distributed copies of the Revised Zoning Code to each of the Commissioners. CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\PC3-9-99.wpd Planning Commission Minutes March 9, 1999 X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Robbins to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held April 13, 1999, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:55 P.M. on March 9, 1999. Respectfully submitted, BETTY J. SAWYER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC3-9-99.wpd of ,z `y OF I N� TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: MARCH 16, 1999 SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT REPORT FOR THE MONTH OF FEBRUARY Attached please find a copy of the Community Development Status Report. These are the current cases staff is working on that require action by the Planning Commission and/or City Council. 1 S:\cdev\'eb - Mo Dept Rept.wpd :: L F D W W cl Z O L) O' OTC D cc co uu uL rn rn � O 0 cn 0) E o - Z ° to CD O o N O �•.. •v U >- 0 y c Q 0 LO y aCi o � N O H d Q� D a E O aU. U W CL U �. O +_ E °' �° 0 v U OC is aci +' c° c c °+�' 0 w += y c O N '= O o cn C O E 'p ► v) V O d E n �►� 0 0 0 y W aa)) N v- O 0 0 C M c O 0) O L Co N V ? �0 O U •Q U 'p C o U N E cv a o ° 0 cc N ;, y O v a c n� + o a ao c O N o m a O a•c > O c O NQ co - E CDUN�v �: o 0 Cc CL 4t H 0 0 0 E c C. V C C. CN •U cu 0 m O 0 co Ci O N cco 4 Q CL 0+ += 0. 0 �►' n f�0 U a �O +• C U c c L c W �-- m w 0 V H O OQ) O CDN c O avi C> CD ++ n o� a•C'0 0 0 o C +0, C a a) ++ 0 0 C C O a O c ° `° ° aa) U M _ •O ° w E 0 c — °" E F- ch > E ) U F- y °- ° ° eyn vi cNn p_= o° t c c O v a) 0 0 0 0 0 co w %- � L- ►.. L ►- O O V M C v) 0 -J M O O 0 0 d a. a a a. n. a. aE�Oa�cEo crEgcc �w C C C c C 4 0 a O m C n O O O O ch ch rn cn cn Q a ca a E c Q oc 4- ° ° oc n ob 0 O 00 a) �' %- O a- CCQ T Q U' co W � W C c7 a) Q co U cj ` O Cr)o d t to0 0 a)U C 00L �J O O ® aci E a. E W ecn U Q 0 cn , a () O C7 @ to O Q E N 0 p 0 O O _ x Q a) t/) p0, CD.0 A CA = c� cn C Q tG a• V O J a- a C N O W a O U d. N D L c D 0)w a U O aS CD m> 0- .°� t- in m cn 0 '0 a) E n N o },® V 4- a = ao QU O a QQ UU a.0 O O �LC QQ UU a.0 O OCl. � s CL QQ UU a.0 -v o) .CL .. UC) 1 -1 Qa_ �CY) UetLo CC -j0U Qa.0 Mw U ir Q O0 moo CD CV) IL O O U E i 0 C C oa tv0s C: }c—, a - aa)i a) N ca I ai ) c o cc . + ) U to a) U) 3� ++ co cn c o .. a) +, �� N w- v O cam a_ c Q C o t� e- ca O O Cl) a) E 3 0= ' ca U N CD a) o r-cn r- c cr s ►_ _ d a. C to c0 a) �" L t aa)) O > N O 3 N d 0 O 0 0 c a0 E+1 a)� � a)rn � c O I� +� O 0 cn Q co cc co �o >> O w O e- r- 4-1 2 M c`t:N0 d CO > o oo c >Vm y a) °' o co a E *' ro ._' 0 d o r= 'v) a) 'sn a. U E c� L- +' N +' a) O O tD ro 0 0 O 0 �- c) a O a) c `� m fl p — C a) O C cm c E U ® 0 r- (!� O O cn O E >, >a, c00 cc9 .. N co �a c .. E tm O Q C W ll E � � a y 0 a) m 0+1 +O c c a) 0 y o > p) c :a m e c 0 c� m f° �' w O m a O OL "� U c Q U O a> E 0 `> c a. cNo 00 O c e� U rn p a in c d E ca > y O vE V N oNo o 4r a) � CL N 0 1- c O co > v E n CD N O r- .O a) C C c O 0 cat N a) a C w w- 0 W N W Q d ate-+ cn N n, 0 0 0 0 +r 0 c a cco y C] 0-a O 4- Q 0 0 _0 +_ ++ O N O _O a) a) O V a. O C O to U O N- a. m CC to C O 0 Mn 0 C c9 > a` U y`- cc 0 p c O c >0 Q p O E? E '- a) > O O O C. +' O c0 p +>+ .. O O 4= U= U co N . C7 .... c r- Q N Q Q Q 0 U N U ir Q a w Q d y N N to D Q O F " 0 a) O o a) 0 O U C7 a. _ O W c C C a) cn6 D w w w + c cnU EU a) E cUn En (nU U m U U Q N >E— It N CD (DO ) (D O C t�V N N N 1 f O r- CD � (n O (4) U ? ma) N_ a Q p 0 a. �t a- U h- (n to C7 N J to (n to tC (n .. 44 0 M t0� a �- c uj o � c .c c d Ld 00 00 N ® H a Z O - Z c O O c O C — 41 O CA c 41 O O X O cm O O rn c C .w a) E o ~ coo L P / MO cr- N N E CD O = U c ? > 'V Q R co t co O E N Q � a o0 �0 00 N N O > O � M- PH # PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: APRIL 13, 1999 CASE NOS.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 98-375, SPECIFIC PLAN AND PARCEL MAP 29052 APPLICANT: LUNDIN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY ENGINEER: WARNER ENGINEERING REQUEST: RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR DEVELOPMENT PRINCIPLES AND DESIGN GUIDELINES OF A 111,000 SQUARE FOOT SHOPPING CENTER AND SUBDIVISION OF 12.5 ACRES INTO SEVEN AND ONE REMAINDER PARCEL LOCATION: NORTHWEST CORNER OF JEFFERSON STREET AND 50TH AVENUE REQUEST TO CONTINUE: Warner Engineering has requested a continuance to April 27, 1999, in order to allow time for resolve design issues related to the Specific Plan (Attachment #1). RECOMMENDATION: Continue request to the Planning Commission meeting of April 27, 1999. Attachment: 1. Letter from Warner Engineering, dated April 2, 1999. Prepared by: Stan B. Sawa, Principal Planner Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager cApc rpt sp 98-034 pm 29052 245 Joshua Lane, Suite B 73-185 Highway 111, Suite A ucca Valley, California 92284-2968 Palm Desert, California 92260-3907 hone (760) 365-7638 Phone (760) 341-3101 ax (760) 365-2146 Fax (760) 341-5999 April 2, 1999 Stan Sawa City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Specific Plan - SP98-034 and Tentative Parcel Map No. 29052 Request for change of date for Planning Commission review Dear Stan: Warner engineering CIVIL ENGNEERNO/PLANNNGMND SURVI I C8510MS � ECMV/ (�Pi - I� l 5 1999 u CITY OF LAQUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT We would Dike to request that the review of this project by the Planning Commission be re- scheduled from April 13th to April 27th. We are currently working to resolve several issues and need the extra time to provide the requested revisions to the Specific Plan document. We understand that by postponing the Planning Commission review, that this project may also be rescheduled from the agenda for the City Council of May 4th to the following City Council meeting of May 18th. Please let me know if you have any questions, or need any further information. Thank you. Yours very truly, WARNER ENGINEERING C�� ��'4f By: Alice Lee Project Manager w 1 i PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: APRIL 13, 1999 CASE NO(S).: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-647 APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES PROPERTY OWNERS: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES LOCATION: TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON TANGLEWOOD, RIVIERA WAY, AND CANTERBURY IN PGA WEST (UNDER SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002) REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR FOUR NEW PROTOTYPE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PLANS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 83062922), PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002, WHICH WAS CERTIFIED ON MAY 15, 1984. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) - 2 TO 4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE SURROUNDING ZONING DESIGNATION: PROJECT SITE: SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL-1 (SPR) - SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NORTH: GOLF COURSE AND SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL SOUTH: GOLF COURSE AND SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL EAST: GOLF COURSE WEST: SPECIFIC PLAN RESIDENTIAL BACKGROUND: To date, approximately 1,800 dwelling units have been constructed in PGA West by various developers. The size of the constructed and approved units varies from 1,290 to 4,830 square feet, excluding custom-built houses. Houses are primarily one-story with some two-story units. PGA West offers a blend of Spanish/Mediterranean- style architecture with houses having clay or concrete tile roofing, exterior plaster walls and plaster or wood fascias. Other features used include, but are not limited to arches, shutters, stucco window and door surrounds, and earth tone exterior colors. The proposed prototype units are for 73 future units to be constructed within a portion of Tentative Tract 21846-3 and Tract 24317-1. The units will be air -space condominiums. Project Request The applicant proposes four new residential prototype plans for 54 future units within Tract 21846-3 and 19 units within Tract 24317-1, in PGA West, a private master planned golf -oriented resort community. The site includes 73 future units located on Tanglewood, Riviera Way, and Canterbury, and two community pools on Tanglewood. Another community pool is proposed for the triangular lot off of Canterbury. The units may also be built in other areas of PGA West should the applicant purchase additional property. The proposed floor plans vary from 2,027 to 2,809 square feet in size. The proposed units would be situated on lots of not less than 6,500 square feet backing onto golf course fairways. All plans are one-story, with each plan ranging in height with a maximum of 18 feet, excluding the chimney projections. Each plan is laid out with a front entry courtyard. Within each plan, the roof heights vary due to the different roof planes and sizes. The four plans feature two car garages with a golf cart parking bay. Of the 73 units, nine will be Plan 1, 19 will be Plan 2, 22 will be Plan 3, and 23 will be Plan 4. A Mediterranean architectural style is proposed for the project, utilizing exterior plaster walls and concrete and/or clay tile roofing. The color and materials are provided in the application portfolio. Each plan includes three different facades, with building sides and rears being the same within each plan. The material for the garage doors is not specified. The typical front yard landscaping plan is included in the portfolio. Front yards are to include a minimum of two shade trees, palm trees and numerous shrubs highlighted by lawn. A varied plant palette is proposed. Vines and ground cover are used to complement the landscaping design. Public Notice: The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on February 26, 1999, as well as mailed to all property owners within PGA West and 500 feet of the site. No comments have been received. Any comments received will be handed out at the meeting. Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) Action On March 4, 1999, the ALRC considered this request. By Minute Motion 99-006, the ALRC determined that the proposed architectural design and landscaping are compatible with that existing at PGA West, subject to recommended conditions which have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval. Planning Commission Action On March 9, 1999, the Planning Commission considered this request and continued the item. To date, no new material has been submitted on the design of the proposed units. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_ approving Site Development Permit 99-647, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Application portfolio Prepared by: Leslie Mouriquand Associate Planner Submitted by: t Christine di lorio Planning Manager P:\perptSDP99-647CenturyatPGA.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-647, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, PROVIDING COMPATIBILITY APPROVAL OF FOUR PROTOTYPE UNITS FOR CONSTRUCTION IN A PORTION OF TRACT 21846-3 AND TRACT 24317-1 ON TANGLEWOOD, RIVIERA WAY, AND CANTERBURY, IN PGA WEST CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-647 APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 9th day of March, and the 131h day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Century -Crowell Communities to approve architectural and landscaping plans for four new prototype residential condominium plans to be constructed along Tanglewood, Riviera Way, and Canterbury, west of PGA Boulevard, and south of 54th Avenue, more particularly described as: Portions of Tract 21846-3 and Tract 24317-1 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 41h day of March, 1999, hold a duly -noticed public meeting to consider the request of Century -Crowell Communities to approve architectural and landscape plans for four new prototype residential condominium plans to be constructed along Tanglewood, Riviera Way, and Canterbury, west of PGA Blvd., and south of 541h Avenue, and did, by Minute Motion 99-006, recommend approval of the request subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be exempt from California Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 15303, Class 3 (A) of the Guidelines For Implementation; 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: 1. The proposed units are of a compatible architectural design, colors, and materials to the existing units in the tract. The units utilize similar architectural features such as tile roofs, exterior plaster, recessed windows, popout window and door surrounds, and wood fascias. The plans are compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. 2. The proposed landscaping plans will provide a minimum of one 24 inch box size tree in the front yard area. All units will have at least one additional tree and other shrubs and groundcover. P:\peresSDP99-647Century.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 99- Site Development Permit 98-647 April 13, 1999 3. No two story residences are proposed, nor are there any existing in the tract. 4. Masonry walls are proposed between units and will be compatible with existing walls in the tract. 5. The size range of the existing residences is 1,290 to 4,830 square feet. The proposed units vary from 2,027 square feet to 2,809 square feet. This request is in compliance with compatibility review requirements. 6. The final plot plan will ensure compliance with the requirement that identical, or similar, front elevations shall not be placed on adjacent lots or directly across the street from one another. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 98-647 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 City Planning Commission, held on the 13' day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\peresSDP99-647Century. wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-647 CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES APRIL 13, 1999 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. This approval is for four residential prototypes containing 2,027 to 2,809 square feet in habitable floor space. 2. Final front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of the first building permit for these units. The plans shall provide for and indicate 24-inch box tree sizes with 1.5 to 2-inch caliper measuring 10 feet tall from the top of box as per Section 9.60.300 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Garage doors shall be constructed of metal, wood, or composite materials and be sectional roll -up style if located less than 25-feet from the front property line pursuant to the requirements of Specific Plan 83-002. Lites are optional. 4. Air conditioning mechanical equipment shall not be installed in the five foot side yard setbacks. 5. The applicant/developer shall apply for a Minor Use Permit for the model home complex. 6. Lawn areas shall be either hybrid Bermuda (summer) or hybrid Bermuda/Rye (winter) depending on the season planted. All trees shall be double staked to prevent wind damage. 7. Fireplace caps shall be of a variety and decorative. P:\pccoaSDP99-647Century.wpd N I M ATTACHMENT i I A ATTACHMENT A 10'-0• 32'-0• 017049 CMUM PATO '--r--------- - -�_r--- --------- i-i Fell 6*- 7 6'-0 L0hG IM S02E N media niche GREAT ROOM ■r illn DINING !EDROOM 2 Room OPT. DEN + ,� /gas own Ffim■■■■■■ '� iionosson soon fru■rsse r�����r■rm" mna*7 ■■�u■■u■��■; ��f■�aiftiyar MASTER �3tu�fuu■r u���u�� MAS. BATH OGARAGE GOLF CART STORAGE s---------------- W PLAN 1 202'7 SQ. FT. PGA WEST { THE CklANJ:'IONS AT PGA WEST as 8 /01/98 CENTURY CROWELL CO S 10 w1siae8/98 LA QLTJSTTA. C � 7-TF+ORI�TIA KN TE d. A980 ATES MDRECnX MD R.H"Q ME RIGHT HEAR 0- 6-- LEFT P"WEST- ge so p 10/01/98 CENTURY Ca;;-'C:)VVF-J-I- C01VlN4TJT4rrMS 11/10/98 LA <2X-TiaNQv-ak,. 4=L c3oxt. 2/03/99 K 11 & ASS17ATES 10'-01 36'-0• OPnONAL i_ r-----------001B2E-------------'-- i PLAN 2 Mk 2203 SQ. PT. P"WEST C IONS AT PGA WEST ID esoss CENTURY C -0 WELL CO lorovea 11/18/98 LA QtJIN'Z'A. CALIFORNZA KN TE S A530 ATES MpfTECTUE AND PLANNG ..... ..... RIGHT REAR LEFT PLAN 2 PGA WEST T' M C IONS AT PGA WEST ED 9ao6s CENTURY CROWELL CO S 10/01/99 nnei9e LA QLTZN'TA, C.A.LIFORN=A 2-3-99 "I TE & ASSO ATES media niche DINING 3'-0' N GREAT ROOM 6'-a Low. VISION SCl1EBd ROOM wet e/c bail --" OPTIONAL i COVEf2E) PATIO MORNING ROOM BEDROOM 2 � 1 linen ow O OPT. DEN LL O MAS. BATH C MASTER SUITE ° i I ` 4 _ GUEST SUITE I GARAGE 31 V GOLF CART STORAGE r--------------- i i i i i QAM All mmw SLLS TO 6`9 i (TTPIOAL THIS SCE MY) PLAN 3 ..� 2418 SQ. FT. PGA WEST { 71-M C IONS AT PGA WESTED as a CENTURY CROWELL CO S 10/01/9e nnares z..*- c�unv-r A. c �zrgor�vxa KN TE & ASS, ATES ARCIMCTIN MO PLANIG -------------------- ®a as Fl 3o ®® FolD --r RIGHT REAR LEFT PLAN 3 PGAWEST 9s a THE CI3AMPIONS AT PGA WEST 1oioED Y CROWELL CO w1ai9a I , e� QL7IN'TA. CAI .IFORNIA 2-02-99 PLANT 4 WA 2809 SQ. FT. PGA WEST THE CIIAMPIONS AT PGA WEST ea as CENTURX CROWELL CO S 1°/oi/aa 11/18/98 I —A. 4CQ-P1<JXr4TA. CALZFFO14-1 I KN TE & ASSO ATES A"TFCTLff Mn a AN M PLA1vT 4 RIGHT REAR LEFT i PGAWEST o■ Q T]E3E Ci-iAivjipIONS AT PGA WEST 96 58 CENT mlr CROWF..L.L CO S LA QLJIrT'TA, CALIFORNtA 10/0D1/98 11/18/98 2-02-99 8 8e 1�i! k�6tllgi k ! e w w_ n n• e w n_ w n n w n• e o w e ---�- i 1 a a% a i A a a y y e b b s PH #1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: APRIL 13, 1999 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-619 AMENDMENT 1 APPLICANT: RJT HOMES, LLC. PROPERTY OWNER: JOHN HENSLER LOCATION: ALONG CYPRESS DRIVE AND BRECKENRIDGE DRIVE IN LA QUINTA FAIRWAYS REQUEST: APPROVAL OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR TWO ADDITIONAL PROTOTYPE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 83061305), PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 83-001, WHICH WAS CERTIFIED ON MAY 15,1984. NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS ARE PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR) SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: PROJECT SITE: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; VACANTLOTS NORTH: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, GOLF COURSE; LA QUINTA FAIRWAYS EXISTING HOMES SOUTH: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, GOLF COURSE; CALLE TAMPICO ROADWAY, CITRUS GATED COMMUNITY BACKGROUND: WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES EAST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, GOLF COURSE, PARK AVENUE ROADWAY, CITRUS GATED COMMUNITY Project Proposal The applicant proposes to amend Site Development Permit 98-619 by adding two additional prototype single family residential unit plans, each with two facade options, for Phases 3 & 4 of Tract 25389, within the southern portion of La Quinta Fairways (Attachment 1). No modifications are proposed for the previously approved landscaping. The project site is a private master planned golf -oriented resort community within Specific Plan 83-001. The site includes 24 lots (Lots 38 through 61) within Phase 3 of the subdivision, and approximately 33 lots to be created in Phase 4 (Parcel 1 of Parcel Map 24837) of the tract. The lots are located along Cypress Point and Breckenridge Drive at the southern portion of the La Quanta Fairways community. Lot sizes for the Phase 3 lots exceed 7,000 square feet. These lots are not fairway lots, but rather back onto each other or the perimeter of the La Quinta Fairways development. The applicant has submitted a portfolio (Attachment 2) including building elevations and floor plans with 2,004 square feet of liveable space for Plan 100, and 1,984 square feet of liveable space for Plan 200. Both of the proposed plans are for 3-bedroom, one story units. The maximum building height is 17-feet, except for chimney projections. Both plans are laid out in a predominantly square footprint with entries oriented within a front courtyard area. The 2-car garages are front loading with roll -up sectional doors. The roof lines consist of the main side facing gable and smaller hips. A Mediterranean architectural style is proposed for the two units, with plaster walls and concrete S-tile roofing. The color and materials will be the same as for the original six prototype units approved in 1998. Proposed side and rear elevations are the same for both prototypes. The garage doors will be the same dark brown color as the first six units. The two new proposed plans provide for outdoor living area in the front of the units, since these lots are not adjacent to the golf course. By having the outdoor living area in the front, the exposure to noise impacts from vehicular traffic along Calle Tampico and Park Avenue will be reduced. The two new plans provide front courtyard enteries with masonry block walls in front of the units, similar to the original six RJT units. Landscaping will be provided P:\LESLIE\perptSDP98-619Amd 1.wpd on both sides of the courtyard walls and in rear yards. The future resident will have the opportunity to have private swimming pools and outdoor fireplaces in the front courtyards. Existing Unit Description The City originally approved the Duna La Quinta Specific Plan (SP 83-001) in 1984 which permitted over 1,200 dwelling units on 266 acres. Subsequent amendments of SP 83-001 have reduced the total number of residential units allowed to 966. The La Quinta Fairways development (previously named Desert Fairways) is Phase 8 of SP 83-001 allowing 300 residential units and golf course fairways on 94 acres. The initial home builders of the La Quinta Fairways (Tract #25389) were Brock Homes and Jascorp. They built single family homes ranging in size from 2,204 square feet to 3,017 square feet on lots that front onto Del Monte Court, Indian Wood Court, Doral Street and Grand Traverse Avenue. The existing homes are one and two -stories and were built in the early 1990's. In the Mid-1990's, Fairways La Quinta acquired various single family lots in Tract #25389 (Phase 1) to develop 2,316 square feet and 2,424 square feet single story houses within five percent of the size of the existing homes. On September 12, 1995, the Planning Commission approved two additional houses that were 1,999 square feet and 2,300 square feet under Plot Plan 95-563 (Compatibility Review). The houses, built by Ayres Homes, were constructed on Spyglass Hill Drive with the exception of the model homes on Grand Traverse Avenue. Exterior finishes consisted of concrete roof the with plaster cement walls (i.e., desert colors). Flat and shingle concrete the roofing was permitted provided the houses were interspersed among houses with S-tiled roofs. Additionally, stucco boxed roof eaves of 18- inches were required to ensure the homes were similar in design to the existing homes. Ayres Homes completed the remaining lots of Phase 1. On March 10, 1998, the Planning Commission approved six new single family residential unit plans and associated landscaping for RJT Development. These units would complete the La Quinta Fairways community. The units ranged from 2,180 square feet to 2,610 square feet, feature 3-bedrooms, and 2-car garages, with golf cart garages for four of the units. The architectural style is California Mediterranean with the houses having concrete S-tile roofs, exterior cement plaster walls and fascia treatments. Roof lines include hip and gable designs, and each house has two different street elevations. Construction of these units is underway along Castle Pines Drive. Architecture and Landscaping Committee Action On April 7, 1999, the ALRC considered this request (Attachment 3). By Minute Motion 99- 008, the ALRC determined that the proposed architectural design is compatible with that P:\LESLIE\perptSDP98-619Amdl.wpd contained in the original approval for SDP 98-619, approved by the Planning Commission on March 10, 1998, subject to recommended conditions which have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve this request can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. The applicant originally proposed two new prototype residential units, both with a continuous roof ridge line as viewed from the rear elevation. The ALRC recommended that one of the units should be revised to break-up the continuous roof ridge line for the rear elevation in order to provide more variety and interest, in keeping with existing roof lines within the La Quinta Fairways community. After the ALRC meeting, the applicant submitted to staff a revision to the rear elevation for Plan 200 (Attachment 4). Staff finds this revision acceptable in achieving the desired goal in that the revision adds a slightly popped -out gable element that reaches up to the top roof ridge line. This revision enables staff to recommend that all mandatory findings can be made for approval of this request. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- approving Site Development Permit 98-619 Amendment 1, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Application portfolio 3. ALRC Minutes - April 7, 1999 4. Revised Rear Elevation - Plan 200 Prepared by: Leslie Mouriquand, Associate Planner P:\LESLI E\perptSDP98-619Am d 1.wpd Submitted by: 1 � Christine di lorio, Plating Manager PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-619 AMENDMENT 1, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, PROVIDING COMPATIBILITY APPROVAL OF TWO ADDITIONAL PROTOTYPE SINGLE FAMILY UNITS FOR CONSTRUCTION ON UNDEVELOPED LOTS ALONG CYPRESS DRIVE AND BRECKENRIDGE DRIVE IN TRACT 25389, IN LA QUINTA FAIRWAYS (SPECIFIC PLAN 83-001) CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-619 AMENDMENT 1 APPLICANT: RJT HOMES, LLC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of RJT Homes, LLC., to approve architectural plans for two new prototype single family residential plans to be constructed along Cypress Drive and Breckenridge Drive, west of Park Avenue, and north of Calle Tampico, more particularly described as: Phases 3 and 4 of Tract 25389 WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 71h day of April, 1999, hold a duly -noticed public meeting to consider the request of RJT Homes, LLC., to approve architectural plans for two new prototype single family residential plans to be constructed along Cypress Drive and Breckenridge Drive, west of Park Avenue, and north of Calle Tampico, and did, by Minute Motion 99-008, recommend approval of the request subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be exempt from California Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 15303, Class 3 (A) of the Guidelines For Implementation; 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: 1. The proposed units are of a compatible architectural design, colors, and materials to the existing units in the tract and surrounding neighborhood. The units utilize similar architectural features such as tile roofs, exterior plaster, and popout window and door surrounds. 2. No changes are proposed to the approved landscaping plans, which will provide a minimum of one specimen 24 inch box tree size, with 1.5" to 2" P:\peresSDP98-619Arnd 1 RJT.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 99- Site Development Permit 98-619 Amendment 1- RJT Homes, LLC. April 13, 1999 caliper measuring 10 feet tall from the top of box, in the front yard area. All units will have at least one additional tree and other shrubs and groundcover. 3. No two story residences are proposed for Phases 3 or 4 of Tract 25389. 4. Masonry walls are proposed for front courtyards and between units and will be compatible with existing walls in the tract. 5. The size range of the existing residences within La Quinta Fairways is 1,999 to 3,017 square feet. The proposed units vary from 1,984 square feet to 2,004 square feet. This request is in compliance with compatibility review requirements. 6. The final precise grading plan will ensure compliance with the requirement that identical, or similar, front elevations shall not be placed on adjacent lots or directly across the street from one another. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 98-619 Amendment 1 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 City Planning Commission, held on the 131h day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California P:\peresSDP98-619Amd1 RJT.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 99- Site Development Permit 98-619 Amendment 1- RJT Homes, LLC. April 13, 1999 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\peresSDP98-619Amd1 RJT.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 98-619 AMENDMENT 1 (COMPATIBILITY REVIEW) RJT DEVELOPMENT (LA QUINTA FAIRWAYS) APRIL 13, 1999 CONDITIONS: 1. Pedestrian gates leading into the side and back yards shall be wrought iron or tubular metal and painted to match the exterior house colors or approved HOA colors. 2. The landscape/irrigation plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review. The plans will require Community Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agriculture Commissioner approval before they will be considered final. The plans shall include the following: (A) front yard landscaping shall include lawn and a minimum of ten shrubs (i.e., 5-gallon or larger) and two trees (i.e., one 15-gallon with 1 " diameter trunks and one 24" box tree with a 1.5 to 2" caliper trunk measuring 10 feet from the top of box as per Section 9.60.300 of the Zoning Ordinance) for interior lots and five trees (4 trees @ 15-gallon minimum with one 24" box tree) for corner lots; and (B) landscaping or fencing shall screen all ground mounted mechanical equipment (i.e., A/C condensing units, pool equipment, etc.). All provisions of Chapter 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscaping and Irrigation) shall be met. The developer and subsequent property owner shall continuously maintain all landscaping in a healthy and viable condition. 3. Lawn areas for front yards shall be either Hybrid Bermuda (Summer) or Hybrid Bermuda/Rye (Winter) depending upon the season when it is planted. All trees shall be double staked with lodge poles to prevent wind damage. All shrubs and trees shall be watered with bubblers, or emitters. Landscape improvements for each house shall be installed before final occupancy of the house. 4. Ground mounted equipment (air-conditioning condensers, etc.) shall be located in side and/or rear yard areas behind screen walls or landscaping. All equipment shall be a minimum distance of five -feet from any property line. 5. The concrete driveways shall include expansion joints and a broom finish (or better) texture. 6. All requirements of Tentative Tract Map 25389, SP 83-001 and the RM Zone District shall be met during building permit plan check approval. The minimum CONDSDP619RTC-22, RESOSDP619-22 Page 1 of 2 Resolution 98-011 Site Development Permit 98-619 March 10, 1998 rear yard building setback for this project is 15-feet. Front yard setbacks shall be varied from 20-feet to 25-feet to create additional interest in the streetscape as required by Section 9.30.050 of the Zoning Code. 7. This site development permit shall expire on March 10, 1999, unless extended pursuant Section 9.200.080 of the Zoning Code. 8. A Minor Use Permit shall be required for temporary model complexes (sales offices) including signs/flags per Section 9.60.250 of the Zoning Code. 9. Roll -up, sectional metal garage doors shall be installed for all homes. 10. Private yard walls shall be constructed using masonry blocks and be finished with stucco. Rear yard walls shall be stepped down when adjacent to golf course fairways. 11. Two car garages shall have a minimum interior dimension of 20' in width by 20' in depth. 12. Street mailboxes shall be shared between two or more houses. The mailboxes shall be set in cement plaster stucco enclosures matching existing mailboxes within the La Quinta Fairways development. 13. Property owner/developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel at its sole discretion. P:\LESLIE\pccoaSDP98-619Amd1RJT.wpd Page 2of 2 TTACHMENT #1 CASE MAP CASE Na SDP 96-619 AMENDMENT 1 RJT LA QUINTA FAIRWAYS SCALE: ATTACHMENT I MINUTES ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA April 7, 1999 CALL TO ORDER 10:00 a.m. A. This meeting of the Architectural and Landscaping Committee was called to order at 10:08 a.m. by Planning Manager Christine di Iorio who led the flag salute. B. Committee Members present: Bill Bobbitt and Dennis Cunningham. C. Staff present: Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planners Leslie Mouriquand and Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: A. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of March 3, 1999. There being no corrections, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 99-619 Amendment #1; a request of RJT Homes, LLC, for approval of architectural plans for two new prototype residences to be constructed in Phase III and IV of Tract 25387 in La Quinta Fairways. Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Cunningham asked staff to identify which lots are in question. Staff indicated the lots on the map. Committee Member Cunningham asked which roof ridge line staff was requesting the applicant modify. Staff indicated the rear roof line. Committee Member Cunningham CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC4-7-99.wpd Architectural & Landscape Review Committee April 7, 1999 stated that from the street, this lack of detail has been a concern of the ALRC. Mr. Chad Myer, Project Manager for RJT, stated they had met with staff and are trying to accommodate staff s recommendations. The new plans were designed with the living space in the front to account for their location on the perimeter of the tract and will be priced less. They have made some revisions, but will continue to work with staff to complete the look desired for homes backing up to Park Avenue and Calle Tampico. 3. Committee Member Cunningham suggested a false dormer with a roof ventilation system. Mr. Myer stated they would add something to the rear elevation. Committee Member Cunningham stated the City does not want a sea of red roofs, therefore, staff is looking to change roof elevations. They do not want to redesign the house, but give developers the "feel" of what is wanted. 4. Mr. Matt Evans, General Manager, RJT Homes, stated they wanted to work with the City and they would make the changes as requested. Committee Member Cunningham stated it was not the City's intent to add a financial burden to the developer, but rather create variation and provide suggestions. 5. Mr. Myer stated he would work with staff to redesign the ridge line. He further clarified that Lot 20 would be landscaped with a groundcover for dust control. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that dust control is an issue. Most of the homeowner associations do not have ordinances or any type of enforcement to control the dust. At PGA West they have provided their own dust control because landowners would not work with them. It is an issue he would like to see addressed by the City. 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 99-008 recommending to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 99-619, Amendment #1, subject to conditions as submitted. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 99-648; a request of Century -Crowell Communities for approval of architectural plans for three prototype residences to be constructed in Tract 27519 approximately 100 feet south of Desert Stream Drive and on the West side of Dune Palms Road in Aliso Del Rey. l . Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC4-7-99.wpd 2 A 1- a A C I-i M f. N -T l# 4 34 zi d� 0-' nkI r "mnn Me' a 77 M=T/22./t72 a 4D'1 : FaX '43. : Sep. 19 1933 11: 33q'1 =c r.n i t r r^I YJr ft" i r'M.-I el— r "i." PH # STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 13, 1999 CASE NUMBER: TRACT 28838-1 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: RIELLY HOMES ENGINEERS: M. D. S. CONSULTING LOCATION: ON THE EAST SIDE OF MADISON STREET APPROXIMATELY 2,700-FEET SOUTH OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD ABUTTING THE TOM WEISKOPF AND JACK NICKLAUS (RESORT) GOLF COURSES. REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF AN AMENDING FINAL MAP TO RECONFIGURE THE SHAPE OF VARIOUS SINGLE FAMILY AND COMMON LOTS ADJACENT TO THE INTERSECTION OF LEGENDS WAY WITH MUIRFIELD AVENUE AND TROON WAY IN SPECIFIC PLAN 83-002 (AMENDMENT #3) AND 90-017 IN PGA WEST. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (SECTION 15305 (CLASS 5(A)) BECAUSE MINOR LOT LINE ADJUSTMENTS ARE PROPOSED. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING/ SPECIFIC PLAN DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND GOLF COURSE OPEN SPACE (LDR AND G)/RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) AND GC (GOLF COURSE) AND RESIDENTIAL AND GOLF COURSE/OPEN SPACE STPC 28838 RH - 32 Page 1 of 3 BACKGROUND: The PGA West Resort and Club is made up of numerous tentative tract maps which have been approved since the 1984 approval of Specific Plan 83-002 (Resolution 84- 31) and its accompanying EIR (State Clearinghouse #83062922). Existing housing units range in size from 1,283 square feet to over 5,000 square feet. Started in 1986, PGA West is a country club community of approximately 1,800 residences (5,000 houses are allowed) and multiple championship golf courses. Development built -out is anticipated to be approximately 2,500 housing units based on development activity in recent years by various PGA West developers building detached residential housing units. On December 3, 1991, the City Council adopted Resolution 91-105, approving a master planned development of 880 units on 220 acres south of the PGA West Resort and Club (i.e., Specific Plan 90-017) in conjunction with certification of an Environmental Impact Report (State Clearinghouse #90020727). This planned community connects with PGA West by the connection of streets and golfing facilities. Tract History On June 23, 1998, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider a 200 single family lot subdivision located on the southeast corner of Madison Street and Airport Boulevard within the boundaries of PGA West (SP 83-002) and Specific Plan 90-017 (i.e., TTM 28838). The single family lots ranged in size from 12,070 square feet to 32,733 square feet fronting onto private streets. The Planning Commission, on a 5-1 vote (Commissioner Gardner absent), adopted Resolution 98-046 recommending approval of the subdivision map, subject to findings and conditions. On July 20, 1998, the City Council adopted Resolution 98-78, approving TTM 28838, subject to findings and conditions (See Attachment 1). The prototype housing units for this Tract were approved by the Planning Commission on October 27, 1998, under Site Development Permit 98-634 (Resolution 98-074). Tract houses range in size from 2,100 square feet to 3,696 square feet. Tract 28838-1, consisting of 77 single family and other common lots, was recorded with the Riverside County Recorder on September 28, 1999 (See Attachment 2). Site construction is ongoing, with the model homes to be completed early this summer. STPC 28838 RH - 32 Page 2 of 3 Project Request Amending Tract Map 28838-1 is proposed by the applicant in order to accomplish multiple lot line changes, in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance (See Attachment 3). The proposed lot line changes are related to the revision of the entrance into Tract 28838-1 on Madison Street. These changes are proposed in order to better align Legends Way with the entrance across Madison Street in Tract 28444 (i.e., Weiskopf) and facilitate larger gate houses and entry statement amenities. This amendment does not increase or decrease the number of lots which were previously approved. Public Notice - This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 1, 1999, and mailed to property owners within 500-feet of the Project. 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. TRACT MAP FINDINGS: The findings for a recommendation for approval can be made as noted in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_, recommending to the City Council approval of an amendment to Tract 28838-1, subject to findings and conditions. Attachments: 1. TTM 28838 Exhibit Map 2. Tract Map 28838-1 3. Amending Tract Map 28838-1 4. Large Exhibit (Planning Commission Only) d r `\ Submitted by: Prep �Y: % Greg-T+s*ll, Associate Planner STPC 28838 RH - 32 Christine di lorio, PI ning Manager Page 3 of 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF LOT DESIGN CHANGES FOR TRACT MAP 28838-1 CASE NO.: AMENDING TRACT MAP 28838-1 APPLICANT: RIELLY HOMES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13`h day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for Rielly Homes to consider design changes for lots abutting Legends Way and its intersection with Muirfield Avenue and Troon Way in Tract 28838-1, generally located approximately 2,700-feet south of Airport Boulevard and east of Madison Street, more particularly described as: West '/2 of Section 22, T6S, R7E, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said amendment complies with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that this request is Categorically Exempt pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15305, Class 5(a): and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify a recommendation for approval of said amendment to Tract Map 28838-1 : 1 . The Map and its design are consistent with the General Plan and Specific Plans 83-002 and 90-017 in that its amended lots are in conformance with applicable goals, policies, and development standards, such as lot size, access, etc. The proposed lots are consistent with and will not negatively impact the overall growth and development of PGA West. Conditions are recommended ensuring compliance with both the PGA West Specific Plans and Zoning Code. 2. The design of the amended subdivision or its proposed improvements are not likely to create environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure wildlife or their habitat because the area covered by the amending Map have already been mitigated. 3. The design of the amended subdivision and the proposed types of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems because urban improvements are existing or will be installed based on applicable local, state, and federal requirements. RESOPC28838-32 Planning Commission Resolution 99-_ Tract Map 28838-1 April 13, 1999 4. All common landscaping lots will be privately maintained. The landscape design complements the surrounding residential areas in that it enhances the aesthetic and visual quality of the area. 5. The design of the amended subdivision and the proposed types of improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of the property within the subdivision in that none presently exist and access to the residential development. No adverse impacts have been identified based on letters of response from affected public agencies. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby require compliance with those mitigation measures required for Specific Plans 83-002 and 90-017, as amended; and 3. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of an amendment to Tract Map 28838-1 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California RESOPC28838-32 Planning Commission Resolution 99-_ Tract Map 28838-1 April 13, 1999 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC28838-32 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TRACT MAP 28838-1, AMENDMENT #1 RIELLY HOMES APRIL 13, 1999 GENERAL Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Clerk is directed to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 2. Tract Map 28838-1 (Amendment #1) shall comply with the requirements and standards of §§66410-66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Title 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. This map amendment shall expire two years after approval by the City Council unless extended pursuant to the provisions of the Subdivision Ordinance. 3. All applicable conditions of City Council Resolution 98-78 for Tentative Tract Map 28838 shall be met prior to recordation of this Map. 4. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. Condpar 28838-1, 32 ATTACHMENTS TENTATIVE TRACT NO. -r YA PGA WEST, w rfaer a .a Y -in aaa 9 U, Attachment 1 E� ,ew-m� ..aw m, j��."�71 r I \C^�' - � s� :• - - - yn .'t _ �. , -- - - - ..off � � � � �r ® RESORSE` a »o ,E.a»M ED a., �.��- � � ,�. �� �� 26.a5 ACREe� � �_ -_,, i.. `._ f .. i; `f•. R; �'4'.'1 f6 - ^-. �- ,.n � ..-sv _ n.'7+''-�F:�.Y•'rj._ r,,>. -N.d•� _tl I"'"'ft ® a� f E - >•" > . - -- :ice", t-- '- ^: --`- ' L»-k� -.' �'-'� ..� ' _ � _. 'H-l.�w Ma1a 1 'L �- T ® A Y1M• I ' -i ;r-�_ '—RES.� :s( T COURS am-c�--ter -�-`- r ��' •, � .�; r, `"r�;"'.!i` r., '=V'- .. _, = �.�'�,�'Y,:ler�i.+�•' �-' � S:}. "® il'-"v,`''1 �.,?�•.-^©^ ��® � �^®t ®'®"a®'fib i.'. ` MM t{ i 4ys- ji nC f 4"p:�• r _ ff CRID PGA WEST ,`�•. ® ©' , �._ : r; i ..• I — =- -:.._. , ...: ' :•. , :__ of °- _ '�: ``et" � ;gym �9!'� .h far-® p ®-® -®• C3 d ®®, u d ® .'il •�1'.�' C�T a�u�i RIELLY �� •"r is f ® ® ® ® ® O ®_ _: �.�'�,�1 -.' I\ J;, L avo CORcox•nox ,.��p/,.xrC~ i _ ; . _ .�-F,-":'G gip` •/-- ,'-.•'' , v.�� -_,.r. �I ��� 'I/D4/ �� I _ ..,�=i � tea-ram.-`4-•' .. If"�- � 'EI�TATIVE 4 ,;;.� .f. _ r.. - _ _ _,. ti . l• -� t,; �'� 'RACY' - ;.. ' AAP 40. 28838 Lip n A rM% A AIT � N�.��� �yo Co(N MB 203/37�50 . 420,031) 82°28'22 E m � I � M ................ I..I..... �.....I -9 r- _ o 0 � SEARCHED N G 209.00' I 85.0 9°49' E 0, b N 89'4914'E 77 5 > 55 Attachment 2 76 LOT 32 TR 2V43 57 � 54 g Iv1B 203/37-J 5 8 3 - 75 ; w 53 V > 74 o � 0 �M 59 M C 52 0 �ELI N Li- 73 � 051 � _ 3 O CuIv 72 z 50 0 0 o 71 62 49 0 Z v ............................. to : 3 �.... ..... . ... .. 63 I'........8 .......................: .� z N 1 PARCH �.®..... 4 rl_� o L.L..A. o li 11 o W (219.00') (N89'49'34'E) 6 4 47 Z - - 6 N.................. �-, �, ...... N 68 67 66 65 46 3 �Us (AI o ,U �, Z Cuo Z EJ 45 w o W o —LOT IZ 39 40 41 42 43 44 t=n .z 22 a 3 ,� I� 0 W 23 0 I® 38 N 24 6 SEE SHEET 5- I� ... Q............................................ ...SEE...SHEET ................ 4 25 J ,J LOT P 25M V_ 26 LEGENDS WAY I� 27 _ LOT A 37 36 35 34 33 32 31 30 29 28 �G 15 LEGENDS WAY LOT 14, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 I� <N 89042'54'E 1029.04'> CN8��4583'�> �I I TROON WAY ..................... ........... I ............ ... 1 AMENDING 9 1 TRACT+JO. 28838-1 PGA WEST mom '� nwoaa r)9 Pt,.OP n9s.m PR.�S a.cr sPPew UsLAWIMMIZI .90If9[MI b 19-1R rcamm A4, ). IMI 4 R{1RMLH RJ }»)!k R M OR A 4 011,.)� fA00, v rPaR. fPR V fwfOYv. e®em »9 AID lNO 4AE UMM Itl• 9P[ w )01f 1 n9pw T - PRir0,4 10)0 2011101 u osR. u 9m, yp u P. r fwm :ems asP''r _: `�1•''- )1R1Ait R:svm1.',4, T9*.. M.2119s13 1911'lA a4139{' +__4� 44 ?'vi 1. �'�f�- f�TOy.C• TSAR-JA.7B31-0'.— 'ap'0 F4,.18rt. iR 2190q r t} •%• MITI 4pP 55 4 r soul E Pm Ww. E I w rsw r. a 110ftC O to lCl"AIt Attachment 3 it — 14 iY. •..l l,.� I '�� �'�• 11'. II .�' •, _ 0 A W .A itl 39 -- � rY.y '�.: V/1• �; f,:�s '�-.r�l(' •'.i ~`�1{�`i -' _ �a �'-l+i-- -� ` r • �#,L 1 .. P an ml9 I[MWRI n. 49M ...LOT.'C %( j: • C�'.''.S` ' : l• ti ... _ �• LOT P }pS 1 't t — 37 3 O ' 35 '.� '.� . `• , r 1 ~c y- -j ryrye�. ~,?' :� .�;-_.._�""• 1 r '` _ LOT"A .i J ,� ,uTov R111's t ^AT OVA&`It { j r.�l'. ,1 i.-} o •� �;, cps % _;'' 2 3- <. PGA WEST RH- HOFffS _=v'•�P'=_ -_ •ti_ � ,`I�il r !,�� f 4�„in �,'\-�_P.f.�J??E:_�9'Jt#iSE_ �' s°j'run,ow' A.wrPr.A LAND CORPORATION ,r v ur.aai»n m r ora++no rw rr,00 an rwnurn.R w,P s, i.•x roww 9PA ma.,Pw IF * k � ..PO, t• P9PM C• @Pl IAi f0»7 Aa_.tl9 MDS=.=� ...�. AMENDING 9, TENTATIVE TRACT MAP N~•U g"" NO. 28838-1 na PH #1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 13, 1999 CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025, TIME EXTENSION #1 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: MR. JOHN GREEN, ET AL. LOCATION: APPROXIMATELY 2,600 FEET SOUTH OF AVENUE 58 AND DIVIDED BY THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF JEFFERSON STREET REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A TIME EXTENSION OF DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR A MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY OF 277 SINGLE FAMILY HOUSES ON 331 ACRES. GENERAL PLAN/ ZONING DESIGNATIONS: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) AND OPEN SPACE (OS) BACKGROUND: Specific Plan History On June 6, 1995, the City Council adopted Resolution 95-37, approving design guidelines and development standards for a master planned development of 277 housing units on approximately 331 acres to the south of The Quarry development in conjunction with approval of an Environmental Impact Report (See Attachments 1 and 2). Condition #6 of Resolution 95-37 requires a review of the Plan by the Planning Commission on or before June 6, 1999. The adopted Specific Plan for this community outlines its long term development pattern for this residential project and conservation of hillside areas and equestrian/hiking trails. Mountainous areas account for approximately 231.2 acres (70 percent) of the Plan's area. STPCSP25-32/RESOSP25-32 CONDSP25-32 1 Access to the site is planned by the extension of Jefferson Street south from Avenue 58 as required by the alignment plan approved under General Plan Amendment 95-048 in 1995 under Resolution 95-41. Street and other infrastructure improvements are required for this project as subdivision maps are processed. This planned community also has ten custom lots at the northwest corner of the Specific Plan which take access from private streets located in The Quarry development. Time Extension Request On February 17, 1999, the applicant submitted a request for an extension of time and periodic review for SP 94-025. A letter from the applicant's attorney explaining the project status is attached (See Attachment 3). Public Notice - The time extension (periodic review) request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on April 1, 1999. All property owners within 500-feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice. Any comments received will be handed out at the meeting. Public Agencies - Public agencies and City departments were sent a copy of the request on March 2, 1999, requesting comments by March 22, 1999. All written correspondence is on file with the Community Development Department. All applicable comments have been incorporated into Conditions of Approval for this case. Staff Comments Condition and text document changes recommended by staff are attached. These recommended changes are necessary to update the Specific Plan to current development standards and to provide corrections to discrepancies within the Plan. Many of the original specific plan conditions have been removed to conform with text changes proposed by staff. Should the Planning Commission accept these recommended changes, no future time extension requests would be required by elimination of Conditions #6 and #7. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_, approving an extension of time for Specific Plan 94-025, subject to the recommended Conditions. STPCSP25-32/RESOSP25-32 CONDSP25-32 2 Attachments: 1. Location Map Exhibit 2. SP 94-025 Land Use Exhibit 3. Letter from Mr. James M. Schlecht dated March 19, 1999 4. Specific Plan Document Prepar d ,by: Submitted by: r . rousdell, Associate Planner Christine di lorio, PI ►fining Manager STPCSP25-32/RESOSP25-32 CONDSP25-32 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A TIME EXTENSION OF THE DESIGN GUIDELINES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR A MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITY OF 277 HOUSING UNITS ON 331 ACRES (SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025) LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 2,600 FEET SOUTH OF AVENUE 58 AND DIVIDED BY THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF JEFFERSON STREET CASE NO.: SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025 APPLICANT: JOHN GREEN, ET AL. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for an extension of time for design guidelines and development standards for a master planned community of 277 housing units on 331 acres, generally located approximately 2,600- feet south of Avenue 58 and divided by the future extension of Jefferson Street, more particularly described as: Portion of South %Z of Section 29, Township 6S, Range 7E, S.B.B.M. (APN: 761-030-001) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 61h day of June, 1995, approve Specific Plan 94-025 and certify its accompanying EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 941 12047) permitting design guidelines and development standards for development of 277 single family houses on 331 acres by adoption of Resolution 95-37. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby approve an extension of time for SP 94-025 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. RIiSOPCSP25 Gr. - 32 Planning Commission Resolution 99-— Specific Plan 94-025 (Extension #1) John Green, et al. April 13, 1999 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this 131h day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPCSP25 Gr. - 32 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 94-025, TIME EXTENSION #1 APRIL 13, 1999 GENERAL 1. Upon their approval by the City Council, the City Cleric is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the property to which they apply. (Conditions will be renumbered) 2. Specific Plan 94-025 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 3. The development shall comply with Exhibit "A" the specific plan for of Specific Plan 94-025 and the those exhibits contained in the Final EIR and the following conditions, which shall take precedence in the event of any conflicts with the provisions of the Specific Plan. . 4. Exterior lighting for the project shall comply with Section 9.60.160 (Outdoor Lighting) of the Zoning Ordinance the "Dark Sky" lighting Ordinance. Plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of a building permit. 5. On -site construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. 6. This specific plan approval shall expire on June 6, 1999, and become void within four years unless extended by the Planning Commission through the approval of an annual program review. The annual review shall be requested at least 30-days prior to the expiration. 7. During annual review by the Planning Commission, the developer/applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the specific plan. The applicant/devefoper of this project hereby agrees to furnish such evidence of compliance as the City, in the exercise of its reasonable discretion, may require. Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith progress towards implementation of and compliance with the requirements of the specific plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Planning Commission may determine that the applicant has made good faith compliance/progress and may extend the specific plan for one year. 8. This approval shaft be in compliance with the approvals of General Plan Amendment 94-047 and Change of Zone 94-077. (Completed) P:IGREGIC0A-SP94.025.wpd Page 1 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 9. Applicant/developer shall work with Waste Management of the Desert to implement provisions of AB 939 and AB 1462. The applicant/developer is required to work with Waste Management in setting up waste collection and recycling programs for this project. 10. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the Conditions of Approval, phasing plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The phasing plans are not approved until they are signed by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations in the order of the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be complete and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a sub -phasing plan is approved by the City Engineer. 11. Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: * Fire Marshal * Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) * Community Development Department * Riverside County Environmental Health Department * Desert Sands and Coachella Valley Unified School Districts * Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) * Imperial Irrigation District (IID) * General Telephone * California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) * MediaOne * Sunline Transit 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 approvals and signatures cn the plans. Evidence of permits or clearances from the above jurisdictions shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. NGREGICOA-SP94.025.wpd Page 2 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 12. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. ENVIRONMENTAL 13. All adopted mitigation measures, as recommended in the Draft/Final EIR shall be incorporated into all future project approvals relating to Specific Plan 94-025 where applicable and/or feasible. It is understood that certain measures will not be applicable to certain site specific proposals, however, all development within the specific plan area shalt be verified as in conformance with said specific plan and the mitigation adopted within the Draft/Final-EIR. The Specific Plan Draft and Final EIR shall be used in the review of all project proposals in the Specific Plan 94-025 area. Said mitigation measures are hereby incorporated into these conditions by reference. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 14. Any proposed entry gates and guard houses shall be subject to separate Site Development Permit plot plan reviews to insure adequate stacking/queuing space, fire access, pursuant to Section 9.210.010 of the Zoning Ordinance. Plans including guard houses or similar structures will also be subject to Planning Commission approval. 15. Separate plot plan review of any maintenance facility site(s) shall be required with action taken by the Planning Commission, with a report of action to be sent to the City Council. 16. Building heights for residential uses shall be subject to height limits specified in the specific plan, except that no building or structure, regardless of use, exceeding one story (20-feet in height), shall be allowed within 200-feet of any perimeter property line/public street frontage. All building heights shall be measured from finish grade elevation. All other residential structures shaft be limited to two stories, not to exceed 28-feet. One story houses (22' high and less) shall be built within 200- feet of the Plan's perimeter. Houses adjacent to Jefferson Street shall comply with Section 9.50.020 of the Zoning Ordinance. 17. The minimum dwef9ing unit size (living area) for all residential units shaft be 1,400 square feet (excluding attached or detached parking garage). RIGREGICOA-SP94.025.wpd Page 3 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 18. All dwelling units shall have a minimum two car garage measuring 20-feet by 20- feet interior clear space in overall size. Three car garages shall be required for four bedroom houses pursuant to Chapter 9.150 of the Zoning Ordinance. The garage can be either attached or detached. 19. The architectural style of the project shall be Spanish Colonial, Southwest Adobe, Pueblo, or other styles approved by the Planning Commission. 20. All roofing material within the project shalt be clay or concrete the barrel. The color of the roof tiles shall consist of desert hues. 21. All residences/dwellings are required to have illuminated building address numbers per the La Quinta Municipal Code. PROPERTY RIGHTS 22. All easements, rights -of -way and other property rights necessary to facilitate the ultimate use of the subdivision and functioning of improvements shall be dedicated, granted or otherwise conferred, or the process of said dedication, granting, or conferral shall be ensured, prior to approval of a final map or filing of a Certificate of Compliance for waiver of a final map. The conferral shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant easements to the City for access to and maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of all required improvements which are located on privately -held lots or parcels. 23. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights -of -way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide to those properties alternate rights -of -way or access easements on alignments approved by the City Council. 24. The applicant shall dedicate public 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. Dedication required of this development include: A. Jefferson Street (realigned) - Full -width right-of-way, width shall be determined in the approved pursuant to the Jefferson Street Alignment Study Plan made part of/or adopted with General Plan Amendment 95- 048. P:IGREGIC0A-SP94-025.wpd Page 4 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 ('Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and left turn lanes, bus turnouts, etc. The applicant shall dedicate street rights -of -way prior to required approvals of any proposed subdivision or improvements to land within the specific plan boundaries. If the City Engineer determines that public access rights to proposed street rights -of - way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating the rights -of -way, then developer shall grant temporary public access easements to those areas within 60-days of written request by the City. 25. The applicant shall dedicate 10-foot wide public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. 26. The applicant shall create perimeter setbacks along public rights of way as follows (listed setback depth is the average depth if meandering wall design is approved); Jefferson Street - 20 feet The setback requirement applies to all frontage including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. The applicant shall dedicate 20-foot common area setback tots adjacent to Jefferson Street. If interior streets are private, the dedication shaft be to a homeowners' association. If interior streets are public, the dedication shaft be to the City. The minimum width may be used as an average width if a -meandering wait design is approved. Where sidewalks, bike paths, and/or equestrian trails are required, the applicant shall dedicate blanket easements over the setback lots for those purposes. 27. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Jefferson Street from lots abutting the street. Access to the development from Jefferson Street shall be restricted to that shown on the "Circulation" diagram in the specific plan. 28. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common areas, and mailbox clusters. 29. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval of this specific plan by the City Council and the date of recording of any final map(s) covering the same portion of the property unless such easements are approved by the City Engineer. NGREGICOA-094-025.wpd Page 5 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 30. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or enter into a secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City for any tentative tract or parcel map or approved phase of development prior to approval of the map or phase or issuance of a certificate of compliance in - lieu of a final map. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. 31. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of the improvement costs. The estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not contained in the City's schedule of costs, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. 32. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (plot plans, conditional use permits, etc.), off -site improvements (i.e., streets) and development -wide improvements (i.e., perimeter walls, common area and setback landscaping, and gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the engineer. IMPROVEMENT PLANS 33. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" X 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading", "Precise Grading", "Streets and Drainage", and "Landscaping". All plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer and are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, parking lots, and water and sewer plans. Combined plans including water and sewer improvements shall have an additional signature block for the CVWD. The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscaping improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. P 1GREGICOA-SP94-025.wpd Page 6 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 Plans for improvements not listed above, shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 34. The City may maintain digitized standard plans for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the developer may acquire the standard plan computer files or standard plan sheets prepared by the City. When final plans are approved by the City, the developer shall furnish accurate computer files of the complete, approved plans on storage media and in program format acceptable to the City Engineer. GRADING 35. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 36. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 37. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted. The report of the investigation ("the soils report") shall be submitted with the grading plan. 38. A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 39. Previously deleted; New Condition - Grading plans adjacent to General Plan designated open space areas shall comply with the requirements of Sections 9.110.070 (Hillside Conservation Overlay District) and 9.140.040 (Hillside Conservation Regulations) of the Zoning Ordinance. 40. 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 PAGREGIC0A-SP94-025.wpd Page 7 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 with Chapter 6.16, La Quinta Municipal Code. In accordance with said Chapter, 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. 41. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, for each building pad in the development, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by development phase and lot number and shall be cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 42. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm shall be retained on site (rather than detained and released as proposed in the specific plan document). The tributary drainage area for which the developer is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 43. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common retention basins. Individual lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2.5 acres in size or larger or where the use of common retention is determined by the City Engineer to be impractical. 44. If individual fllot retention is approved, the following conditions shall apply: A. Each private lot proposed for on -site retention shall be designed to receive and safely convey stormwater in excess of retention capacity, including inflow from adjacent properties. Front yards shall drain to the street unless constrained by the overall lay of the land. Basin capacity calculations and grading plans for each lot shall consider previously -approved grading plans for adjacent properties and shall be submitted, with copies of the previously approved adjacent lot plans, to the City Engineer for plan checking and approval. B. Prior to or concurrently with recordation of the final subdivision map, a homeowner's association or lot owner's association (HOA) shall be legally established and Covenants, Conditions and Restriction (CC & Rs) recorded. The CC & Rs shall stipulate the requirement for design, construction and maintenance of individual on lot basins and the required retention capacity for each individual lot. The CC & Rs shall grant the HOA irrevocable rights P kGREGICOA-SP94-025.wpd Page 8 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 to enter and maintain each individual retention basin and all other grading and facilities necessary for the stormwater retention design. The CC & Rs shall establish, in an irrevocable manner that: 1. The HOA has responsibility for the overall retention capacity of the development; 2. If the HOA fails to maintain the overall retention capacity, the City shall have the right to seek other remedies to restore and/or maintain the overall capacity or to establish or expand downstream facilities to mitigate the off -site effects of the HOA's failure to maintain the overall capacity; and 3. The HOA shall promptly reimburse the City for any and all costs incurred in exercising such right. C. The final subdivision map shall establish a perpetual easement granting the City the right to enter and maintain retention basins and other drainage facilities and grading as necessary to preserve or restore the approved stormwater conveyance and retention design with no compensation to any property owner of the HOA. 45. In design of retention facilities, the basin percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. If retention is on individual lots, the retention depth shall not exceed two feet. If retention is in one or more common retention basins, the retention depth shall not exceed six feet. 46. A trickling sand fitter and leachfield of a design approved by the City Engineer shaft be installed to percolate nuisance water. The sand filter and teach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leachfield shall be designed to contain surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. (of landscape area) and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. 47. No fence or wall shall be constructed around retention basins except as approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. NGREGICOMP94-025.wpd Page 9 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 48. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. 49. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. 50. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. 51. If any portion of the 100-year, 24-hour storm flow from this development is to be conveyed directly or indirectly to the Whitewater Storm Evacuation Channel or the La Quinta Evacuation Channel or will otherwise drain to water bodies subject to the NPDES, the applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oil/water separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize the potential for conveyance of stormwater contamination to off -site locations. Drainage to off -site locations an methods of treatment or screening shall meet the approval of the City Engineer and CVWD. UTILITIES 52. All existing and proposed utilities within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. High voltage power tines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt from this requirement. Existing and proposed wire and cable utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be underground. Power lines exceeding 35 kv are exempt from this requirement. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone strands, to ensure optimum placement for aesthetic as well as practical purposes. 53. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports of utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. STREETS AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 54. The City is contemplating adoption of a major infrastructure and thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any P1GREGIC0A-SP94-025.wpd Page 10 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 final map or issuance of a Certificate of Compliance for any waived final map, the development or portions thereof shall be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall design and construct street improvements as listed below. 55. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Street right-of-way geometry for cul-de-sacs, 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. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure for a 20- year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading, including site and building construction traffic. The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Residential & Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4576.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" If the applicant proposes to construct a partial pavement section which will be subjected to traffic loadings, the partial section shall be designed with a strength equivalent to the 20-year design strength. 56. Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. 57. The City Engineer may require improvements extending beyond subdivision boundaries such as, but not limited to, pavement elevation transitions, street width transitions, or other incidental work which will insure that newly constructed improvements are safely integrated with existing improvements and conform with the City's standards and practices. PAREGICOA-SP94-025.wpd Page 11 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 58. The following minimum street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. 58th Avenue, Jefferson Street and 62nd Avenue in accordance with have several alignment issues that have been addressed by the Jefferson Street Alignment Plan Study which identifies a new alignment to resolve those issues. Development of Phases II and III, as defined in the "Phasing Plan" diagram of this specific plan, shall not begin until at least two lanes of the realigned streets have been installed from 58th Avenue to the south line of Section 29. 2. Jefferson Street (adjacent to this development) - Improvement section as determined by the Jefferson Street Alignment Study Plan. B. PRIVATE STREETS AND CUL DE SAC Residential - 36-feet wide if double loaded (buildings on both sides), 32- feet if single loaded. Street widths shall comply with the requirements of the Circulation Element (Table CIR-2) of the General Plan. 2. Collector (z300 homes or 3,000 vehicles per day) - 40-feet wide. 59. All streets proposed for residential or other access drives shall be designed and constructed with curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas. 60. Access points and turning movements of traffic shall be restricted to locations shown on the "Circulation" diagram of the specific plan, subject to review by the Planning Commission and City Council during review of the subdivision map application(s). 61. Prior to occupancy of completed buildings within the development, the applicant shall install traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads to those buildings. RIGREGICOA-3P94-025.wpd Page 12 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 LANDSCAPING 62. The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the perimeter setback areas or lots along Jefferson Street pursuant to Section 9.60.240 of the Zoning Ordinance. The concept landscape plan for Jefferson Street shall be approved by the Planning Commission during review of a Site Development Permit and/or subdivision map application. Seventy -percent of the trees planted in the parkway shall be specimen trees (e.g., 24"- and 36"-boxes) having a minimum caliper size of 1.5- to 2.0-inches. Specimen trees shall be a minimum of 10 feet tall measured from the top of the container. 63. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, medians, common retention basins, and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. Conceptual front yard landscaping plans shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission during consideration of any Site Development Plan application. 64. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 18-inches 5-feet of curbs along public and private streets. 65. Slopes shall not exceed 3:1 in perimeter setbacks, medians and other publicly- or commonly -maintained landscape areas. 66. Unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer, common basins and park areas shall be designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor -mounted equipment. 67. The applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. PAREGICOMP94-025.wpd Page 13 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 68. Prior to approval of building permits the applicant shall prepare a water conservation plan which shall include consideration of: A. Methods to minimize the consumption of water, including water saving features incorporated into the design of the structures, the use of drought tolerant and low-water usage landscaping materials, and programs to increase the effectiveness of landscape and golf course irrigation, as recommended by CVWD and the State Department of Water Resources. B. Methods for maximizing groundwater recharge, including the construction of groundwater recharge facilities. C. Methods for minimizing the amount of water used for on -site irrigation, including the use of reclaimed water from sewage treatment facilities. The water energy plan shall be subject to review and acceptance by CVWD prior to final approval by the City Engineer. 69. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting materials shall be required for at least 90% of common planting areas. Provisions shall also be made for planting materials which provide forage and nesting areas for nearby wildlife. 70. The applicant shaft submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the CVWD for review and approval with respect to the District's Water .Management Program. (Already addressed in Condition #63) FIRE DEPARTMENT 71. All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required fire flows shall be constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code in effect at the time of development. 72. The level of service required for this project shall be aligned with the criteria for Catalog II -Urban as outlined in the Fire Protection Master Plan and as follows: A. Fire station located within three miles. B. Receipt of full "first alarm"assignment within 15 minutes. Impacts to the Fire Department are generally due to the increased number of emergency and public service calls generated by additional buildings and human population. A fiscal analysis for this project shall identify a funding source to mitigate any impacts associated with any capital costs and the annual operating costs necessary for an increased level of service. Said analysis shall be subject to review and approval by the Riverside County Fire Department and the City of La Quinta. P:IGREGICOA-SP94.025.wpd Page 14 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT 73. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the CVWD as stated in the District's fetter dated December 28, 1994, attached to these Conditions of Approval at time development plans are submitted. During project development all irrigation facilities shall be designed to utilize reclaimed water sources when such sources become available. CVWD letters on file with the Community Development Department shall be used for plan check review. ELECTRICAL UTILITIES 74. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Imperial Irrigation District as stated in the District's letter dated November 15, 1994, attached to these Conditions of Approval at time development plans are submitted. III) letters on file with the Community Development Department shall be used for plan check review. RECREATION 75. Prior to any final map approval by the City Council, the applicant shall meet the parkland dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.24.030, La Quinta Municipal Code and in compliance with the goals and policies of the La Quinta Parks and Recreation Master Plan. 76. (Move to Streets and Traffic Condition Section) The applicant shall provide public transit amenities as required by Sunline Transit and/or the City Engineer. These amenities shall include, as a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter. The location and character of the turnout and shelter shall be as determined by Sunline Transit and the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 77. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 78. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have his or her agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings and certify compliance of all work with approved plans, specifications and applicable codes. 79. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet' and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. P-1GREGIC0A-3P94-025.wpd Page 15 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 MAINTENANCE 80. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of landscaping and related improvements in landscaped setbacks, retention basins and other public or common areas until those areas have been accepted for maintenance by a homeowner's association (developments with private and/or gated interior streets) or the City's Landscape and Lighting District (developments without private or gated interior streets). The applicant shall maintain all other improvements until final acceptance, by the City Council, of all improvements within each map or phase. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all required improvements unless and until expressly released from said responsibility by the City. This shall include formation of a homeowner's association or other arrangement acceptable to the City for maintenance of retention basins, common areas and perimeter walls and landscaping. 81. The applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet for streets, landscaping and related improvements, perimeter walls, drainage facilities, or any other improvements to be maintained by an HOA. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the HOA in planning for routine and long term maintenance. FEES AND DEPOSITS 82. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for the plan checks and permits. The applicant shall additionally pay any fees of any nature required by the City at the time of recording of the final map or the issuance of a building permit according to the fee requirements in effect at the time of issuance or approvals for those items. 83. Prior to approval of a final map or completion of any approval process for modification of boundaries of the property subject to these conditions, the applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the property and pay all costs of the reapportionment. 84. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, applicant shall comply with the following: "Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the applicant shall provide the Community Development Department Building and Safety Department with written clearance from the affected school district DSUSD stating that the per -unit impact fees have been paid." 85. The California Fish and Game Environmental filing fees shall be paid. The fee is $850.00 plus $78.00 for the Riverside County document processing. The fee shall be paid within 24-hours after review by the City Council. (Paid) P:IGREGIC0A-SP94-025.wpd Page 16 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 MISCELLANEOUS 86. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination system (NPDES) and the City's NPDES permit. 87. Relocate to Condition #58 (A2): If the City finds it necessary to revise or abandon the Jefferson Street specific alignment contemplated at the time of approval of this specific plan, the applicant shall revise this specific plan as required by the City to fully address revised access routing. 88. For all General Plan open space designated areas (from the toe of slope) that are 20-percent or more in slope, a conservation easement shall be prepared for City review and approval prior to recordation of the final map recordation and shall then be recorded with the Riverside County Recorder's Office. 89. The developer agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of the Final EIR, the General Plan Amendment and/or the Specific Plan for this project. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this time extension request. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. 90. The developer shall submit to the Community Development Department a detailed construction plan for equestrian trail accommodation into the project. This plan shall include access, signage, and detailed design. This plan shall be approved in conjunction with prior to approval of the first any tentative tract/parcel map for the project. The trail can either traverse the mountain area or be placed along Jefferson Street. TEXT AMENDMENT CHANGES Prior to the approval of the first subdivision map, the Specific Plan document shall be revised as follows: 91. Page 1-1, Specify that the Specific Plan shall comply with Chapter 9.240 of the Zoning Ordinance (Delete the reference to Chapter 9.16). 92. Page II-2, Delete or complete topography table. 93. Page II-3, Open Space -Modify as follows: "The 331-acre Green is designated by the General Plan as Open Space (OS) and Low Density Residential (LDR) permitting 277 single family housing units on approximately 94.1 acres. Open space accounts for P1GREGIC0A-SP94-025.wpd Page 17 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 70 percent of the property. The Open Space Element of the General Plan (Chapter 4) sets forth the goals and policies for conservation of the hillside areas." 94. Page I11-3, Development Standards (Custom Lots) - Replace item numbers 1-15 as follows: 1. RVL District standards shall be met unless otherwise specified. 2. Lots shall be 30,000 square feet or larger. 3. The minimum width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 80' with a minimum depth of 125' excluding flag lot designs. The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 72', except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 40'. 4. Minimum livable floor area is 3,000 square feet. 95. Page III-5, Development Standards (Estate Lots) - Replace item numbers 1-15 as follows: 1. RL District standards shall be met unless otherwise specified. 2. Lots shall be 10,000 square feet or larger. 3. The minimum width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 60' with a minimum depth of 100' excluding flag lot designs. The minimum frontage of a lot shall be 72', except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of 35' 4. Minimum liveable floor area is 2,200 square feet. 5. Side yard setbacks shall be 10' or greater. 96. Page III-6, Permitted Uses (Cove Lots), Delete the following: "Churches, educational institutions, public libraries, museums and art galleries not operated for compensation." 97. Page 111-6, Development Standards (Cove Lots) - Replace items 1-15 as follows: 1. RL District standards shall be met unless otherwise specified. 2. Lots shall be 8,000 square feet or larger. 3. The minimum width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be 60' with a minimum depth of 100' excluding flag lot designs. 4. A 15' rear yard setback is allowed. 98. Page III-8, Open Space/Recreational Section, Replace as follows: "The requirements of Sections 9.110.050 (Open Space District) and 9.110.070 (Hillside Conservation Overlay District) of the Zoning Ordinance shall be met." 99. Pages III-9 and -10, Architecture, Replace as follows: "Any development proposal for the Green Specific Plan shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission, subject to PIGREGICOA-SP94-025.wpd Page 18 of 19 Conditions of Approval Specific Plan 94-025 (Ext. #1) April 13, 1999 the provisions of Sections 9.210.010 (Site Development Permit) and 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Ordinance, excluding those houses developed on custom lots in the Plan which may be approved by the Community Development Director. Desert colors shall be used to cover exterior building surfaces unless otherwise approved by the Planning Commission. Roofing material shall be limited to clay or concrete tiles." 100. Page 111-10, Landscape Architecture, Add the following: "Plant material for the project shall be suitable for the desert climate and comply with the requirements of Section 9.60.240 of the Zoning Code. Conceptual landscape plans shall be approved by the Planning Commission during review of any development proposal." 101. Page IVA , Water, Modify as follows: "On -site improvements, as illustrated in Figure IV-2, shall include an 18" water line ... " 102. Page IV-2, Sewer, Modify as follows (last sentence): "An 8" sewer line will serve that portion of the site as well." 103. Page IV-2, Grading & Drainage, Modify second paragraph as follows: "Grading plans for the site shall be consistent with the rules and regulations of the La Quinta Municipal Code." 104. Page V-4, Maintenance Plan, Delete Table 5-1. 105. Page V-5, Amendments, Replace Planning Director authority with Planning Commission review approval throughout this section. At the end of the section add the following: "This specific plan shall be subject to the requirements of Section 9.240.010 (Specific Plan Review) of the Zoning Ordinance." 106. Delete the following map exhibits from the Plan: "Grading Plan and Slope Analysis." P:IGREGICOA-SP94-025.wpd Page 19 of 19 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1 N _ IrO O f- O z_ N HIGH NAY 111 H N z O LA QUINTA W HOTEL U. 52nd AVE. 54th AVE. PGA 7x% WEST 56th AVE. LAKE CAMILLA g THE 58th AVE. QUARRY 60th AVE. SITE N.T.S. 62nd AVE. vo Attachment 2 JAMES M. SCHLECHT JOHN C. SHEVLIN JON A. SHOENBERGER DANIEL T. JOHNSON DAVID A. DARRIN March 19, 1999 SCHLECHT, SHEVLIN & SHOENBERGER A LAW CORPORATION LAWYERS Greg Trousdell Associate Planner City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 POST OFFICE BOX 2744 801 EAST TAHQUITZ CANYON WAY, SUITE 100 PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA 92263-2744 TELEPHONE (760) 320-7161 TELECOPIER (760) 323-1758 EMAIL ssalaw@gte.net IN REPLY REFER TO: 10262.1 Attachment 3 PLANNING 0EPA-RTtVEPQT RE: EXTENSION OF SPECIFIC PLAN (94-025 - THE GREEN PROPERTY) Dear Mr. Trousdell: Bob Mainiero of Mainiero, Smith and Associates has filed an application on behalf of our client to extend the above Specific Plan. Bob tells me you would like a little information for your file on what has been happening since we were granted the Specific Plan several years ago. - I am writing this letter to you in the absence of my client who is in Europe. However, I have represented John Green and Agiotage for the last six or seven years and am familiar with matters that have occurred during that period of time. Since the Specific Plan has been granted, we have engaged in the following: 1. We have made numerous attempts to negotiate a cost reimbursement agreement with Mr. Morrow of The Quarry group in connection with our client having the right to have access through The Quarry property so that we can reach the approximately 121/2 acre portion of the site shown on the Specific Plan just south of The Quarry. While we have not yet reached an agreement, efforts are ongoing to do so. 2. As you probably know, we have previously filed an application for a parcel map for the entire property and we have had our engineers working on a tentative subdivision map for the 121h portion. We held up the parcel map for some considerable period of time, I think approximately two years, because of waiting for a resolution of how the City would get through the BLM land to the south of us. Subsequently, we learned that no solution to that issue has been found, and accordingly, there may be no need to extend Jefferson beyond our client's property. We have requested our engineers do a re -study of our proposed parcel map and of the proposed tentative map. SCHLECHT, SHEVLBN & SHOENBERGER A LAW CORPORATION LAWYERS Greg Trousdell March 19, 1999 Page 2 3. Our client has made numerous attempts to find a developer for the property, including lengthy negotiations with the owners of The Travertine Project, with a view towards either their acquiring our client's property, or alternatively, marketing the two properties as a joint project. Nothing definite has come from that effort. 4. We have had several listings with real estate brokers in the area who represent major developers, one of whom has been active in finding prospects. We have been showing the property rather consistently and just as recently as the last couple of weeks we have had two different prospects who expressed some interest. We are continuing those efforts and once the Specific Plan has been extended, our client intends on moving ahead with either or both the parcel map and the tentative subdivision map with the recognition that both maps would probably aid in marketing the property. The above is a short summary of the activity that has occurred. If you need further information or if you have any questions, please let me know. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. very truly y-.— M. John L. Green Robert Mainiero Attachment 4 Green Specific Plan of Land Use City of La Quinta. Prepared for Winchester Asset Management 2 September 1994 I�rpp BYCITY COUNCIL ah S The Keith Companies PUBLIC AGENCY LA QUINTA PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P.O. Box 1504, 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta California 92253 TEL 619/777-7125 FAX 619/777-7011 Jerry Herman, Planning and Development Director Stan Sawa, Principal Planner APPLICANT WINCHESTER ASSET MANAGEMENT - bEVELOPMENT SERVICES 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 101 Palm Desert California 92260 TEL 619/340-3575 FAX 619/346-9368 Craig Bryant, President CONSULTANT THE KEITH COMPANIES ENGINEERING 41-865 Boardwalk, Suite 101 Palm Desert California 92260 TEL 619/346-9844 FAX 619/346-936 Mike Rowe, Operations Manager PLANNING 22690 Cactus Avenue, Suite 300 Moreno Valley California 92553 TEL 909/653-0234 FAX 909/653-5308 Richard B. Stephens, Director of Planning Tom Nievez, Senior Planner John Harrison, Senior Planner ENVIRONMENTAL 2955 Red -Hill Avenue Costa Mesa California 92626 TEL 714/540-0800 FAX 714/668-7191 Tom Holm AICP, Director of Environmental Services Saundra Jacobs, Central Region Manager IGm Ruddins, Environmental Planner SUBCONSULTANTS Thomas Olsen Associates, Inc. 2829 South State Street Hemet California 92543 TEL 909/766-4655 FAX 909/766-4658 Joan R. Callahan, Ph.D. Green Specific Plan TABLE OF CONTENTS I. SUMMARY A. PURPOSE & AUTHORITY B. PROJECT II. ENVIRONMENT A. LOCATION B. GEOLOGY C. SOILS D. TOPOGRAPHY E. SEISMICITY F. HYDROLOGY G. BIOLOGY H. EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE I. GENERAL PLAN & ZONING III. LAND USE FLAN A. LAND USE SUMMARY B. DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS & STANDARDS 1. Residential 2. Open Space/Recreational C. DESIGN GUIDELINES 1. Community 2. Architecture 3. Landscape Architecture IV. INFRASTRUCTURE FLAN A. CIRCULATION B. WATER C. SEWER D. GRADING & DRAINAGE E. UTILITIES F. P'UBLIC FACILITIES/SERVICES 1. 'Transportation 2. Solid Waste 3. Fire Protection 4. Police Protection 5. Community Services V. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES & ADMINISTRATION A. PROCEDURES B. FINANCING PLAN C. PHASING PLAN D. MAINTENANCE PLAN E. • AMENDMENTS VI. APPENDICES A. DESCRIPTION B. ASSESSOR'S PARCEL MAPS C. GLOSSARY ii EXHIBITS 1. LOCATION MAP 2. VICINITY MAP 3. ILLUSTRATIVE SITE PLAN 4. GEOLOGY 5. SOILS 6. ELEVATIONS 7. SLOPE ANALYSIS 8, SEISMICITY 9. HYDROLOGY 10. BIOLOGY 11. LAND USE PLAN 12. COMMUNITY DESIGN GUIDELINES 13. ARCHITECTURE DESIGN GUIDELINES 14. LANDSCAPE MASTER PLAN 15. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE DESIGN GUIDELINES 16. CIRCULATION PLAN 17. WATER SYSTEM 18. SEWER SYSTEM 19. GRADING PLAN 20. DRAINAGE PLAN 21. PHASING PLAN iii 1. Green Specific Plan SUMMARY A. PURPOSE & AUTHORITY The Green Specific Plan creates a master -planned resort community with a variety of residential land uses and a quality environment through comprehensive planning regulations, standards and design guidelines. The purpose of this document is to provide a foundation for a variety of uses on the Green property through the application of regulations, standards and design guidelines. The Specific Plan, when adopted by City legislative action, serves both planning and regulatory functions, as well as establishing infrastructure service needs. It will be the major device for implementing the General Plan on this property. The Specific Plan is not a static document, inflexible, and unyielding to change. It is based upon the best information available at the time of its preparation. Because of socio-economic variation, it will become necessary, on occasion, to make adjustments to the Plan to respond to changing conditions. The ability to react to unforeseen change is an important measure of the adequacy of any planning program. It is the objective of this Specific Plan to: 1) establish the guidelines to create a multi -use high quality resort oriented community; while at the same time, 2) ensure the preservation of natural open spaces adjacent the site. The authority and procedures for this Specific Plan is described in Chapter 9.16, General Plan and Specific Plan, La Quinta Municipal Planning and Zoning Code. The Specific Plan shall be adopted in accordance with the provisions of Article S, Specific Plans, Section 65450 et seq., of the California Government Code I-1 B. THE PROJECT The Green Specific Plan encompasses approximately' 331.1 acres in the City of La Quinta at the northeastern base of the Santa kosa Mountains in the Coachella Valley, as depicted on Figure I-1. As shown on Figure I-2, the site is adjacent to The Quarry development, and approximately % mile south of the PGA West development and Lake Cahuilla in Section 29, Township 6 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base & Meridian, County of Riverside, California. The proposed development consists of single family detached residential products on minimum lot sizes of 8,000, 10,000 and 30,000 square feet. The remainder of the site remains as open space, as illustrated in Figure I-3. A brief description of the proposed land uses is provided below. Table 1 also provides the breakdown of land uses by acreage and percentage of the overall property. 1. RESORT RESIDENTIAL The project focuses on providing a total of.277 iesort homes oriented to the physical features that exist on the site. The overall project density will be less than 1 unit per acre. The three product types are as follows: ■ Cove Lots (Medium Density) with a minimum 8,000 square foot lot size and located in the eastern portion of the site. ■ Estate Lots (Low Density) buffering the open space and the Cove Lots on 10,000 minimum square foot lots. ■ Custom Lots (Very Low Density) located at the northwestern corner of the project site, adjacent to The Quarry and comprised of minimum j0,000 square foot lots. 2. OPEN SPACE/RECREATIONAL Approximately 231.2 acres of the site, in the central and western portions of the property, will remain in a natural condition for hiking and riding recreation. The Boo Hoff Trail will be located along the foothills and a multi -purpose trail easement will be dedicated within the Jefferson Street alignment. I-2 Green Specific Plan LAND USE TABULATION Table 1 Land Use Acres % Units Density Cove Lots 67.5 20.0 227 4.0 Estate Lots 14.1 4.0 40 3.0 Custom Lots 12.5 4.0 10 1.0 Open Space/Recreation 231.2 70.0 - - Jefferson Street 5.8 2.0 - - TOTAL 331.1 100.0% 277 0.8 I-3 Z oa ui 0 J J— 1\ I 7 Z ti I j 1 U zLU Oa J� J ao z U FEW- I(r� Ir L_i N as �� ' aIL i w 2 a z a to w J w a z a O J ` VNOZIMV I �' / 1 1 d-M O® QLu In -� a a J U i J IL W f� Y/ O D O O e- O O O O D O Ir Green Specific Plan II. ENVIRONMENT A. LOCATION The project is approximately 20 miles east of Palm Springs; 75 miles east of Riverside; and 125 miles east of Los Angeles. The site is primarily within Section 29, Township 6 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Base & Meridian. The Green Specific Plan is located in the City of La Quinta on the southern edge of the Coachella Valley at the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains. ADJACENT LAND USES Approximately '/2 mile north of the site, is the PGA West development. PGA West comprises a residential community and four world-famous golf courses: Pete Dye's TPC Stadium Course, Arnold Palmer Course, Jack Nicklaus Resort Course and Jack Nicklaus Private Course. Green is southeast of and abuts The Quarry at La Quinta, a world class, Tom Fa2io designed golf course and residential development. South The southern edge of the property is partially defined by the flood control facilities diverting the Guadalupe Creek south of the eastern hills. The Lake Cahuilla County Park is east of the property, and Lake Cahuilla is approximately. '/2 mile further north. West Vacant, Bureau of Land Management properties adjoin the site to the west. =MN ENVMONMVT II-1 B. GEOLOGY The site is primarily situated in a "saddle" between the Santa Rosa Mountains to the west and a small hill to the east. (Geologic information is forthcoming) C. SOILS The Green property is comprised of Carsitas Gravelly Sand and Myoma Fine Sand. Rock Outcrop, found in the steeper elevations, is predominant over the project site. D. TOPOGRAPHY Elevations range from as below 100 feet above mean sea level (msl) at the northeastern boundary to over 900 feet msl at the southwestern comer. Figure II-6, Elevations, and Figure II-7, Slope Analysis, illustrates the existing topography of the project site. The bulk of the project site area contains slopes of less than 10% or greater than 200/6, as described below. Slope Acres % of Site. 0 - 10% 10-20% 20% + E. SEISMICITY The project site, located in Southern California, is subject to groundshaking activity typical to the region. The project site is located within Groundshaking Zone III as established by the County of Riverside. Figure II-5 identifies the geographic relationship of the project site to both the San Andreas and San Jacinto Faults. P. HYDROLOGY Figure H-6 illustrates the existing hydrologic characteristics of the project site. Generally, the site contains a number of relatively small local drainage courses that flow from south to north. GREEN ENVMONMENT II-2 G. BIOLOGY Figure H-7 identifies the predominant biological resources that presently exist on the project site. Plant species include Desert Dry Was Woodland and Sonoran Creosote Bush Scrub. The Green property is not within any of the Environmental Conservation Areas identified in the City's General Plan and lies approximately one mile outside and to the east of the boundaries of the Santa Rosa Mountains State Game Refuge. H. EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE Presently, the only infrastructure facilities that approach the Green property are those that serve The Quarry development to the north. As discussed in Chapter IV of this document, circulation, water, sewer and storm drain systems and facilities will have to be improved and extended to the project boundaries from their present terminus within the PGA West community or as may be extended from The Quarry development to the 1 o Custom lots within the Green property. I.- GENERAL PLAN & ZONING 1. Land Use Element Open Space The 331-acre Green site has the General Plan designation of Open Space (OS). The proposed development has a target of less than 1 DU/AC for a maximum yield of 300 units. Policy 4- 1.2.1 of the Open Space Element states the following: Development shall be allowed to occur in Open Space areas but only when in strict compliance with the City's hillside Conservation Zone Ordinance. The Hillside Conservation Zone Ordinance allows development to occur in areas based on the slope of the hillside. Generally, permitted uses on slopes not exceeding 20% include..... single family residential uses; and accessory uses necessary to accomplish the permitted uses. cart srrvn ONMP'r II-3 Population Green is projected to have a population of 570 assuming approximately 2.1 persons/household which accounts for both permanent and seasonal residents. GRM ENVIRONMENT 11-4 J 0 0) z O Q W J W N a} O Jz N Q 0 0 c.1 CD r'J Tor AA IIWA w AE Lon r M cl O (:) O z� Green Specific Plan III. LAND USE PLANT A. LAND USE SUMMARY The Green Property Specific Plan proposes a total of 277 single family detached dwelling units on the 331.1 acre parcel. The land use plan is depicted in Figure M-1 and illustrated in Figure I-3. The proposed development results in an overall residential density of 0.8 units per gross acre. The residential development proposed is situated on 94.1 acres, or 28% of the property, and results in a net density of 2.4 units per acre on the developed portion of the site. As shown on Figure III-1, the vast majority of the proposed development occurs in the eastern portion of the site, straddling the future extension of Jefferson Street. Ten custom lots are proposed in the northwestern corner of the site, and will gain access through The Quarry development that abuts the property at that location. Approximately 231.2 acres, or 70%, of the project site is proposed to remain in open space, preserving the significant physical features in the central and western portions of the property. GREEN LAND USE PLAN III-1 W N 32 134 Q a J O La co *- O O O r 0 0 LO B. DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS & STANDARDS 1. CUSTOM LOTS (Very Low Density) a. Permitted Uses 1) One -family dwellings , 2) Home occupations. 3) Temporary real estate tract offices, to be used only for and during the original sale of the development, but not to exceed a period of two years in any event. 4) Second Units per the La Quinta Municipal Code. b. Development Standards 1) Buildipgs shall be sid& story, with a maximum height of thirty-five feet -(28'). 2) Lot area shall be not less than thirty thousand square feet (30,000 sf). 3) The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be eighty feet (80') with a minimum average depth of one hundred twenty-five feet (125'). That portion of a lot used for access on "flag" lots shall have a minimum width of thirty feet (30% not to exceed one hundred fifty feet (150) in length. 4) The minimum frontage of a lot shall be seventy- two feet (72% except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of forty feet (40'). 5) The front yard shall be not less than thirty feet (30% measured from the existing street line or from any future street line as shown on any specific plan of highways, or General Plan, -whichever- is nearer the proposed structure. 6) The rear yard shall not be less than twenty feet (20'); side yard setbacks shall no be less than ten feet (10'). 7) Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. GREEN LAND USE PLAN 111-3 8) Minimum gross livable area shall be one thousand six hundred square feet (3,000 sf), excluding the garage, as measured from the exterior walls of the dwelling. 9) Mechanical and Related Equipment. When ground -mounted, heating and cooling mechanical equipment shall be screened from all sides. When equipment is located on pitched roofs or flat roofs, wills and/or screening must be provided on all sides. The screening must be an integral part of the architectural design of the house. 10) Landscaping. The front yard of all lots, and in addition, the side yard of comer lots, shall be landscaped to property line per the requirements of the Design Guidelines. 11) Screening. Refuse container areas and permanently mounted bottled gas tanks shall be concealed by landscaping or block/masonry walls. 12) Underground Utilities. All electric services, overhead wires, or associated structures must be installed underground from the service pole (if any) to the new residence. 13) Driveway Materials. The driveway shall be surfaced with concrete and constructed in accordance with city standards. 14) Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be located and directed so as not to shine directly on adjacent properties or otherwise create a nuisance, consistent with all applicable codes and ordinances. 15) Fencing. Refer to the Design Guidelines. 2. ESTATE LOTS (Low Density) a. Permitted Uses 1) One -family dwellings. 2) Home occupations. 3) -Temporary real estate tract offices to be used only for and during the original sale of the development, but not to exceed a period of two years in any event. GREEN LAND USE PLAN III-4 b. Development Standards 1) Building height shall not exceed two stories, with a maximum height of thirty-five feet (35'). 2) Lot area shall be not less than ten thousand square feet (10,000 sf). 3) The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used as a building site shall be sixty feet (60') with a minimum average depth of eighty (80')• 4) The minimum frontage of a lot shall be seventy- two feet (72% except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul-de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of thirty-five feet (35'). 5) The front yard shall be not less than -twenty feet (20% measured from the existing street line or from any future street line as shown on any specific plan of highways, or general plan, whichever is nearer the proposed structure. 6) The rear yard shall not be less than twenty feet (20'); side yard shall be a minimum of ten feet (10'). 7) Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. 8) Minimum gross livable area shall be two thousand two hundred feet (2,200 sf), excluding the garage, as measured from -the exterior walls of the dwelling. 9) Mechanical and Related Equipment. When ground -mounted, heating and cooling mechanical equipment shall be screened from all sides. When equipment is located on pitched roofs or flat roofs, .wills and/or screening must be provided on all sides. The screening must be an integral part of the architectural design of the house. 10) Landscaping. The front yard of all lots, and in addition, the side yard of corner lots, shall be landscaped to property line per the requirements of the Design Guidelines. 11) -.-Screening. Refuse container areas and permanently mounted bottled gas tanks shall be concealed by landscaping or block/masonry walls. 12) Underground Utilities. All electric services, overhead wires, or associated structures must be GREEN LAND USE PLAN M-5 installed underground from the service pole (if any) to the new residence. 13) Driveway Materials. The driveway shall be surfaced with concrete and constructed in accordance with city standards. 14) Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be located and directed so as not to shine directly on adjacent properties or otherwise create a nuisance, consistent with all applicable codes and ordinances. 1 S) Fencing. Refer to the Design Guidelines. 3. COVE LOTS (Medium Density) a. Permitted Uses 1) One -family dwellings. 2) Home occupations. 3) Temporary real estate tract offices to be used only for and during the original sale of the development, but not to exceed a period of two years in any event. 4) Churches, educational institutions, public libraries, museums and art galleries not operated for compensation. b. Development Standards 1) Building height shall not exceed two stories, with a maximum height of thirty-five feet (35'). 2) Lot area shall be not less than eight thousand six hundred square feet (8,000 sf). 3) The minimum average width of that portion of a lot to be used 'as a building site shall be sixty feet (60') with a minimum average depth of eighty (80'). 4) The minimum frontage of a lot shall be thirty-six J36% except that lots fronting on knuckles or cul- de-sacs may have a minimum frontage of twenty- four feet (24'). S) The front yard shall be not less than twenty feet (20% measured from the existing street line or from any future street line as shown on any GREEN LAND USE PLAN III-6 specific plan of highways, or general plan, whichever is nearer the proposed structure. 6) The rear yard shall not be less than fifteen feet (15'); sideyard setback shall not be less than five feet (Y). 7) Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. 8) Minimum gross livable area shall be eighteen hundred square feet (1800 sf), excluding the garage, as measured from the exterior walls of the dwelling. 9) Mechanical and Related Equipment. When ground -mounted, heating and cooling mechanical equipment shall be screened from all sides. When equipment is located on. pitched roofs or flat roofs, wills and/or screening must be provided on all sides. The screening must be an integral part of the architectural design of the house. 10) Landscaping. The front yard of all lots, and in addition, the side yard of comer lots, shall be landscaped to property line per the requirements of the Design Guidelines. 11) Screening. Refuse container areas and permanently mounted bottled gas tanks shall be concealed by landscaping or block/masonry walls. 12) Underground Utilities. All electric services, overhead wires, or associated structures must be installed underground from the service pole (if any) to the new residence. 13) Driveway Materials. The driveway shall be surfaced with concrete and constructed in accordance with city standards. 14) Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be located and directed so as not to shine directly on adjacent properties or otherwise create a nuisance, consistent with all applicable codes and ordinances. 15) Fencing. Refer to the Design Guidelines. GREEN LAND USE PLAN III-7 4. OPEN SPACE/RECREATIONAL a. Permitted Uses 1) Tennis courts and swimming pools, including clubhouses. A clubhouse is permitted to have customary retail shop and restaurant facilities. 2) Noncommercial community association recreation and assembly buildings and facilities. 3) Lakes, including noncommercial fishing therefrom 4) Picnic grounds 5) Parking lots, only for above -listed permitted uses, pursuant to the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code 6) Water wells and appurtenant facilities 7) On -site identification signs, maximum size, ten square feet (10 sf). 8) Riding academies and stables, provided a conditional use permit has been granted b. Development Standards 1) Lot area. This zone is applied to those areas within subdivisions and other residential development that provide open space and recreational area and facilities for the project. Therefore, no minimum lot size is established for the zone. 2) Yards. Whenever a building is to be constructed on a lot in this zone, it shall have a front yard, side yard and rear yard, each of which shall be not less than fifty feet (50'). If more than one building is constructed on one lot, there shall be not less than twenty feet (20') separation between the buildings. 3) Trash Areas. All trash collection areas shall be enclosed with a solid fence or wall not less than six feet (6') high. 4) - Automobile storage space shall be provided as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. 5) All buildings and structures shall not exceed fifty feet (50') in height, unless a height up to seventy- five (75') is specifically permitted under the provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code. GREEN LAND USE PLAN III-8 C. DESIGN GUIDELINES 1. COMMUNITY a. Purpose & Intent The Design Guidelines have been developed to achieve a quality and cohesive design concept for the community that will develop within the Green Specific Plan. b. Theme The project wide theme of the community is best described as "Mediterranean". Individual "villages" shall contain details which are consistent with recognized features of one of these traditional styles: Italian Mediterranean, French Mediterranean, or Spanish Mediterranean. Designs for the Green Community shall be traditional interpretations of these styles, comprised of a consistent and appropriate design vocabulary that is true to the principles of the style as possible, within the constraints of location, program and budget. It is the intention of these guidelines to foster a community of unique environmental design solutions that are appropriate for the project, rather than stage set, or "doll house" architecture. 2. ARCHITECTURE The integrity of the architectural character of the project will be maintained through the application of the guidelines stipulated within this plan throughout the entire site, and for each village. Every development proposal for the Green Specific Plan shall be reviewed by the City of La Quinta Planning Director to assure it's conformance with the intent of the architectural guidelines stated and illustrated within this document. However, it is intended that other suitable designs which are not specifically mentioned in this document, but are consistent with the initial theme, may be considered and approved for use. GREEN LAND USE PLAN III-9 a: Color The base colors of all structures shall be limited to a palette of white, cream, tan, sand, light brown, mauve and other colors considered to be "earth tones". Primary colors may be used for accent only. b. Materials Roofing material shall be limited to ceramic or concrete - based materials, either flat or round -shake type tiles. 3. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE FORTHCOMING GREEN LANs USE PLAN III-10 Green Specific Plan IV. INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN A. CIRCULATION Figure IV-1 illustrates the circulation plan anticipated for the project. Access to the site is from Jefferson Street which traverses the eastern portion of the site in generally a north/south alignment. Jefferson Street is planned as a Secondary Arterial, with an eighty -eighty foot right-of- way, and sixty-four foot curb to curb dimension. Local streets will connect to Jefferson Street and serve the residential development. The ten Custom Lots which abut existing The Quarry development and will take access from the existing streets. B. WATER Coachella Valley Water District has jurisdiction over domestic water service to the Green project. Currently, domestic water service lines exist in the area of the intersection of 58th and Madison, at the PGA West location. The project is required to provide four well sites to serve the project and service connections made for domestic water. One well is required to be active prior to construction of initial phases of development. Additionally, a 2.5 million gallon reservoir .is required to be built to serve the site. Precise locations, connections and design capacities of these facilities will be determined at a later date, with review and approval from the City of La Quinta and all other affected agencies. On -site improvements, as illustrated in Figure IV-2, shall include an 18' water line within the Jefferson Street right-of-way. The development off Jefferson Street will be served with 12' lines throughout. The ten Custom Lots will be served by an 8" water line, connecting to the existing 8" water line in"The Quarry development. Precise alignments, locations and sizes of lines and connections will be determined at the Tentative Map stage of development. GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN IV-1 C. SEWER The project site is presently served by Coachella Valley Water District. The nearest existing sewer lines available to serve the eastern portion of the project are located at 58th and Madison, at the PGA West site, approximately 2,000 feet from the project boundaries. As depicted in Figure IV-3, the existing 10' line will be extended the 2,000 feet from PGA West to the Green Property boundary. The project site itself will then be serviced with 8" sewer lines throughout. The ten custom lots located in the northwestern comer of the project site will connect to the existing 8" line located within The Quarry development which abuts the site at that location. An 8' sewer line will serve that portion of the site as well. D. GR.ADING & DRAINAGE The drainage facilities proposed to accommodate the flows generated by the development of the project site are identified in Figure IV-4. More detailed design, including location, size, type and capacity of drainage facilities shall be determined at the Tentative Map stage of development. Figure IV-5 illustrates the conceptual grading plan for the site. It should be noted that the grading and development proposed is consistent with the City's Municipal Code, Hillside Conservation Zone, Chapter 9.145. Figure 11-4, Slope Analysis, assists in illustrating that those areas of 10% slope and greater will be consistent with the Hillside Conservation Zone. E. UTILITIES Southern California Gas Company provides the natural gas to the project site. Electric service to Green Property will be provided by Imperial Irrigation District. GRW N WFRASTRUCTM PLAN IV-2 C) co cn 1�1 aW 3N G co O O LO 1�1 I rd co 0) r �Z QJ as c� W Q Z z Q Q aIL J 0 Green Specific Plan V. IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES & ADMINISTRATION A. PROCEDURES The entitlement procedures proposed herein shall be in conformance with those procedures established and set forth in the City of La Quinta Municipal Code. All development applications shall be reviewed by the City of La Quinta as to their consistency with the intent of this Specific Plan. B. FINANCING PLAN The infrastructure and public facilities improvements, as generally described in the Phasing Plan, will be financed in various ways, as outlined below: ■ Developer contribution with reimbursement agreements; ■ Developer contribution with credits against fees; ■ City of La Quinta contribution (as budgeted); ■ Public financing (Community Facilities District); ■ Public Financing (Assessment District). Final financing arrangements, including required participation agreements, shall be further determined at the Tentative Map stage of development and shall be reviewed and approved by the City of La Quinta as well as affected agencies. GREEN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES & ADMINISTRATION V-1. C. PHASING PLAN The primary intent of the phasing of the Green development, as depicted in Figure 5-1, is to ensure that complete'and adequate public facilities and services are in place and available for the residents and visitors to the community. The construction, installation and/or extension of infrastructure and facilities necessary to serve each phase of development shall be operational prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Use and Occupancy for that particular phase.. It should be noted that, the initial phasing plan shall be linked to the area to be developed first as well as the financing program selected. Subsequent phases shall be adjusted in accordance with the overall integration of physical development and financing. As development in Green and the surrounding community continues, infrastructure design and improvements may evolve and include various revisions to the phasing program anticipated and described herein. These revisions, upon the review and confirmation by the City of La Quinta that proposed revisions meet the intent of the Specific Plan and adequately serve the needs of the community, shall be permitted without an amendment to this Specific Plan. GREEN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES & ADMINISTRATION V-2 V zz N Q J =a a N Q aIL a O LO t0 T O O O T O 0 LO rm D. MAINTENANCE PLAN The primary objective of establishing the maintenance responsibilities, as described herein, is to ensure the efficient and quality care for those facilities and improvements that add to the quality of life within the community. The various maintenance areas and associated responsible parties are outlined below. ■ Common landscape areas and/or recreational facilities within individual developments will be maintained by the particular Homeowners Association governing that development. ■ Public streets are to be dedicated to and maintained by the City of La Quinta. ■ Entry monumentation, master common landscape areas, and other areas commonly owned shall be maintained by a Master Homeowners Association established by the developer. The following matrix, Table 5-1, identifies the maintenance responsibilities for the Green Property development. TABLE 5-1 MAINTENANCE RESPONSIBILTTIES GREEN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES & ADMINISTRATION V-4 E. AMENDMENTS Minor adjustments to the Specific Plan, including transfers and refinements of up to ten percent between Planning Areas may be administratively approved by the Planning Director. Other revisions to this document, such as alternate phasing sequences, may be proposed to the Planning Director, if necessary. The Planning Director has the authority to make certain findings that permit the Director to approve said revisions administratively. Said findings must include the following: ■ The proposed revisions comply with and implement the general intent and objectives of the Specific Plan; ■ The proposed revisions do not result in an increase to the adverse impacts to public services and facilities that were identified and considered in the approval of this Specific Plan; ■ The proposed revisions will not increase negative impacts to surrounding property and residents; GREEN IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES & ADMWSTRATION `-5 0 PH #F PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: APRIL 13, 1999 CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-043 APPLICANT: AIRTOUCH CELLULAR REPRESENTATIVE: JOE RICHARDS - RMW PROPERTY OWNER: MARVIN INVESTMENTS, INC. LOCATION: 78-080 CALLE ESTADO REQUEST: TO ALLOW INSTALLATION OF WIRELESS ANTENNAS AND RELATED EQUIPMENT FOR CELLULAR TELEPHONE SERVICE WITH SCREENING ON AN EXISTING BUILDING. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-377. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT; THEREFORE, A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT IS RECOMMENDED. ZONING DESIGNATION: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: NORTH: SOUTH: WEST: EAST: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL, VACANT & CHIROPRACTOR VILLAGE COMMERCIAL, CALLE ESTADO ROADWAY VILLAGE COMMERCIAL, OFFICE BUILDING VILLAGE COMMERCIAL, PARKING LOT, OFFICE BUILDING BACKGROUND: The project site is located within an existing building at 78-080 Calle Estado, in the La Quinta Village commercial area, 250 feet east of Avenida Bermudas (Attachment 1). The existing building, constructed in 1987, is a two-story retail/office building with 6,660 square feet of useable space. The building houses the La Quinta Branch County Library and other tenants, and is known as the Monroe Building. Project Request Mr. Joe Richards, representing AirTouch Cellular, has applied to the City for approval of a Conditional Use Permit 99-043, to allow a digital cellular telephone antenna site to be installed on the building roof (Attachment 2). AirTouch will be leasing the antenna site space from the property owner. The antenna site is to be completely screened from view by a 5.5-foot tall stucco parapet wall. The screen will increase the height of the existing parapet roof from 31.5 to 37 feet at the northwest corner of the building, equal with the tallest existing point on the building. Related equipment and coaxial cables for the antennas will be housed in the existing "penthouse," located at the top of the building. The antenna site will house a total of 29 antennas including: 21 cellular antennas, two microwave dishes, three whip antennas, one Loran antenna, one PGS antenna, and one mobile test antenna. The antenna site will be accessed by a roof access ladder from the second floor balcony, mounted to the existing wall and painted to match the building. The equipment room will be accessed by a doorway into the "penthouse" located on the second level balcony. There will also be two new HVAC equipment units installed on the rooftop to service the antenna site equipment. Public Notice: The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on March 24, 1999, as well as mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. No comments have been received. Any comments received will be handed out at the meeting. Public Agency Review: The applicant's request was sent to responsible agencies, and any pertinent comments received have been incorporated into the Conditions of Approval. STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve this request for Conditional Use Permit 99-043, as required by Section 9.210.020(F) of the Zoning Ordinance, can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution, except for the following: Findin : Approval of the application 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. The applicant proposes to stucco the proposed fiberglass screen wall to match the existing building in both texture and color. To break up the proposed expanse of wall area, the applicant is proposing decorative design elements, quatrefoils, and coping, to complement the design of the building. Coping is proposed at the top of the screen wall that is out of balance with the existing coping on the building. To remedy this design issue, staff recommends Condition of Approval #8, requiring the parapet coping match the width and design of the existing coping on the building in order to provide for a continuation of the existing design elements. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- to certify a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for Environmental Assessment 99-377, prepared for Conditional Use Permit 99-043. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99- approving Conditional Use Permit 99-043, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Site Plan Prepared by: Leslie Mouriquand Associate Planner Submitted by: r) Christine di lorio Planning Manager P:\perptCU P99-043Aiffouch mpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, CERTIFYING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-377 PREPARED FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-043 TO ALLOW A CELLULAR TELEPHONE ANTENNA SITE TO BE INSTALLED ON THE ROOF OF AN EXISTING BUILDING AND SCREENED WITH A 5.5-FOOT TALL STUCCO PARAPET WALL, WITH ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT HOUSED WITHIN THE EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) ZONING DISTRICT AT 78-080 CALLE ESTADO. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 99-377 APPLICANT: AIRTOUCH CELLULAR WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 131h day of April, 1999, hold a duty noticed Public Hearing, at the request of AirTouch Cellular, to allow a cellular telephone antenna site at 78-080 Calle Estado; and, WHEREAS, said application 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, and has determined that although there is some potential for the proposed cellular telephone antenna site to have potentially significant adverse impacts, there would not be a significant effect in this case because appropriate mitigation measures were made a part of the assessment and are included in the Conditions of Approval, and 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 find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify certifying said Environmental Assessment: The proposed cellular telephone antenna site will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly, in that no significant unmitigated impacts have been identified by Environmental Assessment 99-377. 2. The proposed cellular telephone antenna site does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to result in a drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal 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, due to the lack of any such resources existing on or near the existing project site. Planning Commission Resolution 99- Conditional Use Permit 99-043 April 13, 1999 3. The proposed cellular telephone antenna site 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 Environmental Assessment 99-377. 4. The proposed cellular telephone antenna site will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, as the area is an established commercial district with infrastructure in place to support the requested antenna site, and the proposal is considered an ancillary part of the existing use which will not effect an increase in growth through any modification of the current conditions on the site. 5. The proposed cellular telephone antenna site will not have environmental effects that will adversely affect the human population, either directly or indirectly, as supporting documentation submitted by the applicant indicates that microwave and cellular telephone antenna emissions associated with the proposal will be substantially below nationally recognized safety thresholds. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: That the 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 99-377 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, attached hereto, and on file in the Community Development Department. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 13th day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California P:\LESLIE\pereseaCUP99-043AirTouch.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 99- Conditional Use Permit 99-043 April 13, 1999 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\LESLIE\pereseaCUP99-043AirTouch.wpd 1 2 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. Appendix G Environmental Checklist Form Project Title: Conditional Use Permit 99-043 Lead Agency Name and Address: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Contact Person and Phone Number: Leslie Mouriquand 760-777-7068 Project Location: 78-080 Calle Estado APN : 769-101-016 Project Sponsor's Name and Address: AirTouch Cellular General Plan Designation: Village Commercial Zoning: Village Commercial 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.) To allow, under a Conditional Use Permit, 29 cellular antennas of various types to be installed on the roof. The antennas will be screened with a 5.5' tall stucco parapet wall at the northwest corner of the existing building. Associated equipment will be housed within the building. 9. Surrounding Lane Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings. North: Village Commercial, vacant, Chiropractor South: Village Commercial, Calle Estado roadway, office buildings West: Village Commercial, East: Village Commercial, parking lot, office building 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) FCC, FAA, and State Aeronautics Division, in accordance with Section 9.170.070(D) of the Zoning Code. P:\F,A99-377AirTouch.wpd 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 1 lousing Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: Public Services Recreation Transportation/Traffic Utilities and Service Systems Mandatory Findings I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 11 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. 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 I) 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. a Signature Printed Name Date For -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 analyses 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 analyses 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:\EA99-377AirTouch.wpd -3 'ample question: Issues (and Supporting Information Sources): Would the proposal result in potential impacts involving: Landslides or mudslides? (1,6) (Attached source list explains that I is the general plan, and 6 is a USGS topo map. This answer would probably not need further explanation.) I, AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? (Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) Fig. 5-13; EA 87-070) b) Damage scenic resources. including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? (MEA Fig. 5-13; EA 87-070) c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? (Site Plan and Application Materials; EA 87-070) d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? (Site Plan and Application Materials. EA 87-070) II. 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 on -agricultural use? (MEA Fig. 2-23; General Plan (GP) Fig. 6-5, MEA Section 2.55, EA 87-070) b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? (Zoning Map, General Plan; EA 87-070) 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? (GP Fig. 2-23; EA 87-070) 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? (GP Chap. 9, EA 87-070) b) Violate any stationary source air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation? (EMF Report, AirTouch Cellular; EA 87-070) Potentially Potentially Significant Significant Unless Impact ;Mitigated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact /1 /:/ X X X X X X P:'\hA99-3 77AirTouch.wpd 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)? (EMF Report, AirTouch Cellular, EA 87-070 ) d) Create or contribute to a non -stationary source "hot spot" (primarily carbon monoxide)? (EMF Report, AirTouch Cellular, EA 87-070) e) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? (EMF Report, AirTouch Cellular; EA 87-070) f) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people'? (EMF Report, AirTouch Cellular, EA 87-070) IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Adversely impact, either directly or through habitat modifications, any endangered, rare, or threatened species, as listed in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (Sections 670.2 or 670.5) or in Title 50, Code of Federal Regulations (Sections 17.11 or 17.12)? (MEA Fig. 2-23: EA 87-070) b) 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? (MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) c) 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? (MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) d) 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? (MEA Fig. 2-23: EA 87-070) e) 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? (MEA Fig. 2-23; EA 87-070) f) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? (MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) g) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? (MEA Fig. 2-23: EA 87- 070) X /A 91 0 X X X X X X X P:\EA99-377AirTouch.wpd 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? (City Historic Resources Survey, 1997, EA 87-070) 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)? (MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) c) Disturb or destroy a unique paleontological resource or site? (MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? (MEA Fig. 2-23; EA 87-070) 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? (MEA Fig. 6-7, EA 87-070) ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? (MEA Fig. 6-1, 6-7, EA 87-070) iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? (MEA Fig. 6-7; EA 87-070) iv) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? (MEA Fig. 6-7, EA 87-070) v) Landslides? (MEA Fig. 6-7, GP Fig. 8-7, EA 87-070) vi) Flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? (MEA Fig. 6-7, GP Fig. 8-7, EA 87-070) vii) Wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas and where residences are intermixed with wildlands? (MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) b) Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? (MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) c) Would the project result in the loss of a unique geologic feature? (USGS Topo Quad, La Quinta, 7.5% 1980; EA 87-070) X X X X X 01 /1 X X X X X X -t VIIL d) Is the project located on strata or soil that is unstable, or that would X become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on - or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsistence, liquefaction or collapse? (MEA Fig. 5-29, Section 5.7; EA 87-070) e) Is the project located on expansive soil creating substantial risks to life or property? (MEA Fig. 5-29, Section 5.7; EA 87-070) f) Where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water, is the soil capable of supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems? (James Lindsay, Public Works Dept, 3- 16-99, EA 87-070) 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? (United States Activities Board, May 9, 1992; EA 87-070; Chap. 9.170, LQMC) 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? (United States Activities Board, May 9, 1992; EA 87- 070; Chap. 9.170, LQMC; FCC) c) Reasonably be anticipated to emit hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one -quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? (United States Activities Board, May 9, 1992; EA 87-070; FCC) 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? (www.swrcb.ca.gov; EA 87-070) 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? (MEA Fig. 2-23; EA 87-070) 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? (MEA Fig. 2-23; EA 87-070) g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? (John Hardcastle, Code Compliance, 3-16-99, EA 87-070) 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? (MEA Fig. 2-23. EA 87-070) HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY: Would the project: a) Violate Regional Water Quality Control Board water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? (Application materials, EA 87-070) X lil IV X X X X X X X P: \EA99-377AirToucb.wpd 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? (CVWD, 12-9-98; EA 87- 070) 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? (CVWD, 12-9-98, EA 87-070) 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? (CVWD, 12-9- 98, EA 87-070) e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems to control ? (CVWD, 12-9-98; EA 87-070) 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? (MEA Fig. 6-7, EA 87-070) g) Place within a 100-year floodplain structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? (MEA Fig. 6-7_ EA 87-070) IX LAND USE AND PLANNING: Would the project: X a) Physically divide an established community? (MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) 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 costal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? (MEA Fig. 2-23, GP Map; EA 87-070) c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? (CVFTL Map; EA 87-070) MINERAL RESOURCES: Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource classified MRZ-2 by the Statc Geologist that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? (MEA Fig. 5-29, EA 87-070) 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? (MEA Fig. 5-29; EA 87-070) X ►ri 04 X EI R 1I X X XL NOISE: Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of X standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? (United State Activities Board, Mav 9, 1992. EA 87-070) b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? (United States Activities Board, May 9, 1992, EA 87-070) c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? (United States Activities Board, May 9, 1992: EA 87-070) d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing �rithout the project? (United States Activities Board, May 9, 1992, EA 87-070) 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 expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? (Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan, Fig. VI.12: EA 87-070) f) 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? (Riverside County Comprehensive General Plan, Fig. VI.12: EA 87-070) XII. 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) ? (Application Materials, EA 87-070) b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials, EA 87-070) c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? (Application Materials: EA 87-070) 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`? (Fire Marshal letter of 12-1-98; EA 87-070) Police protection?( Application Materials, EA 87-070) Schools? (Application Materials, EA 87-070) Parks? (Application Materials; EA 87-070) Other public facilities? (Application Materials, EA 87-070) ►:/ X X 0 X X 91 X X X X X c P:+A99-377AirTouch.wpd 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, GP Fig. 4-5, EA 87-070) 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? (GP Fig. 4-5, EA 87- 070) 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)? (GP Figs. 3-3, 3-9, EA 87-070) b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? (Application Materials; EA 87-070) 04 X X X 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? (Riverside County Comprehensive General X Plan, Fig. V1.12; EA 87-070) d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) ? (Application Materials; EA 87-070) e) Result in inadequate emergency access? (Application Materials, MEA Fig. 2-23, EA 87-070) f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? (Application Materials; La Quinta Zoning Code, Table 1502, EA 87-070) g) Conflict with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g.. bus turnouts, bicycle racks) ? (MEA Fig. 3-23, EA 87-070) XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS: Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? (Application Materials; EA 87-070) 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? (Application Materials, CVWD, 12-9-98; EA 87-070) 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? (Application Materials, CVWD, 12-9-98; EA 87-070) X X X X X X 11 P: T:A99-377AirTouch.wpd d) Are sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? (CVWD, 12-9-98, EA 87-070) 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? (CVWD, 12-9-98, EA 87-070) f) Is the project served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? (Application Materials; EA 87-070) 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 ANALYSES. Earlier analyses 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: X EI X X KI X 0 P:\F.A99-377AirTouch.wpd a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. The following documents are on file at the Community Development Department, City of La Quinta: EA 87-070 Master Environmental Assessment for the City of La Quinta General Plan for the Citv of La Quinta CUP 99-043 application materials City of La Quinta Zoning Map EMF Report, AirTouch Cellular City Historic Resources Survey, Mellon & Assoc., 1997 Exposure to RF Emissions from Cellular Radio Base Station Antennas. Entitv Position Statement. United States Activities Board, May 9, 1992 Information on Cellular Radio and Radio Frequency Radiation. Federal Communication Commission, Office of Engineering & Technology, Spectrum Engineering Division, n.d. 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. 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. P:\EA99-377AirTouch.wpd -1 2 Addendum to Environmental Checklist, EA 99-377 I. c) The proposed project will include the construction of a 5.5-foot tall fiberglass, parapet stucco wall, to match the existing building. This will increase the height of the existing parapet roof from 31.5 to 37 feet at the north west corner of the building. The wall will be equal in height with the tallest point on the building. The proposed wall addition will result in additional mass for the rear of the existing building, with its four -walled square shape. The rear of the building is visible to the alley -way. Future development north of the building should block the view of the rear elevation where the new parapet wall is proposed. To break-up the proposed expanse of wall area, the applicant has proposed decorative design elements (i.e. quatrefoils - coping to complement the design of the building). There are existing mature trees planted along the rear of the building. Mitigation for this issue is by the proposed decorative elements for design compatibility. VI. a-ii) The City is located in s seismically active area. The proposed Conditional Use Permit is located in a Zone III groundshaking zone. The City has implemented provisions in the Uniform Building Code for seismically active areas. The proposed project will be required to conform to these standards. This mitigation measure will ensure that impact from seismic activity will be reduced to a level of insignificance. XII. a) The addition of the proposed cellular antenna site will increase and/or improve the existing cellular telephone service to the Cove area of La Quinta. This increased service could indirectly encourage population growth by providing cellular service to areas previously without such service, or improve existing service. Potential growth is not anticipated to be substantial, thus any adverse impact resulting from the proposed project will not be significant, and not warrant mitigation. C:\Mydata\eaaddendumEA99-377AirTouch.wpd W U Z J a 0 v as ~ W Z0 d0 a LL J Oa CC >- C9 F- 0 U � a Z R 0 Z 5 O O O rn r- 0 Z J w v a Cl) Ix y N W CO) Ch a O O O Q-- 00 .Q Q O 't3 N Cl) LJJ m U O 00 O 00 r- M O O C7 n U Lii 0 cc a a a O Z a Z V c w W I— cn W ,J a o C) w a W Z F- h Z _O F- C) W Z W m C) Z Z W N � V cc > a0 0 CO Z< 2 W 0 = �cc 00 U. ZO O p cc � Q W 0 Lu L) Q = W Z U) W W Q N w- 0c a� W cc C9 Z 0 J J 0 LL. Lu H W H Q 0 LU 2 m .40 W a hd p W O = U V Q LU m O 'It F-� O C — C) .2 ca +' > O O Q. U U Q c� z O O H '0 N U co O L Q O Q U c O LU Z o y0 Z 0 CL y c E O N U 0 O C Z U o s o 0ca a ca Q. +, c L +, � N LLU O X �cc _ a O a J E vi CD_ c — _ ca M cn m U Q o i Q cn V += m = cmU� 'C rn a Co In a a c r2 � Q > 0 N n. 3 CD m LU cn > co Co O cc cc a o N Q C _ V Ln to CA a)U t cn m O(a W ate. +� ~Cl)° r' t�i 0 y z O U FL c W F- Q 0 ci m Z aW J ]C a c) W O= V V Q W H v c� z O� "z J CC mp N F- a0 (1)� W cc uj f0 � C z a o f.. O U c6 LL 7 (7 N W W co il! c0 ciao �> O y Wm Q U ` m Q C. E J cca a. -a „~J Q Li.i m m Q = Q ujL E CD :. U CU NC7 OL E U ui O OCD N N Q CL E v W v N N a)Q N O m a p O N m Q W � p �; p m O Q W a p M Z 0 F- 2 Z M Z O 1- Z LU Q %i m Z Q W J �G a C) W O= v� a LLA u z oZ LU — OJ-0 O Z Z 0 a0. � H LU cc C z O W co W co F— Q p cr.2) .0 -a N ul D O L1J O (n O i F- = W 0 N O � U o y OC U rn c W U N a) 0 LU C -p J CLl � O Q C.)X v Q a 0 a) O Q � CD U (n W U-cr.Q O H v ccu 'C O cuj c 6 O O n F +, L) D � V O O Ca LU 0 0— Co LU M 0 Z 0 DLn O Ccn F- L Z M Z O n`. n Z w Q L)m Z Q W J he a U gw Ox U� rn cc w — � �. m cc E U O ui t- —0 C O � U vi a� m U Z_ t Q' o ~ U Q ate+ cn C O U a � O C7 O W Z J O m O m FA H m 00 cCo N� w rn � =a m U N 0) Q C :3 D O > o a)U N m f,. to Q `- y E Q J C ♦+ E — ` — C7 W O Q 0 C U o O vi jr N C ` O U O O >, cts N Z U LL N N CL 0 0 N Q w- Q L m 0 p c CD cn a •- o O o Q ui > v tii a y- -e o E cu N Q LV co N Co +, Q. m F.. V CL y fn ..O p N a O cn O C 'C a) m = .W> a) > ca � Q 0 C N M b, +_+ > COL ZQ N O cn N U W.c E w � O r-+ON 0) / « O uj >- kw CL Kui oI QU � � ui � Q 0 z % w cc o� 2 ImB ■L 2E ■� cc 2 o E % N co 2 O 0 2 cr. e O LL 0 cn w cl E Z o g 2 o= S 2 U . 2 7� U g �U � �/ Cd k\ «S Q C a) � OL% a) k / cc / co k %k ui 2 b CL 2 2 \ k f o m 1 2 < c o S 0 2 0 0 w o o 2 M o 2 0 CL o 2 W Q 0 W >- 0 w Z Q w �x �v W 0= v� a W F_ cc 0 0 Z_ H cc 00 LL. Z 1 OC oc O 00 a� W w vi CD 0 Z � a) O 0 Z C 0 N Q Q a Li N y W O ro C F— 0 Q Z Q U cn L m c cc Q� m +� X ro ro -a —j Q Q :,� D N Q W CL E OC c W .= W Z {J1 O to Z F U (D Cl) O. E W CD D Q C O E � Q C M p Z m 0 C w OL f0 LLI O Z M O Z m 0 O` a W O Z W Q vm z Qw J �L IL v * W O= V V Q W F- v CD z O� "z -jiR co O F5�- ao y W co (D Z Q �C U z O `° F O 0 o� `° T LL E > = n. CD CD +� o U Q N O L rn cn cn z E D n a) W F- OC L1 ? Q O X L m ,« t0 p) a) O W c ti O Q +� cn v Q m °' X° coa) Cl) UL.0 > a) Co W CL 0 > 0 0 w c cr O cu H E a�i O a V o o CL aa) z Ci W v '- — a) a) a) y a) N E cn W L Q N CL to Q CD C O m O O O W e— O m O O C W Z M Z O F— C C Z M Z J F- co v- W Q 0 U w Z Q w a U W O= UU Q W F- U C7 Z F- O U. Z -12 on O to H- z Z 0 a0. W N U > z �=+ C y_ U N -� U Cal W y aXi F- w W U CL �+ rn Z ti i Q C ++ = O m U +� RS Q N Q X `� N W Q E m vi N �= .. W � U >' U +�+ W _ U U W r-- 'D U O� Q .) c=n a w ov CL E w a)��' Q c C V m z 0 U +, CD� . W z M z 0 �-- m z W Q U M Z Q W a V � W ox U U a W H U U Z_ F- O C7 LU Z .W.� � mO FA H a� W U O W U C.)L) O H oC .n > > u' a Q Z tl a W W E N p vo 0 p c cn y U O Z U >• iW Li O m Q Cl) m E`EN N � W d > mN > � Z > E J ui v� N cn W Q c Cl) n Q c M Z 0 aLU OC ° Z M N Z 0 F- CD Z PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-043 TO ALLOW A CELLULAR TELEPHONE ANTENNA SITE TO BE INSTALLED ON THE ROOF OF AN EXISTING BUILDING AND SCREENED WITH A 5.5-FOOT TALL STUCCO PARAPET WALL, WITH ASSOCIATED EQUIPMENT HOUSED WITHIN THE EXISTING BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN THE VILLAGE COMMERCIAL (VC) ZONING DISTRICT AT 78-080 CALLE ESTADO CASE NO. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-043 APPLICANT: AIRTOUCH CELLULAR WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 13th day of April, 1999, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, at the request of AirTouch Cellular, to consider a cellular telephone antenna site within the Village Commercial (VC) Zoning District, located at 78-080 Calle Estado; and, WHEREAS, at the Public Hearing upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following findings to justify the approval of said Conditional Use Permit: 1. The proposed cellular telephone antenna site is consistent with current standards of the Zoning Code in that Chapter 9.170 conditionally permits commercial cellular telephone antenna sites, and that the proposed antenna screen wall will comply with the height requirements of Section 9.65.030 (A) (2) of the VC (Village Commercial) Zoning District. Therefore, the proposed cellular telephone antenna site is consistent with the current Zoning Code. 2. The proposed cellular telephone antenna site is compatible with the goals and policies of the General Plan, in that the project serves to fulfill General Plan Objective 7-1.4 which states that the City shall utilize alternative means to ensure the adequate provision of natural gas, electrical, cable television and telecommunications facilities to serve the domestic and commercial needs of the community. 3. The proposed cellular telephone antenna site is subject to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as there is the potential for some types of telecommunications equipment to emit radioactive waves which Planning Commission Resolution 99- could adversely impact the public's health. Environmental Assessment 99-377 did not identify any potential harmful effects from the proposed antennas for this project. Additionally, the proposed antennas meet the current standards for nonionizing electromagnetic radiation as stipulated in Section 9.170.080 of the Zoning Code. 4. The proposed cellular telephone antenna site will not create conditions injurious to or incompatible with other properties or land uses in the vicinity, with the implementation cf the attached conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of said Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby approve the above described Conditional Use Permit, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\peresC i JP99-043AirTouch.wpd CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 99-043 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR - MONROE BUILDING APRIL 13, 1999 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Upon their approval by the Planning Commission, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply (Assessors Parcel Numbers 769-101- 016). 2. 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 applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 3. Approval of this Conditional Use Permit is subject to compliance with Sections 9.210.020 and 9.170.010 of the Zoning Code, as applicable. 4. Prior to the issuance of an improvement or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies. - Fire Marshal • Public Works Department • Community Development Department • Riverside County Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District 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. 5. Development of this site shall be in substantial conformance with Exhibits approved and contained in the file for Conditional Use Permit 99-043, unless amended by the following conditions. 6. The approved Conditional Use Permit shall be used within one year from City approval date of April 13, 1999; otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means beginning of substantial construction toward Planning Commission Resolution 99- Conditional Use Permit 99-043 AirTouch Cellular April 13, 1999 year time extensions up to a total of two extensions may be requested pursuant to City requirements. 7. No signs are permitted as part of this approval. 8. The parapet coping at the top of the screen wall shall match the width and design of existing coping on other parapet walls. FEES AND DEPOSITS 9. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for the plan checks, permits, and inspections. 10. Within three days after Planning Commission approval, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department a check payable to the County of Riverside for $78.00. This fee shall be forwarded to the Riverside County Clerk's Office for payment of the State -required Fish and Game Fees and administrative handling fee. P:\PCcoaCUP99-043AirTouch.wpd ATTACHMENT #1 W '..gym �mm . -- mm mm mimummmiHm CALLE ESTADO CALLE--CADIZ CASE MAP CASE Na CUP 99-043 AIRTOUCH CELLULAR 78-080 CALLE ESTADO SCALE: ATTACHMENT # 60 30Vd 1031Wd h3NNVO 8 0 9 Zb5bZL 81:bl 666Z/0I/60 06 I E- w Z0 30Vd 1'J31THOdV A3N VO d 0 0 9LGLZOSOTL 81:0T 666L/01/ZO U G V hz a O 'n Sv C, r85 W Cn Z yC 3: a l CD N 4 33 o^ W d� m cm ✓ ¢ fn b Y � W SNOStl3S �d yr O a xJa"zZZz �z 5 p, 2 �GGU K 3NN4 omo 10S30 aowzxooW w� cn IX O ZZ Q Nq�J+ 1 cv- —U�aO�;i-z N .Z v .J (yfjl c..i tjz�Z�Z���pZ�S1Wy W �w Z < 4�OUJ f/N�O1 J �o Li [T W Q 7. BI #A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: APRIL 13, 1999 CASE NUMBER: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-648 APPLICANT/ PROPERTY OWNER: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES (MR. ED KNIGHT, PROJECT DIRECTOR) LOCATION: APPROXIMATELY 100-FEET SOUTH OF DESERT STREAM DRIVE AND ON THE WEST SIDE OF DUNE PALMS ROAD REQUEST: RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE THREE PROTOTYPE RESIDENCES AND LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR USE IN TRACT 27519 (ALISO DEL REY) ARCHITECT: LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS: BACKGROUND: BENJAMIN AGUILAR AND ASSOCIATES IMA DESIGN GROUP INCORPORATED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE)/RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT) On January 5, 1999, the City Council adopted Resolutions 99-7 approving the subdivision of 17.6 acres into 70 single family and other common lots under Tentative Tract Map 27519 (See Attachment 1). Condition #90 requires the prototype house p9ans to be approved by the Planning Commission. SRPCSSDP648 - 32 Page 1 of 3 Section 9.60.330 (Residential Tract Development Review) of the Zoning Code requires review of the prototype house plans by the Planning Commission as a Business Item insuring the plans are architecturally appealing. Project Proposal The applicant proposes three residential prototype plans each with three facade options within Tentative Tract Map 25719, a recently approved subdivision of 70 single family lots located south of the Topaz development. The prototype floor plans vary from 1,500 square feet to 1,718 square feet in size. Plan 5 can be increased to 2,008 square feet by converting the third car garage parking space to living space. Each prototype plan is described below: Plan 2 Plan 3 Plans 5 1,500 square feet 1,700 square feet 1,718 square feet to 2,008 square feet 3 bedrooms 3 bedrooms 2 or 3 bedrooms 2 car garage 2 car garage 3 or 2 car garage All plans are one-story (14-feet to 16-feet high), and include attached garages for two or three cars. Model homes are planned for construction on Lots 41 and 42 under Minor Use Permit 99-122. A Mediterranean architectural style is proposed for the project, utilizing exterior plaster walls and concrete S-tile roofing. Desert color tones (e.g., various shades of brown and grey) are proposed for the exterior building surfaces. The material sample board will be available at the meeting. The typical front yard landscaping plan is attached. Front yards include a minimum of three to five specimen shade trees (i.e., 1.5" and 2.0" calipers), and numerous shrubs highlighted by mounded lawn and/or groundcover areas. Shrub types vary based on location around the houses and exposure to the sun. Landscaping is also proposed for the retention basin and Dune Palms Road parkway, consisting of trees and shrubs clustered throughout. Lawn is used primarily for coverage in the retention basin. Access to the basin is provided by a concrete ramp located at the south side. Parkway walls are masonry clad in stucco with pilasters. SRPCSDP648 - 32 Page 2 of 3 Open wrought iron sections are proposed adjacent to the retention basin. Existing Eucalyptus trees along the north side of the retention basin will be retained, as required by the Tract approval. Public Notice - A letter was mailed to adjacent property owners by the Community Development Department on March 24, 1999, informing the owners that the Planning Commission would be reviewing the prototype house plans at this evening's meeting. Any written correspondence received will be handed out to the Planning Commission at the meeting. Architecture and Landscape Review Committee Action On April 7, 1999, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee met to evaluate the architectural and landscaping plans for Tract 27519. The Committee, on a 2-0 vote adopted Minute Motion 99-009, recommending to the Planning Commission approval of the preliminary plans of the applicant, subject to conditions. A copy of the draft Minutes from the meeting is attached (See Attachment 2). The recommended conditions of the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee have been incorporated into the attached Conditions of Approval. Conditions 10-13 require the developer to make architectural upgrades to the side and rear building elevations through the use of clipped gables, roof dormers and other design treatments pursuant to the requirements of Section 9.60.330 of the Zoning Code, before building permit issuance is allowed. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 99-_, approving the prototype residences and landscaping for Tract 27519, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Tract Map Exhibit 2. Draft ALRC Minutes of April 7, 1999 (Excerpt) 3. Large Architectural Plans (Commission only) Prepared by: Submitted by: Greg dell, Associate Planner Christine di orio, Planning Manager SRPCSDP648 - 32 Page 3 of 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-648, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS, PROVIDING APPROVAL OF THREE PROTOTYPE HOUSING UNITS AND LANDSCAPING FOR CONSTRUCTION IN TRACT 27519 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-648 APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 131h day of April, 1999, consider the request of Century -Crowell Communities to approve architectural and landscape plans for three prototype residential units to be constructed on the west side of Dune Palms Road approximately 100-feet south of Desert Stream Drive in Tract 27519, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel No.: 604-061-009; Portion of SW 1 /4 of Section 20, T5S, R7E, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee for the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 71h day of April, 1999, recommend approval of the prototype units and landscaping for Tract 27519, by adoption of Resolution 99- 009, subject to conditions; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 51h day of January, 1999, approve Tentative Tract Map 27519 under Resolution 99-7, permitting the subdivision of 17.6 acres into 70 single family and common lots, subject to the prototype residential plans being approved by the Planning Commission; WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has been determined to be exempt from California Environmental Quality Act requirements under Section 15303, Class 3(A) of the Guidelines For Implementation; 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 Sections 9.60.330 and 9.210.010 of the Zoning Code: 1. The proposed units vary from 1,500 to 2,008 square feet in size which is larger than 1,400 square feet required by the RL District. The project is consistent with the Zoning Code in that the prototype plans will meet all of the development standards of the RL District, including building height, setbacks, and garage requirements. No new two story units are proposed as a part of this approval. Therefore, there will be no height impacts on existing Topaz residences to the north of the site. A:\RESOPCSDP648.wpd - 32 Planning Commission Resolution 99-_ Site Development Permit 99-648 April 13, 1999 2. Varied architectural elevations are proposed as required by Section 9.60.330 of the Zoning Code. The proposed detached single family residential units have concrete roofing, stucco exteriors, and other architectural features that are similar to houses being built in the immediate area. Conditions 10-13 require architectural upgrades to the roof design for side and rear building elevations before building permits can be issued. 3. Specimen trees are proposed for the houses exceeding the minimum landscape requirements of the RL District. Plant material is varied to create an aesthetically pleasing streetscape. The common area landscaping is attractive and compatible with existing improvements to the north, provided Oleander and Pine trees are not installed. The recommended conditions ensure compliance with Code requirements. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; and 2. That it does hereby approve Site Development Permit 99-648 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 City Planning Commission, held on the 13th day of April, 1999, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ROBERT T. TYLER, CHAIRMAN City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR City of La Quinta, California A:\RESOPCSDP648.wpd - 32 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 99-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 99-648 APRIL 13, 1999 GENERAL CONDITIONS 1. Final front yard landscaping and irrigation plans shall be submitted for review by the Community Development Department prior to issuance of the first building permit for these units. The specimen trees used for front yard areas shall have 1.5- and 2.0-inch calipers. All trees shall be double staked to prevent wind damage. The plans shall comply with Chapter 8.13 (Water Conservation) of the Municipal Code. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department, Coachella Valley Water District, Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner before they will be considered final. 2. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, common area landscaping plans shall be submitted for review by the Public Works and Community Development Departments, pursuant to the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Tract Map 27519. Mexican Fan palm trees (minimum 8' high brown trunks) shall be added to the planting program for Dune Palms Road. 3. Lawn areas shall be either hybrid Bermuda (summer) or hybrid Bermuda/Rye (winter) depending on the season installed. 4. Substitute smaller shrub for Nerium Oleander "Red" standard in parkway area. Oleander and pine trees shall not be used in parkway and retention basin areas. 5. Permanent irrigation and groundcover shall be installed in the existing Eucalyptus tree grove. 6. Pedestrian access gates shall be constructed of tubular steel or wrought iron. 7. Fencing for the prototype houses shall be decorative masonry with block caps for areas facing street frontages. 8. Permanent tract identification signs shall be approved by the Community Development Department prior to fabrication and/or installation (i.e., Sign Permit application). Cond pc sdp 648 - 32 Page 1 of 2 9. All conditions of Resolution 99-7 for Tract 27519 shall be met. 10. The building elevations shall be revised to include decorative chimney caps. 11. Each prototype house plan shall have one side building elevation that offers a clipped gable roof design. 12. Two of the prototypes shall be redesigned to break up the continuous roof ridge line. 13. Stucco surrounds shall be added to all side and rear building elevations, except for bay windows. 14. The minor architectural design changes addressed herein shall be approved -by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of the first building permit for these units. 15. The precise plan plot shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department for plan check review and approval. The plans shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for approval, prior to issuance of any building permits issued for units authorized by this approval. 16. Developer agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the City of La Quinta in the event of any legal claim or litigation arising out of the City's approval of this project. The City of La Quinta shall have the right to select its defense counsel in its sole discretion. Cond pc sdp 648 - 32 Page 2 of 2 ATTACHMENTS �r iN3nWVd3a JNIN1 I ATTACHMENT 1 Dune Palms Road . e prn•o �rwa yrit•• � _ a� � viaum w ay C i• Qin b_ Z44 w O ►i T W via 0 YI tIA > Qz p g n u d < LF. z F" d a b ei Ig's loll i � r•� !If i' �.i I iy A— all W A VJ jaw — a Iri b ���� / �p�i * a '>, r W O �I Cr ■ w _ oil It CL _ i o;I i �:i• Z �i • i 1�� Ip • a all � .. lag Camino Vista 1 ,� "ON,INr;o a a r ' 13 film 'NOW \ / ATTACHMENT I Architectural & Landscape Review Committee April 7, 1999 stated that from the street, this lack of detail has been a concern of the ALRC. Mr. Chad Myer, Project Manager for RJT, stated they had met with staff and are trying to accommodate staff s recommendations. The new plans were designed with the living space in the front to account for their location on the perimeter of the tract and will be priced less. They have made some revisions, but will continue to work with staff to complete the look desired for homes backing up to Park Avenue and Calle Tampico. 3. Committee Member Cunningham suggested a false dormer with a roof ventilation system. Mr. Myer stated they would add something to the rear elevation. Committee Member Cunningham stated the City does not want a sea of red roofs, therefore, staff is looking to change roof elevations. They do not want to redesign the house, but give developers the "feel" of what is wanted. 4. Mr. Matt Evans, General Manager, RJT Homes, stated they wanted to work with the City and they would make the changes as requested. Committee Member Cunningham stated it was not the City's intent to add a financial burden to the developer, but rather create variation and provide suggestions. 5. Mr. Myer stated he would work with staff to redesign the ridge line. He further clarified that Lot 20 would be landscaped with a groundcover for dust control. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt stated that dust control is an issue. Most of the homeowner associations do not have ordinances or any type of enforcement to control the dust. At PGA West they have provided their own dust control because landowners would not work with them. It is an issue he would like to see addressed by the City. 7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 99-008 recommending to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 99-619, Amendment #1, subject to conditions as submitted. Unanimously approved. B. Site Development Permit 99-648; a request of Century -Crowell Communities for approval of architectural plans for three prototype residences to be constructed in Tract 27519 approximately 100 feet south of Desert Stream Drive and on the West side of Dune Palms Road in Aliso Del Rey. 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. (':\My Documents\WPDOCS\AI,RC4-7-99.wpd 2 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee April 7, 1999 3. Mr. Ed Knight, Century -Crowell Communities, project director, stated he concurred with staff s recommendations. 4. Committee Member Cunningham asked if the colors presented were the intended colors for the project. Mr. Knight stated they were. Committee Member Cunningham stated it was important to work with the colors to create as much variation as possible to break up the "sameness". He went on to explain the City was looking to have additional detail on the side and rear elevations as noted in the previous project they had just reviewed. He asked if the chimney cap design would be changed. Discussion followed as to variations that had been made on the plans. Mr. Knight stated they would work with staff to make the changes as requested. 5. Committee Member Bobbitt asked what the rear setbacks were. Staff stated they were 20 feet and would not interfere with the changes requested. 6. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about the Eucalyptus trees and whether or not they would be maintained by a HOA. Mr. Knight stated an easement would be created for the HOA them to maintain them. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the trees spilled over into the retention basin which is maintained by the City. If the block wall is built behind the houses and the trees are on either side, then the City will be responsible for part of the trees. Mr. Knight stated the wall is already existing and the trees are all on the one side. The trees will be cleaned up and maintained by the HOA. 7. Committee Member Bobbitt asked about errant golf balls from the adjoining Golf School and potential complaints by the homeowners, as it is inevitable that someone will hit a ball that breaks a window. Has the La Quinta Golf School been required to add screening? Mr. Knight stated the cost is extensive and they are working with the Golf School to reach a solution. The provision for protection is there, but they have not been resolved to date. Committee Member Bobbitt suggested a secondary fence be installed closer in to the golfers. 8. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell asked if the Golf School was agreeable to the fence on the property. Mr. Knight stated the future fence would be donated to the Golf School and hopefully placed on their property to lessen the visual impact to their lots. 9. Committee Member Bobbitt asked if the City had a minimum house square footage. Staff stated it was 1,400 square feet. Committee Member Bobbitt suggested not using the larger Oleander species because of the blight that may CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC4-7-99.wpd 3 Architectural & Landscape Review Committee April 7, 1999 set in. He also noted the project currently is using pine trees which he believes is not appropriate for the desert. Mr. Knight agreed and they did not intend on using the pine tree in the future. 10. Staff asked if the Committee wanted to specify the species of trees or plants. Committee Member Bobbitt stated the oleanders and pine trees should be deleted from the plant list. 11. There being no further discussion it was moved by Committee Member Cunningham/Bobbitt to adopt Minute Motion 99-009 recommending to the Planning Commission approval Site Development Permit 99-648, subject to the recommended conditions with the following changes: a. Delete the use of the large oleanders and pine trees. b. Decorative chimney caps shall be used. Unanimously approved. C. Capital Improvement Project 98-11; a request of the City for approval of landscaping plans for the parkway/stormwater channel. Assistant Engineer Marcus Fuller presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Committee Member Bobbitt stated he had no comments, but agreed that it was a good idea to put a buffer between the turf area and the wall. 3. Committee Member Cunningham stated he had no objections or concerns. 4. There being no further discussion it was moved and seconded by Committee Members Bobbitt/Cunningham to adopt Minute Motion 99-010 recommending to the Planning Commission approval of Capital Improvement Project 98-11, as submitted. Unanimously approved. VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: V. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: A. Committee Member Bobbitt asked staff if there were any plans for Jefferson Street and Washington Street widening. Staff discussed the plans that were proposed. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\ALRC4-7-99.wpd 4 04/13/99 15:51 e760 251 4899 BLM PALM SPRINGS 14 002 �gNT OF T 0 c � a 4f1CH 3 t6p9 United States Department of the Interior BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT Palm Springs -South Coast Field Office 690 West Garnet Avenue P.O. Box 1260 North Palm Springs, CA 92258-1260 Visit us on the Internet at www. ca.bhn.gov/palmsprings APR 13 1999 City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78-495 Caile Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the Planning Commission: U. S. OEPARMENT OF THE INTERIOil YVRf/.Y Of lANO YANAi[YCR IN REPLY REFER TO: 1795 CA-066.311 �. 1999 CITY Of-- LAQUiNTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the proposed time extension for the master planned community of Mr. John Green (Project No. SP94-025 ext.25). We offer the following comments for your consideration. 9 Subsequent to preparation of the original Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Travertine and Green development proposals, the Peninsular Ranges bighorn sheep was listed as endangered per the federal Endangered Species Act and threatened under the California Endangered Species Act. Since bighorn sheep utilize the foothills and alluvial fans within and adjacent to the City of La Quinta, the cumulative effects of the Green and other development proposals on the bighorn sheep will need to be addressed. Believing that cooperation and early coordination will result in better land use decisions for both people and wildlife, the Bureau would like to offer our assistance or participation in coordinating with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game, the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, the Coachella Valley Mountains Conservancy and other affected entities to develop a proposal that could be supported by all parties, i.e. a development proposal that will allow for reasonable development, protect the federally and state listed bighorn sheep and their habitat, and contribute to the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan. If you would like to set up a meeting or if you have any questions, please feel free to give me a call at (760) 251-4800. Thank you. Sincerely, James G. Kenna cc Ken Berg, USFWS Glenn Black, CDFG Steve Nagle, CVAG Bill Havert, CVMC ®4-13-99 16:47 RECEIVED FROM:760 251 4899 P•02 � ,-7- ,�� 04��.�%�'���% CMG U� l 1,7 J� /7 �a 11-7 - F E C rc-- - -'L� E 1 ail !, AP:'131099II JI j CITY OF LAQUINTA I PLANNING DEPARTMENT March 27, 1999 City of La Quinta Planning Commission 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Sirs, Re: Site Development Permit 98-619. Amendment V . RJT Homes, LLC. Approval of two additional prototype homes under plan 83-001 This requests that RJT Homes be required to complete its original plan by building on every lot. It's all right to designate some additional models, but ...... it is not all right to leave one lot facing existing homes empty as part of the first phase. Specifically, lots 18 & 19 are to contain the new models, but lot 20 is to be left empty with no speific plans. Existing homes on Spyglass Hill facing the construction site have lived for years with wind generated dust blowing into our houses and dumping of unwanted debris. Not to mention the fact that empty lots quickly become targets for every dog in the neighborhood. Please cause RJT to make good on their promise to complete the first 42 homes before they move on to other areas. Failing that, please cause them to at least landscape lot 20 to prevent it from becoming a duStbowl and neighbor- hood dump. I will not be able to attend the April 13 meeting, but I trust you will give full consideration to my request. Since ly, Hans de Lange 50320 Spyglass Hill La Quinta, CA 92253 cc: La Quinta Fairways Home Owners Assoc. Mr. Alex Kunzler, 50340 Spyglass Hill Mr. Jeff Pressman, 50300 Spyglass Hill Mr. Roger Erb, 50280 Spyglass Hill