Loading...
2000 10 10 PCPlanning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-quinta.org PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California October 10, 2000 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2000-067 Beginning Minute Motion 2000-015 I. CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Approval of the Minutes of the regular meeting on September 26, 2000, B. Department Report PC/AGENDA V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ........... Request ............ Action ............... B. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ........... Request ............ Action ............... C. Item ................. Applicant .......... Location ........... Request ............ Action ............... PC/AGENDA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2000-396, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-067, ZONE CHANGE 2000-093 SPECIFIC PLAN 2000-045, AND SITE DEVELOPMENI PERMIT 2000-677 Evergreen - La Quinta Limited Partnership Southeast corner of 50th Avenue and Washington Street Certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, amend the General Plan Land USE Element from Commercial Office to Neighborhooc Commercial, change the Zoning Designation frorr Commercial Office to Neighborhood Commercial, desigr guidelines and development standards for a 7.63 acrE commercial/office complex, and development plans for one story 14,490 square foot drug store. Request to continue to November 14, 2000 CONTINUED - SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-683 Tomra Pacific Inc./Replanet Recycling Centers 78-630 Highway 111 in front of Stater Brother: Supermarket within the One Eleven Shopping Center. Review of architectural, landscaping, sign and site plans foi a 496.5 square foot prefabricated recycling collectior facility. Resolution 2000- ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-341 ADDENDUM GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-072, ZONE CHANGE 2000-097, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 Chapman Golf Development, L.L.C. The Southern terminus of Washington Street on Peerless Place, within The Tradition Club. Amend the General Plan and Zoning Land Use Designatior from Golf Course to Low Density Residential and create 13,230 square foot single family residential parcel. Resolution 2000- , Resolution 2000- Resolutior 2000- , Resolution 2000- VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Btem ................. MINOR USE PERMIT 2000-241 Applicant .......... St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church Location ........... Immediately south of 47-225 Washington Street. Request ............ Review of a temporary turfed parking lot with 219 parkinc spaces with temporary parking lot lighting for the Church. Action ............... Minute Motion 2000- B. Item .................. RW-C 2000-001 Applicant ........... City of La Quinta Location ............ Avenida Mendoza south of Frances Hack Park betweer Avenida Montezuma and the alley Request ............ General Plan consistency finding for the proposed closure o' Avenida Mendoza located between Avenida Montezuma anc the alley to vehicular traffic Action .............. Resolution 2000- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner discussion regarding City Council meeting of October 3, 2000 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 September 26, 2000 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Robbins who asked Commissioner Kirk to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abels, Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Steve Robbins. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, Assistant City Attorney John Ramirez, Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of joint meeting of September 12, 2000. Commissioner Kirk asked that Page 6, Item 24 be reworded to note that the facility should be classified as a building. Chairman Robbins asked that the spelling of xeriscape be corrected on Pages 10 and 12 There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners AbelsTyler to approve the minutes as amended. B. Department Report: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Environmental Assessment 2000-396 General Plan Amendment 2000- 067 Zone Change 2000-093 Specific Plan 2000-045, and Site Development Permit 2000-677; a request of Evergreen, La Quinta Limited Partnership for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, amend the General Plan Land Use Element from Commercial Office to. Neighborhood Commercial, change the Zoning Designation from Commercial Office to Neighborhood Commercial, design C:\My Documents\WPD0CS\PC9-26-00-Wpd 1 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 2000 guidelines and development standards for a 7.63 acre commercial/office complex, and development plans for a one story 14,490 square foot drug store. 1. Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requested a continuance to allow more time to meet with the adjoining developments. 2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Abels to continue this item to the meeting of October 10, 2000, as requested by the applicant. Unanimously approved. B. Environmental Assessment 2000-401 General Plan Amendment 2000- 068 Zone Change 2000-094 Specific Plan 2000-048, and Tentative Tract Map 29858; a request of RJT Homes for a recommendation to certify a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact, approval of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change from Tourist Commercial to Low Density Residential, approval of a Specific Plan allowing up to 178 single family detached and attached dwellings on 73 acres, and approval of a Tentative Tract Map subdividing 73 acres into 172 residential and miscellaneous lots to be located at the southwest corner of Jefferson Street and 50" Avenue. 1. Chairman Robbins stated the applicant had requested a continuance to a future Planning Commission meeting. 2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to continue this application to the October 24, 2000, Planning Commission meeting. C. Site Development Permit 2000-684; a request of R.C. Hobbs Company, Inc. for approval of architectural and landscaping plans for three new prototype residential houses to be constructed in La Quinta Del Oro on Via Del Sol, Via Sevilla and Via Coronado. 1. Chairman Robbins and Commissioner Tyler excused themselves from discussion and left the dias due to a potential conflict of interest. 2. Vice Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. C:\My Documents\WPD0CS\PC9-26-00-Wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 2000 3. Vice Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Kirk asked about Item #4, regarding trees and lush landscaping as to whether or not this was required under the compatibility review. Staff stated it is based on the existing landscaping at the site. Commissioner Kirk asked if the Commission had ever included landscaping as part of compatibility review. Staff stated it had been, but not in as much detail as this. 4. Vice Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Roger Hobbs, President of R.C. Hobbs, stated he had no concerns and was available for questions. 5. Commissioner Kirk asked if they had any objections to the conditions. Mr. Hobbs stated no. 6. Vice Chairman Abels commended the applicant on his designs as they were an asset to the community. 7. Mr. Brian Handover, 44-245 Villeta, stated his property borders this site at the end of the cul-de-sac, and his concern is that a two story house will be constructed to the rear of his property that will destroy his view and lower his property values. 8. Mr. Jon Dunlevie, 78-585 Sanita, stated he was in favor of the project and lives at the end of street where the pads are to be lowered and wanted to know how much. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the north -south street is already built so the lots that are on the north -south cul-de-sac street were graded several years ago and were at the maximum grade. Staff considered the difference in the grades and decided that to drain to the street the lots would have to be lowered .3 of a foot. Mr. Dunlevie stated that the Bast house to the south is noted to be lower than the street. Staff explained how the pad height would be determined. Mr. Dunlevie asked how far the houses would be from the rear property line. Staff stated the minimum rear setback is ten feet. Mr. Dunlevie requested they be as low as possible and set back as far as possible. 9. Ms. Linda Broom 78-380 Via Seville, stated she informally represents the existing homeowners of La Quinta Del Oro, and they have surveyed all the homeowners and ask that a gate be constructed at the entrance to their tract to slow the traffic. Or at least at the Forbes Street entrance. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-26-OO.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 2000 10. Ms. B. Slavin 78-355 Via Caliente, stated she likes the project, but when the tennis stadium opened, it was a nightmare as people attending the event were parking on their street and taking sponge baths in front of their home. She could not get either Indian Wells or La Quinta's Code Enforcement to assist with this problem and wants someone to find a solution. The other question is that she backs up to the other property that is not developed yet and asked what would be developed on this site. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the City is currently not processing any applications for this property and is still zoned as Medium Density. Ms. Slavin asked who was responsible for the fence. Vice Chairman Abels suggested Ms. Slavin direct her questions to the proper City departments as this was not an issue that was before the Commission. 11. Mr. Handover questioned whether or not this project would have to go through a compatibility review. Staff stated it would not as it is a different tract and not part of an existing tract. It will have to maintain the same, if not more restrictive design guidelines as what is existing in the neighborh000d. Via Caliente goes through and joins with Forbes and he would like to close this street off and make it a cul-de-sac and he was informing staff of their plans. They do understand this would cause a drainage issue but will work with staff to resolve any problems. Vice Chairman Abels reassured Mr. Handova that the Planning Commission was very concerned with compatibility issues. Mr. Handova asked what the process would be to establish a HOA. Vice Chairman Abels stated it was not an issue before the Commission. 12. Vice Chairman Abels asked if there was any other public comment. There being no further public comment, Vice Chairman Abels closed the public participation portion of the hearing and opened the project for Commission discussion. 13. Commissioner Butler stated he likes the project and believes it will be an asset to the community. He understands the homeowners concern regarding the pad height, but the existing grading is already established. 14. Commissioner Kirk stated he agrees with Commissioner Butler. He apologizes for not being able to address some of the concerns raised, but they are not issues the Commission can address. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-26-OO.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 2000 15. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Kirk/Butler to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-066 approving Site Development Permit 2000- 684, subject to the Findings and Conditions of Approval as submitted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Butler, Kirk, Vice Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Robbins and Tyler. ABSTAIN: None. Chairman Robbins and Commissioner Tyler rejoined the Commission. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Sign Application 2000-515; a request of 1st Choice Signs for Verizon Wireless for approval of a deviation to an approved sign program to permit corporate signs for a business located on the north side of Highway 111 in the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center, west of Simon Drive entry. 1. Chairman Robbins asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Kirk asked how the applicant was not in compliance. Staff stated the proposed letter style and height were not in conformance. 3. Commissioner Tyler asked staff to explain how many signs the applicant was asking for. Staff stated two. 4. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Robby Seeds stated only if there were any questions. There being no questions, Chairman Robbins asked if there was any other public comment. There being none, Chairman Robbins asked if there was any further Commission discussion. 5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to adopt Minute Motion 2000-014 approving Sign Application 2000-515, as recommended by staff. Unanimously approved. C:\My Documents\WPD0CS\PC9-26-00-wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 2000 VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None. VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Commissioner Tyler gave a report of the City Council meeting of September 19, 2000. IX. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abets to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held October 10, 2000, at 7:00 p.m. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 7:44 p.m. on September 26, 2000. Respectfully submitted, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-26-OO.wpd 6 4 a" PH #A MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION t FROM: JERRY HERMAN, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: OCTOBER 10, 2000 SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM "A" - EVERGREEN, LA QUINTA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP At the request of the applicant, staff is requesting this item be continued to the Planning Commission meeting of November 14, 2000. Enginp®rrng, planning, 6� ASSOCIATES, LN-. Environmental Sclem ee oral P'GlanioeoiWin., M►OwMkxfti"If MsnegemeiV Services October 2, 2000 Christine di Iorio Plannning Manager City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta. Ca. 92253 75-150 Sheryl Avenue Srite C Palm 04aert, CA 92211 780.34'1-8660 760.346.6118 fax Project: 2636 Subject: Evergreen La Quinta Speciiitc Plan and Site Developmeat Permit - Request for Postponement of Planning Commission Hearing to November 14, 2000. Dear .Ma. di Iorio, On behalf of my client Ed erg -men - La Quinta Linuted Partneralup I am requesting that the scheduled Planning Commission Hearing on the above project be postponed until the November 14, 2000 Pla&�uting Commission Meeting. This postponement will allow my client to complete one last public workshop (for at total of three) with neighborhood residents. Thank you for your consideration and assistance in this matter. Very Truly Yours, Dudek & AsSUCi es, Inc. Michael A. P=ni Principal Cc, Phillip R. gross Greg Alpert nr. 1,7 wr� 8ng1"" ln®, Planning, 75.150 8heryl Avenue 760-341-6660 & ASSOCIATES, INC. gnvrronmental sciences and suits C 760-346.6115 fax PnWros(eralTeens 1wCwnyla I miecte Alanagement Services Palm Des®rt, CA 92211 F A C S I M I L E DATE: October 2, 2000 JOB I PROPOSAL NO.:2636.01 TO: Christine di Iorio FAX 760.777,7155 PAGES: 2, INCLUDING COVER PAGE FROM: Michael Mokray, Project Plarmer RE: La Quinta Promenade (Walgreens at 501 and Washington) Attached is the requested letter for Planning Commission Meeting postponement. Provided things gc as planned, this would be the schedule of meetings: November 1 - ALRC • November 14 - Planning Commission • December 19 - City Council Regards, Michael )(Aoi �)� mmokray@dudek.com If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. If you have received this transmission in error, please immediately notify us by telephone at the number Indicated above. ENCINITAS a OCEANSIDE 4 ORANGE 4 PALM DESERT 9 SANTA BARBARA PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 10, 2000 CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-683 APPLICANT: TOMRA PACIFIC INC./REPLANET RECYCLING CENTERS PROPERTY OWNER: WASHINGTON PLAZA ASSOCIATES REQUEST: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL, LANDSCAPING, SIGN AND SITE, PLANS FOR A 496.5 SQUARE FOOT PREFABRICATED RECYCLING COLLECTION FACILITY LOCATION: 78-630 HWY. 111, IN FRONT OF STATER BROTHERS. SUPERMARKET, WITHIN THE ONE ELEVEN SHOPPING CENTER GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MIXED/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (M/RC) ZONING DESIGNATION: ON -SITE: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR) NORTH: WATERCOURSE (W) SOUTH: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR), ACROSS HWY. 1 1 1 EAST: COMMERCIAL PARK (CP) AND REGIONAL COMMERCIAL (CR), ACROSS ADAMS STREET WEST: COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL (CC), ACROSS WASHINGTON STREET ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15303 (C) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. BACKGROUND: The applicant proposes replacing the existing small recycling collections facility within the One Eleven Shopping Center, from behind Stater Bros. grocery store to the front of the store with a new collections facility, within the parking lot area (Attachment 1). The facility will be both staffed and automated with reverse vending machines (RVM's) P:\PCrptSDP 2000-683TomraPacific10-10-2000wpd.wpd and will accept glass, plastic bottles, and aluminum cans. The proposed recycling facility has the potential of being at this site for several years as the three to five year contractual agreement between Stater Bros. and Tomra Pacific will automatically be renewed as long as all is well. Original Project Proposal The proposed 12-foot high prefabricated steel building will contain 216 square feet 0 2' x 18') of floor area. It will face west and take up all, or a portion of five existing parking spaces. Two steel roll -off containers (21' x 16.5') are inserted four feet into the rear of the structure leaving 17' in length remaining outside and visible. The floor area of the containers, outside of the structure, totals 280.5 square feet, bringing the total area for the facility to 496.5 square feet. The originally proposed building had a pitched, simulated S-tile, brick -orange colored steel roof with a 12-inch overhang. The front of the building will feature two automated reverse vending machines on each side of a 6-ft. wide pedestrian roll -up door. The originally proposal elevations consisted of plain steel walls painted light gray. Four- color graphic murals are depicted on the elevations and containers. Revised Project Description The applicant proposes the following revisions: 1. The building colors are changed from gray walls to off-white and the roof from orange to terra cotta to match the roof color of the shopping center. 2. All murals are deleted with the exception of the roll -up door on the building facade (please note the recycle logo is removed). 3. All signs are deleted with the exception of the 8.6 square foot recycle logo on the building facade. The sign is not illuminated. 4. The existing landscape planters are now enlarged and include new plant material in addition to the existing plantings. Operation Truck pick-ups occur about 3 to 5 times per month. The proposed facility faces west, so as to allow enough room for the truck to have 50 ft. of clear space beNnd the containers for easy access for the exchange. The applicant proposes to conduct early morning pick-ups, between 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m. P:\PCrptSDP 2000-683TomraPacific10-10-2000wpd.wpd Public Notice This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on September 1, 2000, and mailed to all property owners within 500 foot of the project site. Additionally, staff mailed a project transmittal to each tenant within the shopping center. As of September 7, 2000, one letter has been received regarding this project (Attachment 2). Planning Commission The Planning Commission at its September 12, 2000 meeting continued this item and requested the applicant revise the lighting, landscaping, signs and building colors. The minutes are attached (Attachment 3). MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings necessary to approve this request per Zoning Code Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permit) can be made, and are contained in the attached Resolution with the exception of the following: 5. Site Design. As designed and conditioned, the proposed facility will not conflict with established and required parking spaces within the shopping center. The area designated for container loading will be controlled by Condition No. 23 which requires that the applicant place temporary signs (all-weather sign on a Type 2 barricade subject to approval by the City Engineer) within the parking spaces that are within the designated loading area no sooner than 24 hours ahead of truck arrival, and remove the signs immediately after the truck has departed. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_ approving Site Development Permit 2000-683, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments: 1. Exhibit booklet & Landscape 2. Letter dated August 31, 2000 3. Planning Commission Minutes Prepared and Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager P:\PCrptSDP 2000-683TomraPacific10-10-2000wpd.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE SITE, ARCHITECTURE, LANDSCAPE, AND SITE SIGNS PLANS FOR INSTALLATION OF A 496.5 SQUARE FOOT PREFABRICATED RECYCLING COLLECTION FACILITY IN FRONT OF STATER BROS. MARKET, WITHIN ONE ELEVEN LA QUINTA CENTER, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-683 APPLICANT: TOMRA PACIFIC INC./REPLANET RECYCLING CENTERS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 12T" day of September, 2000, and 101h day of October, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearings to consider the request of Tomra Pacific Inc./rePlanet Recycling Centers to approve the site, architecture, landscape, and site plans for a 496.5 square foot prefabricated recycling collections facility in the parking lot in front of Stater Bros. Market, in the CR zone district, located north of State Highway 1 1 1, east of Washington Street, more particularly described as: ASSESSORS PARCEL NUMBER 604-050-031 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the Community Development Director has determined this request is exempt from environmental review pursuant to Section 15303(C) of the California Environmental Quality Act; 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. Consistency with General Plan. The proposed prefabricated recycling collections facility site is designated as Mixed/Regional Commercial (M/RC), and the proposed facility is consistent with the goal to promote recycling and to ensure that there is adequate opportunity available to redeem containers at convenient locations, as contained in the Source Reduction and Recycling Element adopted by the Coachella Valley Association of Governments, for which the City of La Quinta is a signatory. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. As conditioned, the proposed prefabricated recycling collections facility will be consistent with Section 9.100.190 (Recycling collection facilities) as conditioned. P:\LESLIE\PCRESsdp2OOO-683tOMRAPACIFIC9-12-00.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Site Development Permit 2000-683 Tomra Pacific Inc./rePlanet Recycling Centers October 10, 2000 3. Compliance with CEQA. The La Quinta Community Development Director has determined that this request is exempt from environmental assessment pursuant to Section 15303 (C) (New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) of the California Environmental Quality Act. 4. Architectural Design. The architectural design of the proposed facility will be compatible with the existing structures within the One Eleven Shopping Center (SP 89-014) with respect to the color of the building's walls, and roof. 5. Site Design. The proposed facility will not conflict with established parking spaces and parking lot circulation, as the applicant is required to place temporary no parking signs (all-weather sign on a Type 2 barricade) within the parking spaces. 6. Landscape Design. Landscaping is proposed so as to soften and visually screen the recycling facility. 7. Sign Program. The sign program is in conformance with Section 9.100.090 (Recycling Collection Facilities) of the Zoning Code. 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 2000-683 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto;. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 101h day of October, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California P:\LESLIE\PCRESsdD2000-683tOMRAPACIFIC9-12-00.wDd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Site Development Permit 2000-683 Tomra Pacific Inc./rePlanet Recycling Centers October 10, 2000 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California P:\LESLIE\PCRESsdp2OOO-683tOMRAPACIFIC9-12-00.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-683 TOMRA PACIFIC INC./REPLANET RECYCLING CENTERS OCTOBER 10, 2000 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. 3. This development shall be subject to the provisions of the Development impact Fee Program in effect at the time of building permit issuance. 4. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 5. The applicant shall install the following street improvements to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses. (Public street improvements shall conform with the City's General Plan in effect at the time of construction.) A. Parking Lot - The location and nature of the recycling structure, containers, and landscaping shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. PALE SLIE\pccoaSDP2000-683 TomraPacifc9-12-00.wpd Page I of PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-683 TOMRA PACIFIC INC./REPLANET RECYCLING CENTERS OCTOBER 10, 2000 6. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, if required. 7. The applicant may be required to extend improvements beyond development boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., traffic control devices and transitions in alignment). 8. The City will conduct a final inspection of the recycling facility only after the landscape planters are complete. LANDSCAPING 10. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department, the final landscaping/irrigation plan featuring the following: a. All landscaping shall be consistently maintained in a healthy condition or replaced. 11. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 12. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 13. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 14. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. MAINTENANCE 15. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements, perimeter landscaping, and access drives. PAL ESLIE\pccoaSDP2000-683TomraPacifc9-12-OO.wpd Page 2 of 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-683 TOMRA PACIFIC INC./REPLANET RECYCLING CENTERS OCTOBER 10, 2000 FEES AND DEPOSITS 16. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. FIRE DEPARTMENT Conditions are subject to change with adoption of new codes, ordinances, laws, or when building permits are not obtained within twelve (12) months. Final conditions will be addressed when architectural building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding the meaning of the Fire Department conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering staff at (760) 863-8886. 17. All buildings shall be accessible by an approved all-weather roadway extending to within 150' of all portions of the exterior wall of the first story. 18. The minimum dimensions for fire apparatus access roads entering and exiting this project shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20 feet in each direction and an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. 19. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. MISCELLANEOUS 20. All public agency letters received for this case are made part of the case file documents for plan checking processes. 21. Prior to final inspection, the recycling structure (including roof) and containers shall be painted to match the exterior colors of either Stater Bros. Market or the Auto Club building, subject to Community Development Director approval. 22. The facility shall be maintained in a like -new condition at all times. 23. For the life of the operation, the applicant shall place temporary signs (all-weather sign on a Type 2 barricade, subject to the approval of the City Engineer) within the parking spaces that are within the designated loading area no earlier than 24 hours and no later than 6 hours prior to the arrival of the roll -off trucks to empty the containers. The barricades and signs shall be removed immediately after the truck has departed. P:\LESI.IE\nccoaSDP2000-683TomraPacifc9-12-OO.wod Pan 3 of 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL- RECOMMENDED SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2000-683 TOMRA PACIFIC INC./REPLANET RECYCLING CENTERS OCTOBER 10, 2000 24. No trash or recycling commodities shall be placed or left outside of the containers. Any materials left at the facility while unattended will potentially become a code compliance issue. 25. Should the facility be removed and the use be terminated, the applicant shall be required to restore all changes made to the use area back to the "pre -use" conditions. PALES LIE\occoaSDP2000-683TomraPacifc9-12-OO.wnd Pan 4 of 4 FROM : P.EPLANET FAX NO. : 9099410840 Sep. i5' zuc*j- . Be -it By: STATEF BR08, MAP,K.ETS: 909 433 3220; Sep• i 00 15:24; Page 2/2 oaiai/oa IT:tR PAX soeaoai:dQ � xoENIG ATTACHMENT ENT 2 Washington Plaza Associates w AOW mj6Wr 43i3C2 Piwano RAM ;emu. CA 02W2 Fax 9093tl3•e6g9 Aug= 31, 2000 S%xm Moors praparty Niaaager Suter Bros_ 21700 Barron Road Cotmn, CA 92324 Re; Ore F-Wm La Quirita Shopping Cerroer - Recycling Program Ls Quince CA. Dear Susan; As we discussed this 40m0m, ] am glad W see the you are on tbo scbcdule for the Planning Cammissim to review the ievlsdemeat of the owyaUq center for your fwibty at ow Elevon La Quinn ShhoPping Ceuten. As you kww, w6 bave bean Gonc-cmcd for sore time abort the current recycling ceOr be4 tocmd bebbied TOW StOM since Ybe parLng is shallow and tine area i9 baxar4OVS b bolt, pedestrim Rod vehicular braffie. Tpe placemerd of fnis new facility it1 the VOW Of ft miter sbonld allow 'or 'setter Gomm. and i=m%' will provide far increased 46ctuity for it's Pasr= it is m,V mdetBw4im that you am cianandY laolomg to revise the placement o°the recycling oeme7 opposite Your gaSUmly dear ratifier than the vmtera dm, but in the Sarre proximate arm ofttw pukLu area. 'This revived pintem d should be ameMble to Gill pardes of tim shopping crater, ad I approd* y= WaUnp rss to work with The otber pad owners to insure their acaepmiCe of your new program• wg look forward to haY4 a new ` rei d " center at your store. please let me know ypu* progi+ess oa tuts n3ftner and if I coo assist you in maywo. Sincerely► Angela Koenig ASSM MaaMcr Michwl I Sboviia . Thu% PaurtGez 09-05-00 11:21 RECEIVED FROIM:9099410840 P.01 ATIf ACHMENT 3 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA September 12, 2000 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER �r A. This meeting of the Planning Commission N as called to order at 7:00 p.m. by Chairman Robbins who asked Comi'nissioner Kirk to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Jacques Abets, Richard Butler, Tom Kirk, Robert Tyler, and Chairman Steve Robbins. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, Planning Manager Christine di lorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed. IV. CONSENT ITEMS: A. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of joint meeting of August 22, 2000. Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 4, Item 3 be amended to read, "or across the street?"; Page 6, Item 14 to read, "north one-half of the alley only along his frontage."; Page 9, Item 9 change the word "He" to "His"; and Item 8 remove the word "how". There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Abets to approve the minutes as amended. B. 'Department Report: None. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Site Development Permit 2000-68; a request of Tomra Pacific Inc./Recycling Centers for approval of architectural, landscaping, sign and site plans for a 496.5 square foot prefabricated recycling collection facility to be located at 78-630 Highway 1 1 1 in front of Stater Brothers Supermarket within the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center. CAMy Documents\WPD0CS\PC9-12-00.Wpd Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 2000 1. Chairman Robbins opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager Christine di lorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to identify the location of the State mandated signs. 3. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Abels asked what would happen if a customer came after hours; do they go to the store to redeem their receipt the next day. Staff stated the applicant would answer that question. 4. Commissioner Butler asked for clarification as to whether or not money would be dispensed at the site. Staff stated the patrons would receive a receipt that would be taken into Stater Bros. for redemption. 5. Commissioner Abels asked about Attachment #4, a letter from Washington Plaza Associates stating that all parties in the Center are agreeable with the project; are all parties to the Center agreeable to the proposal? Staff stated that all tenants were notified and the only ones who responded were AAA Auto Club who wanted to have it moved further east, and Carl's Jr. had questions in regard to the application. 6. Commissioner Kirk asked why the Center's sign program would not apply in this instance. Staff noted because they were murals and educational tools for recycling centers in accordance with the State mandate. Also the trailers were temporary in nature. Commissioner Kirk asked if it was a photo kiosk, would it be considered differently? Staff stated murals had not been addressed previously. 7. Commissioner Butler asked why it could not remain in its original location at the rear of the Stater Bros. building. Staff noted the new location was a request of the applicant. 8. Commissioner Tyler asked what the State mandated requirements were. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated there were numerous State mandated requirements and went on to state some of them. Commissioner Tyler asked if the City had to abdicate to those requirements. City Attorney Jenson stated that not if the City had C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-OO.wpd 2 Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 2000 adopted its own standards applicable to recycling facilities. Section 9.100.190 of the City's Zoning Code was adopted for this purpose and staff reviewed them as to how this project applies to the City standards. Commissioner Tyler stated there were a number of areas where the proposal did not apply with the City's Zoning Code and asked why we were allowing it on an Image Corridor. City Attorney Jenson stated the City's Zoning Code sets a maximum of 16 square feet of sign and cannot be illuminated. 9. Chairman Robbins stated that the photographs show overhead power lines. Staff stated they do not expect any and would not approve any. Chairman Robbins asked about Condition #33 as it states the building would be open 24 hours and one of the signs in the pictures state 7-1 1; what are the hours of operation? Staff stated it would need to be clarified by the applicant and could be corrected. Chairman Robbins stated his concern as to why we require all the landscaping to hide the building which will hide the signs. It should be one or the other. 10. Commissioner Kirk asked staff to clarify the maximum sign requirements; what is the total allowable amount of signage on all four sides. Staff stated the small signs such as hours of operation, are not counted. The signs giving the name of the business are allowed. Commissioner Kirk asked if all the signs exceeded the allowable 16 square feet. 11. Chairman Robbins also questioned signage on three sides of the building which has been consistently denied to applicants. 12. Chairman Robbins asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. John Griffin, representing Tomra Pacific Rancho Cucamonga, stated that in regard to the hours of operation for the vending machine, they are generally the same as the grocery store or 7:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m.; the required signage is to have the days and hours, a price sign, an open sign, and signs in the grocery store windows explaining where to recycle and the days and hours of operation. Therefore, all the signs are on the front of the facility. As to the landscaping requirements, they are willing to revise the landscaping to staff's recommendations. One of the conditions they have a problem with is the color of the recycling Center. All of their bins for roll -off containers are a warm grey to be compatible with the Centers. In looking at the shopping center, Stater Bros. uses these colors in part of their signage. The roof C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-OO.wpd 3 Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 2000 trim and material will be an exact match to the Center to blend in. Another issue raised by the Commission was moving the recycling facility from the back of the building to the front. The grocery store was concerned about the safety of their patrons using the facility where it is currently located. There is some high speed traffic traveling through there and it is not very well lighted. Part of the push for the Replanet Center's is to create a clean and well lit, convenient and safe area to recycle. Under SB332 all ready to drink beverage containers were added to the Act. Prior to this being adopted, the only containers that were acceptable were beer, malt liquor and carbonated beverages. Since then they have added all ready to drink beverages which include water, juice, and even children's beverages creating up to three billion more beverage containers in the State that are recyclable under the Beverage Container Act. What they are finding with their grocery store partners is that they want to make recycling much more convenient because virtually every customer has some type of beverage container and they are being charged California redemption value and they believe that the Tomra Recycling Center is very well timed in that it does meet their customers needs. 13. Commissioner Tyler questioned the need for all night lighting. Mr. Griffin stated the lighting is incorporated in the construction of the building and they are down shining lights. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern is that the proposed location is on the One Eleven Corridor and to have it there with lighting is not attractive. 14. Chairman Robbins asked if the signs on the sides could be illuminated. Staff stated the illuminated sign would be where the pop-up roof element is on the front and the sides will light up the murals. The overhang at the front would make it an externally illuminated sign that is not allowed by the Code. 15. Commissioner Tyler asked how the roll -up dumpsters would be replaced. Mr. Griffin stated they will set the new one down out of the way of traffic and pick up the full container and put it down and place the empty container in the Center. Commissioner Tyler stated he did not think the parking lot was constructed to handle this load over time and he does not believe there is a problem with traffic at the rear. Mr. Griffin stated install plates where the four wheels of the roll -off will be stationed and they have not had any damage with this procedure since July of 1999 and they have 115 in place. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-OO.wpd 4 Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 2000 16. Commissioner Butler stated he has not been convinced of the need to move the Center to the front of the store. He too does not believe there is any speeding traffic and in the rear of the building it is out of the way and provides the customers adequate access. With the number of business existing and coming in the need for parking will be needed, he is not convinced this facility cannot go in the back where it is now. Mr. Griffin stated that what they have found out is that with the facility in the rear of the grocery stores, the volume is low because people do not feel safe and others do not even know the facility is there. They have done a lot of studies and with their presentation to the grocery stores, they understand that consumers want easy, convenient, safe, well lit, and clean recycling centers. Commissioner Butler stated he agrees with these comments and believe they exist with the current facility at the rear of the store and he does not feel unsafe with its present location. 17. Commissioner Abels asked what prevents someone from using the Center after it is closed. Mr. Griffin stated a video comes on and states the machine is closed and will not work. 18. Chairman Robbins asked if anyone else would like to address the Commission. Ms. Susan Moors, representing Stater Bros. Corporate management, stated the reason they asked Tomra to relocate was at the request of the property owners, Desert Cities Development, who asked that the facility be moved to the front as it is in direct line of their trucks. Parking is impacted due to double parking and there have been several very serious near misses. They have had numerous complaints from citizens of the City complaining about being in the back of the building and with the new Replanet system they have eliminated many of these problems and increased the amount of recycling. Stater Bros is working with Tomra to maintain a clean and safe environment. Stater Bros. and the owners of the Center have made it clear that the rear is not an option. They will do whatever it will take to have an attractive site. They too are concerned about the condition of the asphalt and working on a system of signage to make it safe and accessible to the public. 19. There being no further public comment, the public participation portion of the public hearing is closed and open for Commission discussion. CAMy Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-OO.wpd 5 Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 2000 20. Commissioner Kirk stated he believes the owner and Stater Bros have made a compelling reason for moving the facility to the front of the building. As this is a recycling center he thinks the City should be more willing to work with the applicant, but it should comply with the Center's Specific Plan and City Zoning. 21. Commissioner Abels stated he concurs with Commissioner Kirk and thinks this design is too gaudy as presented. He also agrees with the argument to move the facility to the front, but the signs are too much. They are trying to stop sign pollution and this adds to the problem. 22. Commissioner Butler stated he still believes it can be behind the building and work. The idea is fine, but the location is wrong. 23. Commissioner Tyler asked if the State mandated facility does anything for meeting AB939 requirements. City Attorney Kathy Jenson stated it does. The City is required to meet certain mandates, but the Commission is still authorized by the City's Zoning Ordinance and by State law to regulate the design of the structures. Commissioner Tyler stated he has gone through this area early in the morning and there has been some competition for space with the truck drivers for parking, but he does not believe it creates the necessity to move the facility. He went on to cite what he believed were violations of the Zoning Code and asked why this was being allowed to be built in violation of each of the City's requirements. Staff stated the sections quoted referred to individual machines and as this is a building/facility, modifications were made to allow it to be considered. In addition, the loss of parking spaces was analyzed and the Center was still over parked. Commissioner Tyler stated that if it is approved it should comply with ADA requirements. 24. Chairman Robbins stated he has no concern about moving it to the front as he agrees it is a safety concern. He does agree with Commissioner Kirk in that this does look like an old photo kiosk that was dropped off in the middle of the parking lot. This should be classified as a building and should therefore meet those standards for the shopping center. The architecture does not meet the architectural design of rest of the Center and does not meet the image the City wants on Highway 1 1 1. C:\My Documents\WPD0CS\PC9-12-00.wpd 6 Planning Commission Minutes September 12, 2000 25. Commissioner Kirk suggested the applicant work with staff on the location and architectural design issue. Chairman Robbins recessed the meeting at 8:00 p.m. to allow the applicant time to meet with staff regarding the issues raised. The meeting reconvened at 8:05 p.m. 26. Mr. Griffin asked the Commission to continue his application to October 10, 2000. 27. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Abels/Kirk to continue this item to the meeting of October 10, 2000, as requested by the applicant. Unanimously approved. B. Environmental Assessment 83-009 Addendum General Plan Amendment 2000-070, Zone Change 2000-095, Specific Plan 83-002 Amendment #4, and Tentative Tract Map 29878; a request of KSL Land Holdings, Inc. for certification of an Addendum to the PGA West Environmental Impact Report, a General Plan Amendment from Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential, Zone Change from Community Commercial to Medium Density Residential, Specific Plan Amendment to modify development standards, design guidelines and land use alternatives for PGA West, and a Tentative Tract Map to subdivide 22.21 acres into 60 residential lots, and other miscellaneous lots, for the area located at the southeast corner of Avenue 54 and PGA Boulevard. 1 . Chairman Robbins opened, the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the .staff report and noted additional changes to the Conditions of Approval for the Specific Plan and Tentative Tract Map, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Chairman Robbins asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Tyler asked about the widths -of the streets. Senior Engineer Steve Speer explained that in one instance it refers to the right of way width and the other is the street width. Street width is typically measured between the curb face, but vvhen you go to a wedge curve we call it a flow line as there is no curb face. He went on to explain why the conditions were written as they are. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PC9-12-OO.wpd 7 PH #C STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: OCTOBER 10, 2000 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-341 ADDENDUM GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (GPA 2000-072) ZONE CHANGE (ZC 2000-097) TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP (TPM 29897) REQUEST: 1) CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; 2) AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM GOLF COURSE TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL; 3) CREATE A 13,230 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCEL LOCATION: AT THE SOUTH TERMINUS OF WASHINGTON STREET ON PEERLESS PLACE WITHIN THE TRADITION APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. REPRESENTATIVE: THE KEITH COMPANIES PROPERTY OWNER: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED AN ADDENDUM TO THE PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (EA 97- 341). NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES IN IMPACT WILL RESULT FROM IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROJECT. PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, SECTION 15162 NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DEEMED NECESSARY. ZONING: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) A:\PC. staff rpt GP.ZC.PM 29897.wad SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: GOLF COURSE SOUTH: OPEN SPACE EAST: OPEN SPACE WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Property Description The existing 17.21 acre lot No. 34 consists of Golf Course use and is located along the north and east side of Peerless Place in the Tradition Club. The proposed Parcel No. 1 (Attachment 1) consisting of 13,230 square feet is within Lot No. 34 of Tract Map 28611 and is located along the eastern edge Peerless Drive with hillside topography to directly adjacent to the east of the proposed parcel. Applications Under Consideration The applicant is requesting General Plan Amendment 2000-97 and Zone Change 2000- 097 to change the General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map designation from Golf Course to Low Density Residential; and Tentative Parcel Map 29897 to create a 13,230 square foot single family residential lot designated as Parcel No. 1 on Tentative Parcel Map 29897 (Attachment 2). ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that based on this Addendum to the previously certified Negative Declaration, no further environmental review is deemed necessary, pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15162. COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES: The project was sent out for comment to City Departments and affected public agencies on August 23, 2000, requesting comments returned by September 15, 2000. All applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. PUBLIC NOTICE: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper and posted on, September 19, 2000. All property owners within 500 feet of the site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Zoning Code. A:\PC. staff rpt GP.ZC.PM 29897.WDd STATEMENT OF ISSUES: The proposed General Plan Amendment, eliminating the Golf Course use designation and changing the designation to Low Density Residential will have minor or no significant impacts to the Land Use, Circulation Element, and other Elements of the General Plan. The Parcel Map conforms the City's General Plan Land Use designation of Low Density Residential and to the provisions the La Quinta Zoning Code as conditioned, and the Final Tract Map 28611. There are no issues with this request and findings required to approve this request can be made as noted in the attached resolutions. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution recommending to the City Council certification of an Addendum to previously approved Environmental Assessment 97-341. 2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment 2000-072; and, 3. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council approval of a Zone Change 2000-097; and, 4. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000-_, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map 29897 subject to the attached conditions. ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map 2. Tentative Parcel Map 29897 Prepared by: Fred Baker, Principal Planner Submitted by:. `Cjtiritin i lorio, Planning Manager A:\PC. staff rot GP.ZC.PM 29897.wod PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATION OF AN ADDENDUM TO A PREVIOUSLY CERTIFIED MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-341 PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-072, ZONE CHANGE 2000-097, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 CASE NO: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-341 ADDENDUM CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 101h day of October, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 97-341, as prepared for General Plan Amendment 2000-072, Zone Change 2000-097, and Tentative Parcel Map 29897; and WHEREAS, said applications 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 Addendum to Environmental Assessment 97-341 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines 15164; and, WHEREAS, on November 18, 1997, the La Quinta City Council certified a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental impact for Environmental Assessment 97-341 for The Tradition Tract Map 28470 (Resolution 97-26) for a 242 lot a Country Club with an 18-hole golf course. WHEREAS, the Revised Project does not call for the preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration or EIR pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public Resources Code Section 21166, in that the Revised Project does not involve: (1) substantial changes to the project analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration which would involve new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; (2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the project is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; or (3) new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PCResoEA 97-341Add.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Environmental Assessment 87-341 October 10, 2000 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 certification of said Addendum: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment and related applications will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, as the project in question will not be developed in any manner inconsistent with the General Plan and other current City standards. The project does not have the potential to eliminate an important example of California prehistory, as extensive archaeological investigations of the site have been conducted as part of the project to implement appropriate mitigation alternatives. The applicant has agreed to implementing the necessary mitigation prior to site development activities and is in concurrence with project conditions relating to this. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment and related applications will not have the potential to achieve short term goals. 3. The proposed General Plan Amendment and related applications will not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable when considering planned or proposed development in the immediate vicinity, in that the proposed project is undertaken pursuant to the General Plan for which a Mitigated Negative Declaration has been certified. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Addendum to Environmental Assessment 97-341. 2. That it does hereby recommends certification of an Addendum to Environmental Assessment 97-341 in that the changes proposed to the project are a minor nature and do not require the preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21 166 and there are no new circumstances which would require the preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration and there is no new information or change in circumstances which would require the preparation of a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 10t' day of October following vote: C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PCResoEA 97-341 Add.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Environmental Assessment 87-341 October 10, 2000 AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California C:\My Documents\WPDOCS\PCResoEA 97-34lAdd.wpd ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 97-341 GENERAL PLAN 2000-072, CHANGE OF ZONE 2000-097, AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 Prepared by: City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Contact: Principal Planner Fred Baker (760)777-7125 Prepared for: Chapman Golf Development, L.L.C. Tradition Club Associates 78-505 Old Avenue 52 La Quinta, CA 92253 September 11, 2000 AAAddendum to EA 97-341.wpd 1 INTRODUCTION This Addendum to the previously certified Environmental Assessment (EA) 97-341, for Tract 28611 has been completed pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) in order to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with minor changes. PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION Proposed changes to Tract 28611 now require further environmental evaluation. This evaluation need not take the form of another EA, as explained below, but can take place in an Addendum to the EA 97-341 for General Plan 2000-072, Change of Zone 2000-097, and Tentative Parcel Map 29897 . EA ADDENDUM CRITERIA According to CEQA Guidelines § 15164, if a project does not fulfill any of the criteria enumerated in CEQA Guidelines § 15162(a)(1)-(3) then an Addendum, rather than a subsequent or Supplemental EA is appropriate. The determination that none of the criteria outlined in CEQA Guidelines § 15162(a)(1)-(3) are fulfilled must be supported by substantial evidence. As stated in CEQA Guidelines § 15162: a. When an EIR has been certified or negative declaration adopted no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or, (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or Negative Declaration was adopted shows any of the following: A:\Addendum to EA 97-341.wpd 2 (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. A detailed description of the initially proposed project and the currently proposed project is provided in Section (Project Site Characteristics) of this document. Using the information provided in Section 2, a brief refutation of the criteria set forth in CEQA Guidelines § 15162 is provided as follows. Subsection (a)(1) does not apply to the proposed changes to the Project because the revision is not a substantial change in the Project's scale with commensurate increase in environmental impacts from those initially anticipated and disclosed in the Negative Declaration. No new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects would occur as a result of construction of the currently proposed project. Subsection (a)(2) does not apply because there are no substantial changes to he existing environmental conditions such that new and significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of the environmental impacts would occur. As previously stated, the proposed Project is not a substantial change, with a commensurate increase in environmental impacts. In summary, the environmental circumstances under which the Project is undertaken are substantially similar to, or in some cases are, improved over the conditions in 1998. Lastly, Subsection (a)(3) does not apply because the environmental analysis did not identify any significant environmental effects that were not previously disclosed in the Negative Declaration, nor did this analysis find that any significant environmental effects previously examined in the Negative Declaration will be substantially more severe with the revised plan. In fact, some effects were determined to be less severe as a result of the project redesign. Further, this analysis did not reveal that there are any new mitigation measures that would substantially reduce one or more significant effects. AAAddendum to EA 97-341 .wpd 3 In summary, CEQA Guidelines § 15164 (b) states that: "An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary" Given that none of the conditions outlined in CEQA Guidelines § 15162 have occurred, an Addendum to the Negative Declaration is the appropriate document for evaluating environmental impacts resulting from the revised Tentative Tract. PROJECT SITE CHARACTERISTICS The project boundaries are defined as a 13,230 square foot graded portion of Lot 34 within Tract 28611 located on Peerless. The request is to change the Golf Course designation located on Peerless to Low Density Residential use on the General Plan and Zoning Maps. REVISED IMPACTS The elimination of the Golf Course designation and changing it to Low Density Residential (LDR)use will not change the environmental impacts. Tract Map 28611 consists of 148.64 acres with 33 residential lots; with LDR Zoning on 148.64 acres the tract could achieve 595 residential lots. With the addition one residential lot, no significant change in impacts will result in the areas of air quality, noise, population generation, use of natural and energy resources, traffic, public facility and services demand, and cumulative impacts. CONCLUSION The La Quinta Community Development Department has determined that based on this addendum to the previously certified Negative Declaration, no further environmental review is deemed necessary, pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Section 15304. AAAddendum to EA 97-341.wpd 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM GOLF COURSE (G) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO ON APPROXIMATELY .3 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTH TERMINUS OF WASHINGTON STREET ON PEERLESS PLACE WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2000-072 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 101" day Of October, 2000, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and to consider the request of Chapman Golf Development, L. L.C. for a General Plan Amendment as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: A 13, 230 square foot portion of Lot 34 of Tract 28611 ; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that an Environmental Assessment was conducted Tract 28611 in 1997, for the overall development of the Tradition Club. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was certified by the City Council (Resolution 97-91) on November 18, 1997. No substantive changes exists which would require the preparation of additional environmental documentation. An Addendum has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with minor changes in the project. The Community Development Department has determined that no significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated will result from this project. Therefore, no further Environmental Assessment is necessary. Pursuant to Public Resources code 15162; 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 to justify a recommendation for approval of said General Plan Amendment: 1. The new land use designation is suitable and appropriate for the property involved because it is an extension of the existing residential development. 2. The new land use designation is compatible with the designations on adjacent properties because the property is accessible from a residential street . A:\PC RESO GPA 2000-072.wpd Fanning Commission Resolution 2000- General Plan Amendment 2000-072 October 10, 2000 3. The proposed Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare in that the resulting land use does not exceed the allowable density for the Tract. 4. That the General Plan Amendment is within an area that will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described General Plan Amendment request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 101h day of October, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\PC RESO GPA 2000-072.wpcl PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM GOLF COURSE (G) TO LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RL) ON APPROXIMATELY .3 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTH TERMINUS OF WASHINGTON STREET ON PEERLESS PLACE WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB CASE NO.: CHANGE OF ZONE 2000-097 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 101h day Of October, 2000, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and to consider the request of Chapman Golf Development, L. L.C. for a Change of Zone as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: A 13, 230 square foot portion of Lot 34 of Tract 28611 ; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that an Environmental Assessment was conducted Tract 28611 in 1997, for the overall development of the Tradition Club. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was certified by the City Council (Resolution 97-91) on November 18, 1997. No substantive changes exists which would require the preparation of additional environmental documentation. An Addendum has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with minor changes in the project. The Community Development Department has determined that no significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated will result from this project. Therefore, no further Environmental Assessment is necessary. Pursuant to Public Resources code 15162; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Zone Change. 1. This Zone Change is consistent the General Plan being amended, in that the zone change categories proposed are consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies in the General Plan. 2. The Zoning Change is suitable and appropriate for the property involved because it is an extension of the existing residential development. A:\PC RESO ZC 2000-097.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Change of Zone 2000-097 October 10, 2000 3. The Zoning Change is compatible with standards within the low density residential zone because the property meets the required minimum lot size. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the above -described General Plan Amendment request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 10t" day of October, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California A:\PC RESO ZC 2C00-097.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 ALLOW THE CREATION OF A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT AND MISCELLANEOUS AMENITY LOTS ON APPROXIMATELY .3 ACRES LOCATED AT THE SOUTH TERMINUS OF WASHINGTON STREET ON PEERLESS PLACE WITHIN THE TRADITION CLUB CASE NO.: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 APPLICANT: CHAPMAN GOLF DEVELOPMENT, L.L.C. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 101h day Of October, 2000, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and to consider the request of Chapman Golf Development, L. L.C. for approval of a Parcel Map as shown on Exhibit A., and more particularly described as: A 13, 230 square foot portion of Lot 34 of Tract 28611 ; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that an Environmental Assessment was conducted Tract 28611 in 1997, for the overall development of the Tradition Club. A Mitigated Negative Declaration was certified by the City Council (Resolution 97-91) on November 18, 1997. No substantive changes exists which would require the preparation of additional environmental documentation. An Addendum has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with minor changes in the project. The Community Development Department has determined that no significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated will result from this project. Therefore, no further Environmental Assessment is necessary. Pursuant to Public Resources code 15162; 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 Commission did make the following Mandatory Findings of approval to justify said Tentative Parcel Map 29897: A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan. The project is a Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the 1992 General Plan Update; therefore, all provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) shall be met. Tentative Parcel Map 29897 is consistent with the A:\PC RESO PM 29897.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Tentative Parcel Map 29897 October 10, 2000 goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions contained herein are met to ensure consistency with the General Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences pursuant to Environmental Assessment (EA) 97-341. B. The design, or improvement of, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and the Subdivision Ordinance. All streets and improvements in the project conform to City standards contained in the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. Access for the single family lots will be provided from an street built under the tentative tract map. The design of the proposed lot is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan in that the subdivision has on -site drainage, flood water retention, and internal circulation system acceptable to the City Engineer. C. The site is physically suitable for the type of development in that the slope and topographic relief is relatively flat, and the soil type is suitable for residential development. D. The design of the lot , or type of improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage, or substantially and unavoidably injure fish, or wildlife, or their habitats in that a Mitigated Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified for EA 97-341 November 18, 1997. An Addendum has been prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts associated with minor changes in the project. The Community Development Department has determined that no significant environmental impacts which cannot be mitigated will result from this project. Therefore, no further environmental documentation is necessary. E. The design of the lot, or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems in that the Fire Marshall, Sheriff's Department, and the City's Building and Safety Department have reviewed the proposal for public health conditions and the project is conditioned as appropriate. F. The design of the lot, or type of improvements, will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large, for access through or use of property within the proposed subdivision in the proposed internal streets will be privately owned and maintained, and that there will be no publicly -owned improvements with the tentative tract map. A:\PC RESO PM 29897.wpd Planning Commission Resolution 2000- Tentative Parcel Map 29897 October 10, 2000 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does recommend approval to the City Council of Parcel Map 29897 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this the 10th day of October, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 OCTOBER 10, 2000 GENERAL 1. The subdivider agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta (the "City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this tentative map or any final map thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. This tentative map and any final maps thereunder shall comply with the requirements and standards of § §66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC). 3. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: • Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) • Community Development Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval of the plans. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit. For projects requiring project -specific NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall submit a copy of the CWQCB acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit. The applicant shall ensure that the required Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan is available for inspection at the project site. AAPC COA PM 29897.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 OCTOBER 10, 2000 4. Final maps under this tentative map shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of final map approval. 5. The applicant shall comply with all applicable Conditions of Approval for Tract No. 28470 and Tract No. 28867. PROPERTY RIGHTS 6. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights required of the tentative map or otherwise necessary for construction or proper functioning of the proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction of essential improvements. 7. The applicant shall dedicate ten -foot public utility easements contiguous with and along both sides of all private streets. The easements may be reduced to five feet with the express concurrence of IID. 8. The applicant shall dedicate easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox clusters, park lands, and common areas. 9. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements or written permission, as appropriate, from owners of any abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments are to occur. 10. If the applicant proposes vacation or abandonment of any existing rights of way or access easements which will diminish access rights to any properties owned by others, the applicant shall provide approved alternate rights of way or access easements to those properties or notarized letters of consent from the property owners 11. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval of this tentative map 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. AAPC COA PM 29897.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 OCTOBER 10, 2000 FINAL MAP(S) AND PARCEL MAP(S) 12. Prior to approval of a final map, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete map, as approved by the City's map checker, on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. If the map was not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the map. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these conditions of approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect" refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 13. Plans shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," and "Landscaping". Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for Community Development Director and the Building Official. All other plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include irrigation improvements, landscape lighting and entry monuments. "Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 14. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the applicant may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 15. When final plans are approved by the City, the applicant shall furnish accurate AutoCad files of the complete, approved plans on storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. The files shall utilize standard AutoCad menu items so they may be fully retrieved into a basic AutoCad program. At the completion of construction and prior to final acceptance of improvements, the applicant shall update the files to reflect as -constructed conditions. A:\PC COA PM 29897.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 OCTOBER 10, 2000 9f the plans were not produced in AutoCad or a file format which can be converted to AutoCad, the City Engineer may accept raster -image files of the plans. GRADING 16. The applicant shall have a "Rough" Grading Plan prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and reviewed by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of any grading permits. The plan shall address drainage from adjacent hillsides. 17. This development shall comply with Chapter 8.11 of the LQMC (Flood Hazard Regulations). If any portion of any proposed building lot in the development is or may be located within a flood hazard area as identified on the City's Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the development shall be graded to ensure that all floors and exterior fill (at the foundation) are above the level of the project (100-year) flood and building pads are compacted to 95% Proctor Density as required in Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Section 65.5(a) (6). Prior to issuance of building permits for lots which are so located, the applicant shall furnish certifications as required by FEMA that the above conditions have been met. 18. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall furnish a preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report and an approved grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations of the soils report and be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on final maps (if any are required of this development) that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. 19. Slopes shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights of way and 3:1 in landscape areas outside the right of way unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 20. Prior to occupation of the project site for construction purposes, the applicant shall submit and receive approval of a fugitive dust control plan prepared in accordance with Chapter 6.16, LQMC. The Applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the city, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. AAPC COA PM 29897.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 OCTOBER 10, 2000 21. The applicant shall maintain graded, undeveloped land to prevent wind and water erosion of soils. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. 22. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide building pad certifications stamped and signed by qualified engineers or surveyors. For each pad, the certification shall list the approved elevation, the actual elevation, the difference between the two, if any, and pad compaction. The data shall be organized by lot number and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE The applicant shall comply with the provisions of Engineering Bulletin No. 97.03 and the following: 23. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage plan for The Tradition. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved method.. Stormwater falling on site during the peak 24-hour period of a 100-year storm (the design storm) shall be retained within the development unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. 24. Storm flow in excess of retention capacity shall be routed through a designated, unimpeded overflow outlet to the historic drainage relief route. 25. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be retained on site or passed through to the overflow outlet. 26. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. In residential developments, nuisance water shall be disposed of in a trickling sand filter and leachfield approved by the City Engineer. The sand filter and leechfield shall be designed to contain surges of 3 gph/1,000 sq. ft. (of landscape area) and infiltrate 5 gpd/1,000 sq. ft. UTILITIES 27. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within the right of way and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electrical vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. A:\PC COA PM 29897.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 OCTOBER 10, 2000 28. Existing aerial lines within or adjacent to the proposed development and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground. Power lines exceeding 34.5 kv are exempt from this requirement. 29. Utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing, improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of trench compaction for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 30. The City will conduct final inspections of homes and other habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the tract or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. QUALITY ASSURANCE 31. The appiicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 32. The applicant shall employ or retain qualified civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, surveyors, or other appropriate professionals to provide sufficient construction supervision to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. 33. The applicant shall arrange and bear the cost of measurement, sampling and testing procedures not included in the City's inspection program but required by the City as evidence that construction materials and methods comply with plans, specifications and applicable regulations. 34. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were signed by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the CAD or raster -image files previously submitted to the City to reflect as -constructed conditions. AAPC COA PM 29897.wpd PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2000- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 29897 OCTOBER 10, 2000 FEES AND DEPOSITS 35. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. FIRE MARSHALL With respect to the conditions of approval for the above referenced land division, the Fire Department (760-863-8886) recommends the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code and/or Riverside County Fire Department protection standards: 37. Fire hydrants in accordance with CVWD Standard W-33 shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 300 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any lot frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 gpm for 2 hour duration at 20 psi. Blue dot reflectors shall be mounted in the middle of streets directly in line with fire hydrants. 38. Applicant/developer will provide written certification from the appropriate water company that the required fire hydrant(s) are either existing or that financial arrangements have been made to provide them. 39. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review/approval. The plans shall conform with the Fire Marshal's requirements for types, location and spacing of hydrants and fire flow requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a registered civil engineer and the local water company with the following certification: "I certify that the design of the water system is in accordance with the requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire Department." 40. The required water system including fire hydrants will be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. AAPC COA PM 29897.wpd ATT/kCNMENT 1 ® AVE. x W 0 z W V) W CALLE z W d v - , 'L� Z 50 � TAMPICO AVE. 52 `. ABANDONED AVE. 52 PROJECT LOCATION VICINITY MAP N.T.S. I N B I #A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 10, 2000 CASE NO.: MINOR USE PERMIT 2000-241 APPLICANT: ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI CATHOLIC CHURCH REQUEST: REVIEW OF A TEMPORARY TURFED PARKING LOT WITH 219 PARKING SPACES WITH TEMPORARY LIGHTING FOR THE SAINT FRANCIS OF ASSISI CATHOLIC CHURCH. LOCATION: IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF 47-225 WASHINGTON STREET (THE EXISTING CHURCH) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED PURSUANT TO THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT, SECTION 15304, CLASS 4A AND SECTION 15311, CLASS 11 B. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE) ZONING: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) SURROUNDING ZONING/ LAND USES: NORTH: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) CATHOLIC CHURCH SOUTH: RL (LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) VACANT AND FUTURE HOME OF THE LA QUINTA ARTS FOUNDATION FACILITIES WEST: OS (OPEN SPACE) VACANT EAST: CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL) BACKGROUND: Pursuant to Section 9.210.020, Minor Use Permits are processed administratively by the Community Development Department. Projects may, at the discretion of the Director be referred to the Planning Commission for their consideration. P ABETTY\ihncrnt-mun00-241-10-10-00.wnd The temporary parking lot was referred to the Planning Commission and previously approved under Minor Use Permit 98-104 on December 8, 1998. The permit was approved for one year with the ability to request an additional year. Therefore, the permit was granted an additional year and now expires on December 8, 2000. The parking lot as it is currently developed includes; 1) a grassed parking lot; 2) a main driveway paved with 3 inches of asphalt over native; 3) two retention areas; 4) the use of power poles and railroad ties as parking lot bumpers and perimeter lot delineation; and 5) a graded walkway to the existing church buildings. PROJECT PROPOSAL The proposal is a request to permit the continued used of the established grass temporary parking lot for an additional three years. In addition, the request is for six temporary light poles (20 feet in height), having two light boxes per pole, to be located within the temporary parking lot. A portable generator with lights was used during the winter months evening services to provide security and area lighting. Street improvements along Washington Street and/or the frontage road, were not required for the original temporary use permit because of the uncertainty of the ultimate configuration of the street system and the future permanent storm water retention basin that will be constructed in this location. The current temporary retention basins constructed in conjunction with the temporary parking lot helped eliminate the drainage problems that exist in front of the church. The temporary parking lot and lights will ultimately be replaced with a permanent parking facility in conjunction with the future church project to be developed on the property. REQUIRED FINDINGS: 1. Consistency with General Plan. The temporary grass parking lot when part of, or as an accessory use, in this case the St. Francis of Assisi Catholic Church, is consistent with the General Plan. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The Zoning Code permits accessory uses in conjunction with a primary use. The Church has provided the minimum parking spaces for the use, and this temporary parking is for overflow parking generated by special religious days. 3. Compliance with CEQA. The temporary parking lot is exempt. However, an archaeology study was prepared for the area used for the temporary parking lot. The Church complied with the recommendations of the study. 4. Surrounding uses. To the north of this site is the Catholic Church. To the west is open space (mountains), and to the east are vacant commercial lots. To the south is vacant land and future home of the La Quinta Arts Foundation facilities. P:\BE.TTY\ihncrnt-mun00-241-10-10-OO.wnd The permanent lighting for the Arts Foundation was limited to bollard type lighting. The requested 20-foot tall temporary light poles would be inconsistent; however, 10-foot tall light poles on a temporary bases would be more compatible and would achieve the necessary lighting that was obtained by the generator/light system used previously by the Church. The proposed project as conditioned will not create conditions detrimental to these properties. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Minute Motion 2000- _, approving Minor Use Permit 2000-241 subject to the following conditions: 1. The Minor Use Permit is valid for two years from the date of the Planning Commission approval. A one year time extension may be approved by the Community Development Department. 2. No temporary signs are permitted unless separately approved by the Community Development Department. 3. Six -security light poles, with two light boxes per pole having fully shielded high pressure sodium lamps, at a maximum height of 10 feet are permitted. All light fixtures will be designed to prevent light/glare from being cast onto adjacent properties or affecting the vision of passing motorists. 4. Public street improvements will be required when the permanent parking lot is installed. 5. The City may elect to add conditions to this application request to mitigate any problems that arise not previously addressed herein. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Rough grading plan 2. Lighting plan Prepared and Submitted by: H ty Development Director IIABETTY\ihncrnt-mun00-241-10-10-OO.wnd x �,I �o N I m a z W si 00 uZ O m J U a O Z z 7 w o ,x is x W u = Z 0 Q a W i za a Sam � !z aac Oo co ^oz `oa iaw I z I p Q yyy h6 _ I I g� I I I I I I I ,II I �l I u I TJ� a w O I I I a I Iv) Q I I I. II II I I I I �OJ�fiilt' ' la I I � I I i �p jACH NCI E NT SAINT FRANCIS nr ASSISI �,- _ 5c" 2 % PARKING LOT LIGHTING 1 Proposed new meter location 2 Proposed IID ranch runner trans. 3 Existing HD U/G pull box 0 Proposed new parking lot fixture SAINT FRANCIS OF ASSISI PARKING LOT LIGH I INN I Proposed new meter location 2 Proposed IID ranch runner trans. Existing IID U/G pull box Proposed new parking lot fixture (S, '' PJC ,,/(. *IV 4 1 '° toyr, '�1RTAN', To build catalog numbers refer to inside front cover Wattage Lamp (add mounting code) Mounting Code (Insert Code at in Cat.) 175W MH FPM'417-(a)(b) I = 1 1/2" (lose Pole Mt.0 25OW MH FPI11I'4254a)(b) 2 = 6" Extended Pole Mt. t0 32OW MH FPM'432-(a)(b) 3 = 2" Adjustable Slip Fitter 350W MH FPIN'435-(a)(b) 4 = Yoke Mt. (not shown) 40OW MH FIRM'440-M(b) 5 = 12" Extended Pole Mt. 40OW MSX/HOR FPM'740-(aHb) 8 = Without Mounting I000W MH FPL'499-(a)(b) 9 = Wishbone Mount 1000W MSX/HOR FPL'799-(a)(b) (See page 20) 70W HPS FPM'507-(a)(b) IOOW HPS FPM'510-(a)(b) 150W HPS FPM'5154a)(b) 250W HPS FPM'525-(a)(b) 40OW HPS FPM'540-(a)(b) 25OW HPS-P FPAR'625-(a)(b) 40OW HPS-P FPM'640-(o)(b) 1000W HPS FPL'599-(a)(b) (For wall mount brackets see page 21) ffix Rey: Indicate voltage in space (a) n 120 Volt 277 Volt 208 Volt 140 Volt 480 Volt Multi -tap 1 2 3 4 5 M topped @ 277V dicate options in space (b) (Factory Installed) SUFFIX a (b) UL Pending) e (120V 8 277V) F (208-240.480V) J Change Suffix (a) to: 120 Volt 277 Volt 208 Volt 240 Volt 1 2 3 4 Standby (Includes 0 lamp:15OW =16", 25OW = 23") Non delay -relay type 480 Volt 5 ontrol P, fist lock receptacle and matching photocell are supplied. Specify voltage in position (a) of order code. Change Suffix (a) to: 120 Volt 277 Volt 1 2 to Square Pole Mount 208 Volt 140 Volt 3 4 480 Volt 5 S ie Round Pole Mount R ousing (Custom Colors Available: Consult factory for pricing and delivery.) W (Field -Installed) 16" housing 23" housing n Catalog Number Catalog Number and WG-16 WG-23 Shield VS-16 VS-23 — Tenon Adaptor for restrictions. Wishbone Mount 4 Without Mounting (Factory Drilled) 41 17 r■ B I #8 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: OCTOBER 10, 2000 CASE NO: RW-C 2000-001 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA REQUEST: GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY FINDING FOR THE PROPOSED CLOSURE OF A 100-FOOT LONG SEGMENT OF AVENIDA MENDOZA LOCATED BETWEEN AVENIDA MONTEZUMA AND THE ALLEY TO VEHICULAR TRAFFIC LOCATION: AVENIDA MENDOZA SOUTH OF FRANCES HACK PARK BETWEEN AVENIDA MONTEZUMA AND THE ALLEY ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THE PROPOSED ACTION IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT PURSUANT TO SECTION 15301, CLASS 1(C), OF THE GUIDELINES FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. tI r The proposed closure of Avenida Mendoza south of Frances Hack Park between Avenida Mendoza and the alley is a recommendation of the Museum Expansion Committee formed by the City Council at its June 6, 2000 meeting. A map showing the proposed closure is included as Attachment 1. The Committee was comprised of Mayor Pro Tem, Stanley Sniff; Council Member, Don Adolph; Historical Society Members Pat Cross and Judy Vossler; and Historical Preservation Commissioner Barbara Irwin. The Committee met on two occasions, June 8, 2000 and July 19, 2000. Street closure was discussed at the latter meeting. Closure of the segment of Avenida Mendoza adjacent to the La Quinta Historical Museum property would allow for public parking, and pedestrian and bicycle access from the residential area to the south to the Museum and park. Pursuant to the Committee's recommendation, the proposal to close Avenida Mendoza to vehicular traffic is presented for consideration. The proposal is TAMDEPTTIanning Commission\001010.wpd closure of the street to motorized vehicular traffic at the subject location, not vacation of public use rights dedicated by the subdivider on the subdivision map that created Avenida Mendoza. Hence, the public use right will be retained if the proposed action is approved. The proposed closure is permissible under Vehicle Code §21 101(a)(1) and La Quinta City Council Resolution 2000-99 which establishes policies for closure of streets to vehicular traffic. The public hearing for this item has been published in the Desert Sun and notices sent as required by Resolution 2000-99 apprizing all interested parties and property owners within 500 feet of the proposed street closure location. In order for the City to approve the proposed street closure, it is necessary the Planning Commission, and the City Council, to make a finding that the street is no longer needed for motorized vehicular traffic. The subject portion of Avenida Mendoza proposed for closure is lightly used by motorized vehicular traffic. A 24- hour traffic count was taken on July 18, 2000; 75 vehicles were counted. The light use is largely attributable to convenient alternative routes in the immediate vicinity and the subject street segment is not a key route linking big traffic generators to big traffic attractors. Closure of the subject segment of Avenida Mendoza would divert motorized vehicles west to Eisenhower Drive or east to Avenida Navarro, both of which are 550 feet away. Residents wishing to access Frances Hack Park from south of Avenida Mendoza would travel 1 /4 of a mile longer after the proposed segment of Avenida Mendoza is closed. At an average speed of 15 MPH, approximately one minute commute time is added. Public use for pedestrian and bicycle traffic will continue to be accommodated through the closure area. The alley located at the south end of the closure area is currently unimproved, while Avenida Mendoza and Avenida Montezuma are paved but have no curb or gutter. However, the City is currently under contract with Granite Construction Company to improve all of the streets and alleys in the immediate area to city standard. The improvements are expected to be completed by March, 2001. The new improvements will greatly enhance motorized vehicle accessibility in the area making the alternative routes that support the proposed closure viable for use. GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY The General Plan has three policy statements (3-1.1.1 through 3-1.1.3) that address the need to have a street system capable of accommodating projected traffic demands produced by development of the City's planned Land Use Element. Pursuant to those policy statements, the General Plan includes a Circulation System Policy Diagram on page 3-9. The primary purpose of the Circulation System Policy Diagram is to provide a TIPWDEPTTIannmg Commission\001010.Wpd specific layout for the arterial and collector street system. The Diagram also shows the local street system that existed at the time the General Plan was adopted; however, the local street system is shown as background information to provide a visual relationship between the local street system and the arterial/ collector street system and should not be construed as part of the street layout required by the General Plan. In fact, the need to make minor adjustments to the local street system are common place occurrences to correct unanticipated deficiencies that result from unintended traffic patterns in residential neighborhoods. Typical subdivision design in the first half of the 1900's employed a rectangular grid system layout of straight streets crossing each other at perpendicular angles. The grid system layout provides maximum circulation benefit for motorists and pedestrians alike, but unfortunately also introduces a host of traffic safety problems. Hence, the vast inventory of grid system in existing neighborhoods with their inherent problems lead traffic engineering and urban planning professionals to labor through the second half of the 1900's researching and implementing concepts to improve public safety. Some of the retrofit concepts commonly implemented in existing grid system neighborhoods include street closures where possible and traffic diversion techniques where appropriate. Minor increases to a resident's commute route are generally preferred by residents in the neighborhood if the loss of circulation convenience yields an improved traffic safety situation for the neighborhood. In conclusion, the proposed street closure changes the character of benefits accruing to neighborhood residents. The circulation benefit decreases slightly for motorized vehicular traffic while the traffic safety benefit for pedestrians and residents increases in a more pronounced way because the street closure causes motorized traffic from outside the neighborhood to find a route that does not pass through the neighborhood. Additionally, the proposed street closure does not prevent pedestrians and bicycle traffic from continuing to use the area closed to motorized traffic. Given the parameters noted in this report, it is possible for the Planning Commission to make the following finds: 1 . The proposed street closure is consistent with the General Plan. 2. The proposed closure area is no longer needed for motorized vehicular traffic. TAPWOEPTOanning Commission\001010.wpd Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2000- , finding the street segment proposed for closure to be no long needed for motorized vehicular traffic, and closure to be consistent with the General Plan. Attachments: 1 . Santa Carmelita at Vale La Quinta, Unit 14, Subdivision Map Prepared by: Submitted by: Steven D. J,er, Senior Engineer Cf�ristine i lorio, Plann g Manager TAMDEPT\Plannmg Commission\001010.wpd RESOLUTION NO. 2000- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CLOSURE OF A 100-FOOT LONG SEGMENT OF AVENIDA MENDOZA TO MOTORIZED VEHICULAR TRAFFIC SOUTH OF FRANCES HACK PARK BETWEEN AVENIDA MONTEZUMA AND THE ALLEY CASE NO.: RW-C 2000-001 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 10th day of October, 2000, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for the City of La Quinta to review the proposed street closure of Avenida Mendoza to motorized vehicular traffic south of Frances Hack Park between Avenida Montezuma and the alley; and WHEREAS, in 1935, subdivision map entitled Santa Carmelita at Vale La Quinta, Unit 14, created Lot G on the tract map as Avenida Mendoza and was irrevocably dedicated to public use, and subsequently accepted by the City of La Quinta; and WHEREAS, the City of La Quinta now desires to close a 100-foot long segment of Avenida Mendoza to motorized vehicular traffic south of Frances Hack Park, which is shown as Lots 130 and 131 on the tract map, between Avenida Montezuma and the alley, but continue to accommodate pedestrians and bicycle traffic through the closure area; and WHEREAS, proposed closure to motorized vehicular traffic is permissible under Street and Highways Code §21101(a)(1) and La Quinta City Council Resolution 2000- 99; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending closure of the proposed street segment: 1 . The 100-foot long segment of Avenida Mendoza south of Frances Hack Park between Avenida Montezuma and the alley is no longer needed for motorized vehicular traffic. 2. Closure of the 100-foot long segment of Avenida Mendoza is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan, and the Circulation System Policy Diagram contained therein. Planning Commission Resolution 2000- RW-C 2000-001 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: Section 1. The area proposed for closure to motorized vehicular traffic is more particularly described as being that part of Lot G located south of Avenida Montezuma's south right of way line, which is Lots N and 0 on the tract map, where said southerly line projects across Lot G; and located north of the alley's north right of way line, which is Lots Q and R on the tract map, where said northerly line projects across Lot G. The area of closure is sixty feet wide, east to west, and one hundred feet long, north to south, and contains 6,000 square feet. Section 2. The closure area is no longer needed for motorized vehicular traffic and there are sufficient alternative routes in the immediate area to complete access needs of motorists to properties in the area with inconsequential impact. section 3. Closure of the 100-foot long segment of Avenida Mendoza is consistent with the General Plan. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 10th day of October, 2000, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: STEVE ROBBINS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California ATTACHMENT #1 W W oWW W QQ�lk�x Z Z4 W ti Q �oehvJ� W o�kleN � � s: \ Fes � 8 �.�0% 37)-�Qi�v7l�_�..6!�Y'_7.L7ht•1,.4'f ?!l in'�-!ro?_ _.R'� Nsri ,} ,n� .ar o ,or ,o + c 1 a�. �• er : ,or ,or ar Ar ,Ar ;4�:`o•No° b� tl �� b� n% 'v `� °a � � :� �� tl tl� M nY n� b� ^�� o •SH .� ��2 N ° AAw or 0 0 .d .._:E t _ rn3es-l7- •�14 � -'"Tir �t(e.ar-f�9� /�i 1 bf -spas -- — `,L 8- ..1 � I � y YT,. .or .as arVI t •.� t 4jr b, a+� Ar AS ox N f� ♦'oe i m3 'd At� 5�r 1a, ei�S` " y tl b bEt,n; IC �h a •:m•- N v t �a\ -1 ^+ _ .♦ -.Ix I .I �Iv •=; A kt�ma oro (� � p �(t\"V� �Oa M � ti\ts � � brt 1y K •"§t'ro NAYEN/Dr9"--� '� VO � w �' _ � , �_1GT rce:r`' � � '< x g b�Of#�si�aa�g Q s +eol or Ar m oD N •v ? ,�i o 5 g '° ; �.+.r, ae M V 'd \' err ° N +� .y �i ,(Y� 4i N . A ` ♦ V � Y: a e2:'.or. ...\ _ �•• � °� 0 2 �.^ �' h.rv•.,, Q ] rdryr- •�1^ 'M � � � � ..M,ei� 1 ,• ^+°� a � ^.ovoo8 clh � � ; y� :♦'..':q'. b .$' b•o � y;F 8 8 �. r do " :, bo r 9—1-7- 0---I�ZOOY\/7l✓--f�0/��/1b�'or� Ini 7...r+ssv'uN - I t O r n. �I v wrl .o . r^ ` .� r r .1 , '. • `+ $ „uj N ° -•I N I � tl , � ti _ } N � �jF o � a �C N $ .t $ "' y tl 8 y � I • •�: �.or,...ot• - .: --„i$ .1 4 y.I` r \�: y t4 Q .n. W ui •.� �q p iRT/NET. � $ o .nr Ix or it• Or or m r (i'" Jp r,r• � "•+' --0j' I.fR :: ' � o/ •"a o A 0 .o o _�'j"ai ` ,. tl. 5'yp" �° r / %. �_ �_.• ?.. __.4—'�.'._.._. ,frf'.' ._... ..Sari o .9s Os or Or 1 �. .. ,I� i .�yi►. V6(6179 _/07 ca as+ oao d0//V_7A fs'' ---'- -- ° �� ,.� '�� . r .cr r . _: '�s.' ' G,:,•�,., 11 V' I °�• h o V ^:�^I I .or ,2n ,a.• ,os .or or ; .as .or cr �r I oo:igl � °`�V � �� .; Y. .� cv .nr � os es nr cD no t1 ' ns• os or r `or s• l.c . os. ,orp, ��H>vp are ec ., +ram.• ... - .,._p A'�r .."t' 'L'.. alu;r.'y +u. n-�>,::�...