The URL can be used to link to this page

1996 05 14 PClPH#1 PLEASE INSERT ATTACHED SHEETS AND DISCARD OLD SHEETS IN DRAFT ZONING ORDINANCE BEFORE REVIEWING STAFF REPORT FOR: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-052 0 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 96-050 THANK YOU docss.003 [Hearing Draft. 5161951 9.10: GENERAL PROVISIONS 8. To provide land zoned for schools, parks and other public facilities. 9. To ensure the provision of affordable housing opportunities. 9.10.020 Applicability of Code. A. Compliance Required. No uses or structures shall be established, substituted, expanded, constructed, altered, moved, maintained, or otherwise changed except in conformity with this Code. B. Applicability. This Code shall apply to all land within the City. C. Limitations on Validity of Permits. The issuance or granting of a permit or approval of plans and specifications shall not be construed to be an approval of any violation of any provision of this Code. The issuance of such a permit shall not prevent the City from thereafter requiring the correction of violations of this Code or of any other ordinance of the City. D. Conflict with Other Regulations. Whenever any provision of this Code and other City regulations impose overlapping or contradictory requirements, that provision which is more restrictive or imposes a higher standard shall control except as otherwise expressly provided in this Code. Nothing contained in this Code shall be deemed to repeal or amend any regulation of the City requiring a permit or license, nor shall any provision of this Code be deemed to repeal or amend the City's building regulations. 9.10.030 Prior Agreements and Approvals. A. DevelopmentAgreements. Notwithstanding any provision ofthis Zoning Code, any development agreement which is valid as of the effective date of this Code shall remain in full force and effect until expiration of said agreement. For the purposes of the specific project approved in such a development rr agreement, permitted land uses, development standards, and other zoning provisions specified in the development agreement shall supersede the provisions of this Code B. Approved Development Projects and Permits. Any �. _c�1 "a MTOV i gca3u, building permit, or similar entitlement which was issued pursuant to earlier ordinances of the City which is in conflict with this Code may nevertheless be continued and the specific construction authorized under the permit may be completed in accordance with the provisions of the permit approval provided the construction complies with all other laws and regulations in effect at the time of the permit approval. I��wM-Rem � project or permit rezxnn �sme. a xtensidn met" 'on 9200:080 s]�alfcon rnrfo the rec tur�meh and standardi'm:effect iftfilEud4d exiensaaiiass' fited: C. Approved ;1'esth Subdivision Maps. Any vesting tentative tract or parcel map which was approved pursuant to earlier ordinances of the City and which is in conflict with this Code may nevertheless be continued and completed in accordance with the provisions of its approval, provided it is completed within the time limit in effect at the time of its approval without extension of time therefor and provided it complies with all other laws and regulations in effect at the time of its approval. 2 [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.10: GENERAL PROVISIONS Final tract and parcel maps shall be consistent with approved vesting tentative tract or parcel maps and any applicable conditions of approval. 9.10.040 General Plan Density and Intensity. The General Plan establishes a range of development intensities, composed of densities, unit counts, floor area ratios, or similar measures, for each land area in the City. This Zoning Code and the City's individual project approvals provide development standards, plans, and other factors which shall determine the exact development intensity of each project within the foregoing General Plan range. The City reserves the right to limit projects to intensities below the General Plan's upper limits. 9.10.050 Planning Agency Consistent with Section 65100 et seq of the state Government Code, the City's planning agency shall consist of the City Council, the Planning Commission, and the Planning and Development Department. 9.10.060 Code Interpretations. Interpretations of the provisions of this Zoning Code shall be made by the Community Development Director. Such interpretations may be referred to the Planning Commission for review if the Director determines on a case -by -case basis that the public interest would be better served by such referral. 9.10.070 Use of Terms. A. Rules for Construction of Language. The following general rules of construction shall apply to the textual provisions of this Code: 1. The specific shall supersede the general. Z. The word "shall" is mandatory. The word "may" is discretionary. The word "should" identifies a regulation or design guideline which must be followed in the absence of compelling opposing considerations identified by the City decision -making body. 3. In the case of any difference of meanings or implication between the text regarding a provision of the Code and any title, heading, caption, or illustration, the text shall control. 4. Unless the context clearly indicates otherwise, words used in the present tense include the future, words used in the singular include the plural, and words used in the plural include the singular. 3 CHAPTER 9.20: ZONING DISTRICTS Sections: 9.20.010 Establishment of Districts ........................... 5 9.20.020 Official Zoning Map ................................ 6 9.20.030 Special Zoning Symbols ............................. 6 9.20.040 Land Uses Not Listed ............................... 7 9.20.010 Establishment of Districts. The City is hereby divided into the following zoning districts, which are consistent with and implement the General Plan: 1. RVL Very Low Density Residential District 2. RL Low Density Residential District 3. RC Cove Residential District 4. RM Medium Density Residential District 5. RMH Medium High Density Residential District 6. RH High Density Residential District 7. RSP Residential Specific Plan Overlay District 8. RR Rural Residential Overlay District 10. VC Village Core District 11. VP Village Park District 12. VS Village South District 13. VN Village North District 14. VT Tampico Urban Mix District 15. NR Nonresidential Overlay District 16. CR Regional Commercial District 17. CP Commercial Park District 18. CC Community Commercial District 19. CN Neighborhood Commercial District 20. CT Tourist Commercial District 21. CO Office Commercial District 22. MC Major Community Facilities District 23. PR Parks and Recreation District 24. GC Golf Course District 25. OS Open Space District 26. FP Floodplain District 27. HC Hillside Conservation Overlay District 28. SOB Sexually Oriented Business Overlay District 29. EOID'Enaa Uver� I3ict 5 [Hearing Draft. 5161961 9.30: RESIDENTUL DISTRICTS 2. Lot coverage means the cumulative ground floor area of the structures on a lot expressed as a percentage of the net lot area. For purposes of this definition, "ground floor area" shall mean all enclosed area within the ground floor of a structure, including exterior was and mechanical spaces. Carports, garages, accessory buildings, and parking structures are included in ground floor area but swimming pools and unenclosed post -supported roofs over patios and walkways are not included. 3. Project area means all of the land area included within a development project excepting those areas designated for public and private road rights -of -way, schools, public parks, and other uses or easements which preclude the use of the land therein as -part of the development project. 9.30.020 Affordable Housing Requirements. W, ON � We 9.30.030, RVL Very Low Density Residential District. A. Pwpose.To provide for the development and preservation of very low density neighborhoods (zero -to -two units per acre) with one and two-story single family detached dwellings on large lots and/or, subject to a specific plan, projects with clustered smaller dwellings, such as one and two-story single family attached, townhome, or condominium dwellings, with generous open space. B. Permitted Uses. Chapter 9.40 lists permitted land uses. C..Development Standards. Min. Lot Size ................................... 20,000 sq/ft Min. Lot Frontage ................................ 100 ft. Max. Structure Height ............................ 28 ft. Max. No. of Stories ............................... 2 Min. Front Yard Setback ........................... 30 ft. Min. Interior/Exterior Side Yard Setbacks ............. 10/20 ft. Min. Rear Yard Setback ........................... 30 ft. Max. Lot Coverage ............................... 30% Min. Livable Floor Area Excluding Garage ............ 1400 sq/ft Min. Landscape Setbacks Adjacent to Perimeter Streets' .. 10' min. at any point, 20' min. aterap over entire frontage Min. Common Open Area' ......................... 40% 'Does not apply to single family detached unless a specific plan is required. Landscaping and open area shall be per the standards of Sec. 9.60.240. 2 [Hearing Draft: 5/61961 9.30: RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS Min. Common Open Area . ......................... 30% or as specified by the underlying base district Other Development Standards ....................... As shown on the approved project specific plan. ` Per the landscaping and open area standards in Sec. 9.60.240. Chapter 9.50 contains additional details and illustrations regarding development standards. 9.30.100 RR Rural Residential Overlay District. A. Purpose. To facilitate the development and preservation of rural character at low densities (zero -three units per acre) in conjunction with the RVL and RL base districts. The RR district is an overlay district to be used in conjunction with either of the preceding base districts. B. Permitted Uses. As permitted in the underlying base district. C. Designation on Zoning Map. 'When the RR overlay district is used, the zoning designation on the Official Zoning Map shall consist of the base district symbol followed by the overlay district symbol enclosed in parentheses. For example: RL (RR). D. Development Standards. Development standards shall be the same as those for the underlying base district except for the following: 1. The minimum front yard setback when RVL is the base district shall be 40 ft. 2. The minimum front yard setback when RL is the base district shall be the same as the RL standards (summarized in Section 9.30.040). 3. Lots of two acres or more shall utilize rural street cross -sections (e.g. no vertical curbs). 4. Architectural styles shall emphasize a rural theme (e.g. Ranch, Western, Southwest, or Mission styles). 5. Fencing guidelines representative of a rural equestri theme shall be developed for each project. 6. Equestrian paths adjacent to specified collector and arterial streets shall be required to link residential areas with trail systems and Lake Cahuilla County Park. [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.40: RESIDENTL4L PERMITTED USES TABLE 9-1: PERMITTED USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS P = Principal Use. M = Minor Use Permit A =Accessory Use H = Home Occupation Permit C= Cond. Use Permit S=Specific Plan Required X = Prohibited Use DISTRICT ;. -°+ } a S a u. N 4y n H a s H a LAND USE RVL RL RC RM RMH RH Senior group housing, 7 or more persons, subj. to §9.60.200 X X X X C C Timeshare facilities, subject to §9.60.280 C C C C C C Bed and breakfast inns X X C C C C Open Space and Recreational Uses Public parks, playfields, and open space P P P P P P Bicycle, equestrian, and hiking trails P P P P P P Clubhouses and community pools/cabanas P P P P P P Unlighted tennis and other game courts on pvt. property, subject to §9.60.150 A A A A A A Lighted tennis and other game courts on private property, subject to §9.60.150 C C C C C C Accessory Uses and Structures Home occupations, subject to §9.60.110 H H H H H H Patio covers, decks, and gazebos, subject to §9.60.040 A A A A A A Fences and walls, subject to §9.60.030 A A A A A A Outdoor antennas and satellite dishes, subject to §9.60.080 M M M M lei M Swimming pools, spas and cabanas, subject to §9.60.070 A A A A A A Guest houses, subject to §9.60.100 M M M X X X 2nd units, "granny flats", and employee quarters, subject to §9.60.090 C C C C C C Garages and carports, subject to §9.60.060 A A A A A A Keeping of household pets, subject to §9.60.120 A A A A A A On lats.ofI s b, , the noncommercial keeping of hoofed animals, fowl (except roosters) and rabbits, subj. to §9.60.120. Hoofed. animals include horses, sheep, goats, pot bellied pigs, and similar. jl a of horses i"s!Wjggq §F.140.060. A X X X X X (Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.40: RESIDENTL4L PERMITTED USES r TABLE 9-1: PERMITTED USES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS P = Principal Use M = Minor Use Permit A= Accessory Use H= Home Occupation Permit C = Cond. Use Permit S = Specific Plan Required X = Prohibited Use . , DISTRICT a s N c J t13 c c (i K E s m (A 9= g -00 w o_ = ,a ID LAND USE RVL. RL RC RM RMH RH Other accessory uses and structures which are customarily associated with and subordinate to the principal use on the premises and are consistent with the purpose and intent of the zoning district A A A A A A Agricultural Uses Tree crop farming; greenhouses P X X X X X Field crop farming P C X X X X Produce stands, subject to §9.100.100 P M X X X X Temporary Uses Garage sales A A I A A A A Construction and guard offices, subject to §9.60.210 M M M M M M Use of relocatable building M M M M M M Model home complexes and sales offices, subj. to §9.60.250 M M M M M M Special outdoor events, subject to §9.60.170 M M M M M M tkbiiation, uTijpe §- - — - 11 1G 1V X X X Parking of recreational vehicles, subject to §9.60.130 X X X Other Uses iP'PS "ft?►�f �P xi Q Jfl C C Community recreational vehicle storage lots, noncommercial X X X P P P TV, radio, and microwave towers and related equipment, subject to Chapter 9.170 C C C C C C Utility substations and facilities M M M M M M Public flood control facilities and devices P P P P P P Other principal, accessory or temporary uses not listed in this Table. Director or Planning Commission to determine whether use is permitted in accordance with §9.20.040 13 CHAPTER 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS Sections: 9.60.010 Purpose and Intent ....................... 23 9.60.170 Special Outdoor Events .................. 40 9.60.020 Signs and Parking ........................ 23 9.60.180 Manufactured Housing and Mobilehomes .. 41 9.60.030 fences and Walls ......................... 23 9.60.190 Family Day Care Facilities ............... 42 9.60.040 patio Covers, Decks and Play Equipment ..... 27 9.60.200 Senior Citizen Housing .................. 43 9.60.050 Storage and Other Accessory Buildings ...... 28 9.60.210 Construction and Guard Offices .......... 44 9.60.060 Garages and Carports ..................... 29 9.60.220 Trash and Recyclable Materials Storage .... 44 9.60.070 Swimming Pools .......................... 29 9.60.230 Noise Control .......................... 44 9.60.080 Satellite Dish and Other Antennas ........... 30 9.60.240 Landscaping and Open Area ............. 44 9.60.090 Second Residential Units ................... 31 9.60.250 Model Home Complexes ................. 45 9.60.100 Guest Houses ............................ 33 9.60.260 Condominium Conversions .............. 48 9.60.110 Home Occupations ....................... 34 9.60.270 Density Bonuses for Affordable Housing ... 50 9.60.120 Pets and Other Animals ................... 36 9.60.280 Timeshare Regulations .................. 54 9.60.130 Recreational Vehicle Parking ............... 36 9.60.290 Compatibility Review for 9.60.140 Screening ............................... 38 Partially -Developed Subdivisions ........ 59 9.60.150 Tennis and Other Game Courts ............. 39 9.60.300 Restrictions on Multi -Story 9.60.160 Outdoor Lighting ........................ 40 Buildings at Project Boundaries .......... 61 9.60.010 Purpose and Intent. This Chapter sets forth requirements for accessory structures, fences and walls, swimming pools, and other special aspects of land use in residential districts. These requirements are in addition to the regulations for residential uses set forth in Chapters 9.30 through 9.50. 9.60.020 Signs and Parking. Refer to Chapter 9.150 for parking regulations and Chapter 9.160 for sign regulations. 9.60.030 fences and 'Walls. A. .Definition. For purposes of this Section, "fence" or "wall" means any type of fence, wall, retaining wall, sound attenuation wall, screen, or windscreen. The terms "fence" and "wall' are used interchangeably in this Section to mean any or all of the preceding structures. r B. Measurement of Fence Height. Except as otherwise specified in this Section, fence heights shall be measured from finish grade at the base of the fence to the highest point of the fence on the interior or exterior side, whichever is higher. In addition, the following provisions shall apply to the measurement of fence height: OPEN RAIUNG UP T04r HIGH ON TOP OF MAX HEIGHT WALL FOR PEDESTIOAN SAFETY FENCES MORE THAN 75" APART(WINdl--) SHALL BE CONSIDERED SEPARATE STRUCTURES FOR PURPOSES OF MEASURlq NE1GMf n EWEPFNDENT Open railings, up to- 48 1 - inches high, placed on top Measurement of Fence Height of a retaining or other wall and required for pedestrian safety shall not be included in the height measurement. 23 (Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS 2. Fences less than 30 inches apart (measured between adjoining faces) shall be considered one structure and fence height shall be measured from the base of the lower fence to the top of the higher fence. Fences 30 inches or more apart shall be considered separate structures and their heights shall be measured independently. The Director may require that the area between such fences be provided with permanent landscaping and irrigation. C. Maximum Fence Heights. The construction and installation of fences shall be in compliance with the following standards: 1. Within Main Building Area. In the area of a lot where amain building maybe constructed, the maximum freestanding fence height shall be 12 feet. 2. Setback Areas Not Bordering Streets. The maximum fence height shall be six feet within any required setback area not adjoining a street. Where the elevation of an adjoining building site is higher than the base of the fence within a side or rear setback area, the height of the fence may be measured from the elevation of the adjoining building site to the top of the fence. However, fence height shall not exceed eight feet measured from either side. 3. Setback Areas Bordering Streets, Alleys, and Other Accessways. a. Within all districts, the maximum fence height shall be five feet within the first ten feet of the required front setback area (measured from the street right-of-way) and six feet within any rear or side setback area adjoining a public street. b. Notwithstanding other fence height restrictions, where, because of the orientation of the lots, a property line fence separates a front yard on one lot from a rear yard on an adjacent lot, the maximum fence height shall be six feet. c. Arches or trellises up to eight feet in height and five feet in width may be constructed over rr a gate on a lot provided the arch is integrated into the fence/gate design. Alternately, pilasters adjacent to such a gate may be constructed up to eight feet in height provided the pilasters are integrated into the fence/gate design. A maximum of two such arches or pairs of pilasters shall be permitted per residential parcel. d. Any portion of a building site where vehicular access is taken shall conform to the access intersection requirements of Paragraph C.4. of this Section. e. City- or state -required sound attenuation walls bordering freeways or arterial highways may exceed six feet in height if so recommended by a noise attenuation study and approved by the Director. 4. Visibility at Intersections. In regulating fences and other visual obstructions, it is necessary to preserve motorist sight distances and to maintain visual openness. Therefore, notwithstanding Paragraph C.3. of this Section, the height of fences, trees, shrubs, and other visual obstructions 24 [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS shall be further restricted as follows: a. The height of fences, trees, shrubs, and other visual obstructions shall be limited to a maximum height of 30 inches within the triangular area formed by drawing a straight line: 1) Between two points located on and 20 feet distant from the point of intersection of two ultimate street right-of-way lines. 2) Between two points located on and five feet distant from the point of intersection of an ultimate street or alley right-of-way on one hand and the edge of a driveway or another alley right-of-way on the other. b. For purposes of this Code, "point of intersection" shall mean the intersection of the prolongation of the right-of-way lines, excluding any curved portion joining the two lines. c. The height restrictions of this Paragraph CA shall apply to fences, walls, trees, shrubs, vegetation, or any other material which obstructs or may obstruct visibility. D. Gates. 1. Materials. Gates shall be constructed of ornamental iron/tubular steel and/or wood. Such gates may be placed in any location provided they meet the requirements of this Section and provided any wood used is not less than a grade of construction heart or merchantable and better redwood or #2 and better (no holes) western red cedar, stained or painted to match or. complement the adjacent wall or structure. Alternatively, if left in natural color, all wood shall be treated with a water -repellant material. Wood gates over 36 inches wide shall have a metal frame. Chain link gates are prohibited. 2. Width. Pedestrian gates shall not exceed 36 inches in width, except that other gates may be any width in sideyard fences wherein the sideyard setback is at least 12 feet. E. Fence Construction and Materials. All fencing in residential districts shall conform to the following construction and material standards: 1. Wood Fencing. a. Except for gates and_f'�t� equestrian fencing regiulafed by Section 9140.060, wood fencing is permitted in rear or interior side yards only, and only if not visible from the street. Gates may be of wood in any location provided they comply with the standards of this Section. 25 [Hearing Draft. 5161961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS b. All wood fencing shall be constructed of not less than a grade of construction heart or merchantable and better redwood or #2 and better (no holes) western red cedar, stained or painted to match or complement the adjacent wall or structure. Alternatively, if left in natural color, all wood shall be treated with a water -repellant material. c. Fence boards may be horizontal or vertical. Support posts shall be a minimum of nominal 4" x 4" redwood, pressure -treated lumber, tubular steel or block placed five feet on center. All fences shall have a concrete footing or approved post base or be embedded in concrete in a manner which allows standing water to drain from the post hole. The posts shall be installed on the interior side of the lot with fencing material on the outside edge of the support posts. 2. Ornamental Iron and Tubular Steel Fencing. Ornamental iron or tubular steel fencing may be used along the front or street side yards only. The iron or steel shall be painted to match or complement the adjacent wall or structure. 3. Masonry Fencing. Solid Masonry fencing (i.e. block, rock, brick, with or without stucco covering) is permitted in any location on the lot provided the color of the masonry or stucco matches or complements the adjacent wall or structure. Precision concrete block shall not be used unless all exterior surfaces visible from outside the property are covered with stucco, paint, texture coating, or other comparable coating approved by the Director. 4. Material Combinations. Combinations of two or more of the preceding materials may be used provided that the bottom one-half of the fence is constructed of a masonry material. Combinations incorporating wood materials shall only be used for the rear and interior side yards and only when not visible from the street F. Fence Landscaping and Maintenance. rr 1. Landscaping. The area between the street right-of-way and any fencing shall be landscaped, have a suitable permanent irrigation system, and be continuously maintained by the property owner. 2. Maintenance. All walls and fences shall be continuously maintained in good repair. The property owner shall be provided thirty days after receiving notice from the City to repair a wall or fence. The Building Official may grant an extension to such time period not to exceed sixty days. G. Prohibited Fence Materials. The use of barbed wire, razor wire, or similar materials in or on fences is prohibited in all residential districts. In addition, chain link or wood fencing is prohibited within required front setbacks or any other required setback adjacent to a street or alley, except for wood gates and for temporary construction fences authorized by a minor use permit issued in accordance with Section 9.210.020. 26 [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS H. Equestrian Fencing. Notwithstanding any other requirements of this Section, fencing shall be provided as fbilows witere the keeping of horses is permitted per Ghaptei 9.40 (Residential Pertniffe -Ys}: regulated by the provisions ofSection 9.140.060 (E�uestrian Overlay Regulations) where the keeping of horses is permitted. - �i� - - i i- i •i • ice- i i %• i :w WIN I. Nonconforming Fences. Any fence which does not meet the standards of this Section but which was legally established prior to the adoption of these standards may be maintained provided such fence is not expanded nor its non-conformance with these standards otherwise increased. Any fence which is destroyed or damaged to the extent of more than 50 percent of its total replacement value shall not be repaired, rebuilt, or reconstructed except in conformance with these standards. 9.60.040 Patio Covers, Decks and Play Equipment. A. Applicability. For purposes of this Section, The term "patio covers, decks, and play equipment" includes any type of yard structure other than a building or a carport. Such structures include but are not limited to open and solid patio covers, gazebos, trellises, arbors, and to play equipment which is more than eight feet in height. All such structures shall be "open" (no side walls) and are referred to in this Section as "yard structures". Enclosed structures shall be considered accessory buildings (see Section 9.60.050). Uncovered decks and others structures less than 18 inches above finish grade shall not be subject to the provisions of this Section. B. Standards. Patio covers, decks, gazebos, play equipment or other yard structures, attached to or detached from the main building shall comply with front and side yard setbacks for the main building and the following requirements: 1. The location of decks and balconies shall be governed by the standards for wall projections in Section 9.50.060. 2. No yard structure shall be more than 12 feet in height. 3. Yard structures shall not be constructed or established within those areas where fences and walls are limited to a maximum height of five feet as specified in Section 9.60.030 nor shall they be located in the panhandle portion of a panhandle lot. 4. No yard structure shall be located less than five feet from any residential lot or from any rear property line adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. 27 [Hearing Draft 5161961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS 5. No yard structure shall be located less than three feet from any rear property line adjacent to any common use easement or open space or recreational area which is at least ten feet deep. 6. for trellises, patio covers, gazebos, arbors, and similar structures, eaves or roofs may overhang into the required setback a maximum of one foot. Setbacks shall be measured from the nearest supporting member of the structure to the property line or, if the property line is at the toe of a slope, from the top of the slope. 7. Structures shall be constructed in a manner so as to prevent rooftop water from draining onto any adjacent parcel. 8. Lattice cross -members in patio covers or trellises shall be of minimum nominal 2" x 2" material, with maximum 2" spacing and maximum 24" span. 9.oxo river freIs; gaze _-or; sunilar structure, or comTvaon-�IieiceosTiall�cov�er more . - - - flaft p —fdeni oftlie yar areaGe weer the residence W71he rear frdhae.' 9.60.050 Storage and Other Accessory Buildings. A. Applicability. Accessory buildings, such as storage or gardening sheds, are permitted as accessory structures on a residential lot containing a primary residence subject to the requirements of this Section. (Carports and garages are regulated separately by Section 9.60.060., patio covers by Section 9.60.040; swimming pools and spas by Section 9.60.070, and recreational vehicle parking by Section 9.60.130.) B. Drainage from Roofs. Accessory structures shall be constructed in a manner so as to prevent rooftop water from draining onto any adjacent parcel. C. Lot Coverage Maximums. The placement of accessory structures on a lot shall not result in rr violation of the lot coverage maximums set forth in Section 9.50.030. D. Standards. 1. Maximum Number. No more than one such accessory building may be placed on any residential lot. 2. Maximum Size. No accessory building shall exceed 200 square feet in roof area. 3. Setbacks and Maximum Height. Attached accessory buildings shall comply with setback requirements for the main building. Detached accessory structures shall conform to the following setback standards: 28 [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS 9.60.120 Pets and Other Animals. In addition to the required setbacks for structures set forth in this Code for the applicable zoning district, all pens, cages (except dog runs), eorrais, stabs_.. and other structures specifically for keeping animals overnight, other than in the residence, shall be located at least 50 feet from any adjoining existing residential structure, or, if no residential structure exists, at least 50 feet from such areas where a residential structure may be legally located. Such areas may be defined by any combination of zoning setback requirements, easements or recorded CC&Rls. Notwithstanding th�rovisions of this Section, the keeping offioises shall be re�ulat�ed_liy Section 9.140.060 `E- uestrian'OverW IZegutado 9.60.130 Recreational Vehicle Parking. A. Purpose. Recreational vehicles may be parked of used for temporary habitation on residentially zoned property only in accordance with the provisions set forth in this Section. Recreation vehicles parked within a validly established recreation vehicle storage lot or park are exempt from the requirements of this Section. B. Definition. For purposes of this Code, a "recreational vehicle" or "RW shall mean any vesicle piacedo a�cas'6oar-bt otlxer .eiucleaa vehicle designed and used for temporary habitation, including motorhomes, travel trailers and camper shells. For purposes of this Section, "stored" shall mean the same as "parked". 01 •1 - - �( " 1 . 1 a•1 - • 11 • �1 1 V• I�.v+�..111 ' - 1 • 1 �i 1f17` 1 11 • �. •Hi iAN- •...il .,....- ' • 1 11 - 1 • • - i - _ • • • • • . • i • 1 . 1 • •W. ZM1 • wali""or. f bh5e. ,�ar ovary HafiitWorE 1. The panting tg of recreational vehicles for tenon is a temporary accessory use and is permitted only within the RVL, RL, and RC districts on lots with an existing dwelling, except that the Director may issue a minor use permit to use a recreational vehicle at a construction site for supervisory or guard personnel if the Director determines that such use would not adversely affect swTounding areas and where such use is in accordance with Section 9.60.210 (Construction and Guard Offices). 2. TJse� a tional�veluc f�f habitation.§ ali-iie tem�ora oitl a- &-ssaiQx teed se�ren�ve iFays: The RV shall not be used as by the resident or owner of the ict on witieh it is . a perirm ftt dwelling. PE • .. . [already stipulated in #1 above -- ' • N :s • • 36 [Hearing Draft. 5161961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS habitation-slialI conform to the parking location restrictions set forth in Paragraph C-ofthis Section: AV--- :.: ; f. M.7i, .: ... ... ,. .,:. ..tpz- - - - : --.• •..- -- is -• i : :• 4. The recreation vehicle shall be self-contained. No water, sewer or electrical connections are permitted. The operation of electric generators is not permitted. 5. Only one recreational vehicle used for temporary habitation is permitted at any one time in ais—o 6. The City may impose any additional conditions on the parking and use of the recreational vehicle deemed necessary by the City to protect the public health, safety and general welfare. 7. The residents and the owner of the main dwelling on the parcel where the recreational vehicle is parked shall be responsible for ensuring compliance of the vehicle with the requirements of this Section and shall be subject to any and all enforcement actions by the City for violations of municipal ordinances and codes relating to such recreational vehicle use. 8. Permit Procedures. a. Application. Prior to reationai vehiele onto the property, MiW no itation, the owner of the property vehicle. oibaitera n vhere-ffff teYparked shall apply for a minor use permit in accordance with Section 9.210.020. The application shall include the following information: 1) Address of dwelling where vehicle will be parked. 2) Name and address of vehicle owner/user. 3) Number of persons to inhabit vehicle. 4) Authorization of resident and/or property owner permitting the temporary use. 5) Description (make, model, year and color) and license number of the vehicle. 6) Location on the lot where vehicle will be parked. 7) Approval from the homeowners association, if applicable. b. Permit. After review of the application by the VMFriate Gity S Director- in accordance with Section 9.210.020, a permit may be granted for a period not to exceed seven consecutive days. False, fraudulent or misleading information on the application shall be grounds for denial. The permit shall be displayed in open view on the vehicle. c. Fees. A non-refundable fee shall be required at the time of application in accordance with the City's current fee schedule. 37 [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS d. Revocation of Permit. A permit may be revoked if it is determined by the City that the use of the RV constitutes a nuisance or is in violation of the Municipal Code. The vehicle shall be removed from the premises within 24 hours of issuance of such a notice of revocation. e. Enforcement. Use of a recreational vehicle for temporary habitation shall cease and the vehicle shall be removed from the property upon expiration or revocation of the applicable minor use permit or the parking and/or use of the vehicle shall be in violation of this Code. Every day that a violation continues to exist shall be deemed a separate violation subject to criminal prosecution or other appropriate legal action. 9.60.140 Screening. A. Parking Area Screening. Screening of common parking areas shall be provided for all residential projects in accordance with the requirements for nonresidential uses in Section 9.100.050. B. Equipment Screening. 1. Roof -Mounted Equipment. Roof -mounted utility and mechanical equipment, including but not limited to air conditioning, heating, restaurant exhaust fans, electrical elevator structures, roof accesses, etc., may be permitted only if screened per the following requirements: a. For flat roofs, a screened enclosure behind the parapet wall may be used if it is made to appear as an integral part of the building. For all roofs, screening shall be an integral part of the roof design and not appear as an afterthought. b. Such screening shall be provided so that the highest point of the equipment is below the surrounding architectural feature and is screened from view to a minimum horizontal sight distance of 1320 feet as viewed from a point five feet above finish grade, whichever provides the most screening. c. All roof mounted equipment shall be screened from view of surrounding two-story (or more) residential development and, where feasible as determined by the city, from two-story commercial and other types of development. 2. Ground -Mounted Equipment. Ground -mounted utility, mechanical, and pool or spa equipment shall be screened from ground view of surrounding properties. Such screening may consist of perimeter walls or fencing (if permitted), screen walls, or landscape planting. 3. Solar Equipment. Solar heating equipment, whether roof or ground -mounted shall be installed so that the underside of the equipment is not visible from surrounding properties. 4. Access Ladders. Wall -mounted exterior roof access ladders are prohibited unless screened from view by surrounding features. C. Facility Screening. Within multifamily and condominium projects, storage, trash, and loading areas shall be screened as follows: 38 Hearing Draft. 516196/ 9.60:.SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS expressly prohibited in all other districts. Further, the conversion of timeshare units to residential condominium uses is prohibited unless one hundred percent of the units in the development are converted simultaneously. 2. Timeshare facilities may include other uses, either as minor ancillary uses to the timeshare facility or independent facilities so long as the specific use is allowed by the underlying zone designation. Such uses shall meet all City laws and requirements. E. Development Standards. The following shall constitute the minimum development standards for timeshare facilities and the conversion of existing facilities to timeshare use. Additional requirements may be attached to a conditional use permit or other discretionary permit if found to be necessary to assure that the development is consistent with the purpose of this Section: 1: pens" ienstiy a fhe6 liareyroject s1�a-II1no� exceed7ffie'd`ensi�r�ermiiie3'fiv tiie y. �..� - Gen zaii R r - the'a irca zoning district.' _ _._.� 2. Setback; Height, and Lot Coverage. The minimum required setbacks and minimum height and lot coverage shall be those as established in the underlying zone designation. Additional setbacks and height and lot coverage restrictions may be required to ensure that the facility is adequately buffered from surrounding uses. 3. Parking. The minimum parking requirements for timeshare facilities shall be those required by law for hotel/motel uses, plus requirements for ancillary uses (for example, restaurants and shops). Other uses which are included in the facility, but which are not ancillary uses, shall meet all requirements of this Code. Additional parking may be required if the design of the facility and units indicates that additional parking is necessary. 4. Signs. The sign requirements shall be those as established by Chapter 9.160. •' 5. Management. The management of a timeshare facility shall be in accordance with the requirements established by the California Department of Real Estate for timeshare uses. An on -site manager is required. 6. Required Facilities. The provision of facilities, amenities, or design features usually associated with hotels/motels (e.g. lobbies, check-in,area, registration desks, service closets, laundry facilities) shall be required to ensure that the timeshare facility will adequately function as a hotel/motel. F. Conversions to Timeshare Uses. The following standards shall apply to conversions of existing facilities to timeshare uses: The conversion of any type of existing unit or facility to timeshare use shall be subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. Conversions shall be evaluated in terms of the physical suitability of the units or facilities for timeshare use. Items to be considered shall include, without limitation, the general maintenance and upkeep of the structures; general physical 55 (Hearing Draft: 51&961 9.60: SUPPLEMENTAL RESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS a certified list of the names and addresses of all tenants residing in the project proposed to be converted at the time the application is filed, whether or not the unit in which the tenant resides will be converted; (4) A comprehensive list of all improvements, upgrading, and additional facilities proposed; and (5) A report describing all repairs and replacements needed, if any, to bring all structures into substantial compliance with the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Housing Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Fire Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, and any other building related codes as modified and adopted by the City. 2. The information required by this section shall be reviewed by the Community Development Director, who will require its revision and resubmittal if found to be inadequate or incomplete. if4VLll �iVJ AO &"O{ 0"UAAJ L6LV , YJT KEiA VWA I - - W V WW- --- --- --- ...-.J , -- at it iater—date: Approval shall be subject to the required documentation being received, and the failure of an applicant to submit such documentation shall be grounds for disapproval. H. Required Notice. Public notice shall be given for all conditional use permits associated with timeshare facilities as required by this Code. In addition, in the event an apartment or condominium facility or any portion thereof is proposed to be converted to a timeshare facility, written notice shall be mailed to all persons residing in the facility, whether or not the unit in which the person resides will be converted, not less than ten days prior to the Planning Commission hearing. Such notice shall be mailed by the Planning Department at the expense of the applicant, and shall state the following: 1. The date, time, place, and purpose of the hearing; 2. Notification that if the permit is approved, tenants may be required to vacate the premises; 3. Notification that if the permit is approved, the property owner will be required to give all tenants a minimum of one hundred twenty days' notice to vacate. However, such notice shall not restrict the exercise of lawful remedies pertaining to, but not limited to, tenants' defaults in the payment of rent or defacing or destruction of all or a part of the rented premises; and 4. A description of any available relocation benefits to be provided by the project applicant. I. Required Findings. In addition to the requirements for findings of fact as established by California law or other provisions of this Code, the approval of a conditional use permit for a timeshare facility shall require the following additional findings: 58 CHAPTER 9.65: THE VILLAGE Sections: 9.65.010 Introduction..................................... 1 9.65.020 VC Village Core District ........................... 2 9.65.030 VP Village Park District ........................... 5 9.65.040 VS Village South District .......................... 8 9.65.050 VN ViIlage North District ......................... 11 9.65.060 VT Tampico Urban Mix District ................... 13 9.65.070 General Development Standards ................... 15 9.65.080 Grouping of Permitted Uses ....................... 18 9.65.090 Table of Permitted Uses .......................... 23 9.65.100 Design and Development Review ................... 28 9.65.110 Supplemental Village Regulations .................. 29 9.65.120 VR Village Residential District .................... 30 9.65.010 Introduction. A. Role of Village Specific Plan. 1. The Specific Plan for the Village at La Quinta, initially adopted February 2, 1988, is referred to in this Code by the abbreviation "Village Specific Plan" or "VSP". 2. This Chapter and all other Chapters and Sections cited herein shall be applied, construed, and used as if the Village Specific Plan were itself incorporated into this Code. 3. The provisions of this Chapter regulating uses and structures within the Village zoning districts are intended to be consistent with the provisions of the Village Specific Plan. Land uses and development proposed within the Village districts shall be designed and evaluated according to the VSP. This Chapter and this Zoning Code provide the administrative framework within which the VSP is to be implemented. -�a F'�i •i� t� = iiif i�iF1 :N � f ri�tarta t a �i� •`�w �ti —i T. �f � � I <� :i�' � • ;4 ak'A:" • C. Purpose and Intent. 1. To enhance the Village area as the center of a year-round commercial, residential, recreational, and community government center in accordance with the General Plan and the Village at La Quinta Specific Plan. The Village districts include the areas designated Village Commercial and Urban Mix on the General Plan. Permitted land uses include those which create a unique, dynamic pedestrian -oriented center in the Village area, including specialty commercial, dining establishments, art galleries, professional offices, and neighborhood commercial uses. In the Tampico "urban mix" area, the above uses are intended to be integrated with high density residential uses in a distinctly urban environment which, complements the other Village areas. [Hearing Draft. 5161951 9.65: THE VILLAGE 2. The Village is the "downtown" of La Quinta. The Village Specific Plan Quinta is intended to create the focused "sense of place" for the continued evolution and development of this downtown. This Chapter is designed to guide the development of the downtown in keeping with the VSP by providing a structured variety of commercial and limited residential land uses and specific development standards. To capitalize on the locational trends already established, these land uses are arranged in particular patterns, mixes, and configurations in separate districts within the Village. To guide and support each pattern of land uses, detailed development standards are also prescribed for each Village district.. 3. The five Village districts included in this Chapter are intended work together to establish an identifiable locus for the provision of goods, services and housing. The Village districts are thus designed to serve four particular market segments: (1) residents of housing within, adjacent to, and a reasonable distance from the Village; (2) residents and guests of the larger La Quinta community; (3) other commercial entities located within the Village commercial area; and (4) tourists and visitors to La Quinta. 4. In providing goods, services, and housing, the permitted land uses and structures are intended to support the thematic emphases of the Village: (1) a desert oasis; (2) consistency with La Quinta's local historic architectural vernacular; (3) a pedestrian scale; (4) an arts theme. 9.65.020 VC Village Core District. A. Purpose and Intent. To provide for an intense concentration of commercial activity in a predominantly pedestrian environment consistent with the Village Specific Plan. B. Permitted Uses. Sections 9.65.080 and 9.65.090 specify the land uses allowed in each Village district. For some groups of uses, modifications or special conditions may be required to ensure the compatibility of the group of uses with other uses within or adjacent to this district. r C. Accessory Uses. In addition to the accessory uses permitted per Section 9.65.090, the following accessory use shall be permitted within the VC district: 1. Outdoor displays, sales, service, and minor entertainment, provided that: a. Merchandise displayed or sold and services are permitted uses in the VC district; b. Sales and service are conducted by entities having a valid current City business license; c. Minor entertainment is provided by groups of five or fewer performers without electronic amplification; performances having a duration of no more than 15 minutes in any one location or within a 50-foot radius, the hours of minor entertainment falling between 9 a.m. and 9 p.m.; d. All such outdoor displays, sales, service, or minor entertainment takes place on private 2 [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.65: THE VILLAGE 9.65.120 VR Village Residential District. A. Purpose and Intent. To provide for single family and multifamily residential land uses adjacent to Village commercial zones, to foster housing and associated uses which contribute to the arts theme of the Village, and to provide special opportunities for off -site parking and pedestrianways which support the pedestrian -oriented nature of the Village, all in accordance with the Village Specific Plan and Policy No. 2-5.1.5 of the General Plan. B. Permitted Uses. Permitted uses in the VR district shall be as follows: 1. Single-family detached dwellings, which comply with requirements and standards of the 06yeflKesfdw7fiiLT-'distd- �, 0.050). 2. All other residential uses at densities (including a variety of housing types. single-family attached, duplexes, triplexes, quadraplexes, townhouses, and other multi -unit dwelling groups), which comply with requirements and standards of this Section. C. Accessory Uses. The following uses are permitted if accessory to principal residential uses: 1. Artist's studios for personal artistic production (but not including commercial presentation or sale to the public on -site), with no employees other than family members or artistic models. Studios may be attached to dwelling units or detached. 2. On -site parking for residential uses and customers of studios/galleries. 3. On -site signs, affixed to building walls, stating the name of the residential structure. complying with Chapter 9.160 (Signs). -r D. Conditional Uses. The following uses are permitted if a conditional use permit is approved per Section 9.210.020. 1. Parking lots for nonresidential uses off -site in acciidxnce�econ:ISD�, d s, s WIMM 2. Second Units ("Granny Housing") iiit Lecordance *.i Sectioh 9:60.090: E. Development Standards. Building Height. For single family detached, 17 feet in accordance with RC district standards. For all uses other than single-family detached residential, the building height limit shall be two stories, up to 30 feet. 2. Setbacks and Other Standards. setbacks, lot areal and other stan&&H shall-conffirnrto the 30 (Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.65: THE VILLAGE RC district development standards as set forth in Section 9.30.050. F. Parking. Parking shall be provided as required by Chapter 9.150 and shall comply with the design standards of the village as described in the Village Specific Plan. Parking lots shall provide pedestrian ways, landscaping, lighting, and screening arrangements meeting design standards. G. Pedestrianways. All development (other than single-family detached residential units on individual lots) shall provide a paved pedestrian walkway along the front and side rights -of -way. Where space is available within the right-of-way between the edge of the ultimate pavement width and the right-of-way line, the pedestrian walkway shall be placed within the right-of-way. Otherwise, a pedestrian walkway easement shall be provided by the development. Walkways shall be in such locations, at such widths, and paved with such materials as are determined necessary for public safety by the City Engineer. H. Design Standards. 1. All structures and uses other, than single-family detached residential on individual lots are subject to the Village design review standards and procedures per Section 9.65.100 2. Single-family detached residences on individual lots shall conform to the RC Cove Residential District standards. I. Guest Houses. I t< of guest libtises or uuarlers afficbe of accord ri Secttiioh 9:�i TifO' J. Patio Covers and Accessory Buildings. Patio covers and "accessoryudiiigs sfi�alI be"ia%d by, Sectgeris 9:�7W&19 60.050. r K. Landscaping. 1. The front yard of all lots and the street sideyard of comer lots shall be landscaped up to the property line, edge of curb, sidewalk, or edge of street pavement, whichever is furthest from the residence. 2. All landscaping shall include trees (minimum two fifteen -gallon trees on interior lots and five fifteen -gallon trees on comer lots), shrubs. and groundcover and/or hardscape of sufficient size, spacing, and variety to create an attractive and unifying appearance. Landscaping shall be in substantial compliance with the standards set forth in the Manual on Architectural Standards and the Manual on Landscaping Standards as adopted by the Planning Commission. 3. A permanent water -efficient irrigation system shall be provided for all areas required to be landscaped. 31 [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.65: THE VILLAGE 4. All landscaping shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and viable condition by the property owner. L. 'Review Ffocess.-&provai of"a -Te development permit shall be recjuiied for new shigle family residences in accordance with Section 920:010. In addition, compatibility review maybe required for units in p-q i lleveloped subdivisi©ns: stlbiect to the criteria and-reguirements in Section 9.60.290. M. Minor and Major Design Deviations. The Community Development Director shall make the determination of whether a design deviation is major or minor using the following criteria: 1. A minor design deviation can be approved by the Director without a public hearing via i minor tine lion 3 I� "Minor design deviation" means a modification of an w>..rg1Pi.1 4r � su►..... approved architectural unit within a subdivision that involves items such as, but not limited to, less than five percent change in square footage of existing constructed or approved units, columns, dormer vents, window size changes, plant -on locations, color, and stucco texture changes. The Director may refer the minor design deviation to the Planning Commission for a non -hearing compatibility review. 2. Major design deviations shall be subject to the coiabit`ewuarocessin accoraa SeCn"0� A "major design deviation" consists of a five percent or more change in square footage of existing constructed or approved units; any exterior architectural modification not defined as a minor design deviation. Kea [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.80: PERMITTED NONRESIDENTIAL USES TABLE 9-5: PERMITTED USES IN NONRESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS P =Principal Use M = Minor Use Permit A = Accessary Use T =Temporary Use Permit C = Conditional Use Permit X = Prohibited Use DISTRICT c 2 mE M. °f Ep' : - _ EE o c z" @ 3E FE E E r r w. LAND USE CR CP CC CN CT I CO 1VIC Libraries and museums P X P C P P P Parks, unlighted playfields, and open space P P P P P P P Lighted playfields X X X X X X C Bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails P P P P P P P Indoor pistol or rifle ranges X C X X X X X Miniature golf/recreation centers C X X X C X X Assembly Uses Lodges, union halls, social clubs and senior citizen centers C C C C X X C Churches, temples and other places of worship C C C C X C X Mortuaries and funeral homes C C C X X X X Public and Semi -Public Uses Fire stations P P P P X P P Government offices and police stations P P P P P P P Communication towers and equipment, subject to Chapter 9.170 C C C C C C C Electrical substations 1Qt 1 1 X I X X N Water wells and pumping stations M PPI X X X 141 Reservoirs and water tanks X X IX X X X 1% Public flood control facilities and devices P P P P P P P Colleges and universities C X X X X X C Vocational schools, e.g. barber, beauty and similar C C C I X X C C Private elementary, intermediate and high schools C C C C C C C Private swim schools C X C X X X C [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.90: NONRESIDENTL4L DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TABLE 9-6o NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD CR* CP CC CN CT CO MC Min.- Max. Building Site (acres) n/a n/a 10 or mere 1-20 n/a n/a n/a n/a Max. Structure Height (ft.)' 50 35 40 35 1 40 40 1 40 Max. Number of Stories 4 2 3 2 3 3 3 Max. Floor Area Ratio (FAR)' .35 :2S .30 .25 .25 .30 n/a .50 From Highway 111 Right -of- 50/ 50/ 50/ n/a n/a n/a n/a Way (R/W)' 50 50 50 From all other Primary Image Corridor' Rights -of -Way' 30/ 20 30/ 20 30/ 20 30/ 20 30/ 20 30/ 20 30/ 20 Min. Perimeter From all other Perimeter Street Rights-of-Way 20/ 15 20/ 15 20/ 15 20/ 15 20/ 15 20/ 15 20/ 15 Building/ Landscape Setbacks (in ft.)4 From residential districts and PR, OS, & GC districts' 501 10 50/ 10 501 10 30/ 151 30/ 151 30/ 15 s 30/ 15 s From abutting commercial and 10/5 10/5 1015 10/5 10/5 10/5 10/5 other nonresidential property or districts' Min. setback from interior property lines 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 within the same project Parking and Signs See Chapters 9.150 and 9.160 Fences and Walls See Section 9.100.030 Landscaping and Screening See Sections 9.100.040 and 9.100.050 * Specific plan approval required for development or land division in the CR district. ' All min. perimeter setbacks shall be increased one foot for every foot in height that bldg. is above 35'. ' FAR means the gross floor area of all buildings divided by the building site area. ' The following are applicable Primary Image Corridors as identified in the General Plan: Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, Calle Tampico, Eisenhower Drive (from Tampico to Washington St.) 4 Landscape setback shall consist of landscaped area within the building setback. Number given is minimum landscaped setback from the street right-of-way. The remaining building setback may contain parking, driveways, and similar facilities. In addition to above landscape setbacks, interior landscaping shall be required as a percentage of the net project area as follows: parking areas: min. 15 percent; nonparking areas: min. 5 percent (also see Section 9.100.050). s For bldgs over one story in CN, CT and CO districts, setbacks shall be increased to 40/20. 15 [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.100: SUPPLEMENTAL NONRESIDENTIAL REGULATIONS a. Located within 250 feet of all businesses served by the enclosure. b. Directly available to collection vehicles via alleys or driveways to avoid the necessity of substantial hand carrying of containers or hand pushing of dumpsters; and, c. Located substantially away from public viewscape, pedestrian and vehicle circulation areas unless determined infeasible by the decision -making authority. 2. Enclosure Design. Enclosures shall be constructed on a concrete pad sloped to drain under the gate. Enclosures shall be of an adequate size to accommodate the containers they enclose per disposal company and City standards. Access to the containers for collection shall also meet disposal company requirements. Enclosure walls shall be at least six feet high and shall be made of strong, durable materials consistent with the colors and finishes of nearby buildings. Doors shall be self -latching, metal or metal -framed, and of heavy duty construction sufficient to withstand hard usage. Interior concrete or metal curbs shall be included to prevent damage to the enclosures walls from collisions with large, heavy containers. Decorative overhead structures such as trellises shall be integrated into the design if the enclosure is visible from higher terrain. E. Weather Protection. Each enclosure or individual container shall be designed and maintained so that deposited materials are contained during windy periods. Enclosures or containers designated for recyclable materials which could be damaged or be rendered unmarketable by rain or other environmental conditions shall provide adequate protection against such conditions. F. Maintenance.Each enclosure shall be maintained to preserve its appearance and function and to minimize litter, odor and other nuisances. Trash and recyclables shall be collected regularly. rr 9.100.210 Noise Control. A. Purpose. The noise control standards for nonresidential land use districts set forth in this Section are established to prevent excessive sound levels which are detrimental to the public health, welfare and safety or which are contrary to the public interest. B. Noise Standards. Exterior noise standards are set forth below. Residential property, schools, hospitals, and churches are considered noise sensitive land uses, regardless of the land use district in which they are located. All other uses shall comply with the "Other Nonresidential' standard. All noise measurements shall be taken using�fhoise measurin_ gmstruments: Measurements shall be taken within the receiving property at locations determined by Director to be most appropriate to the individual situation. 43 [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.100: SUPPLEMENTAL NONRESIDENTL4L REGULATIONS EXTERIOR NOISE STANDARDS Receiving Land Use Noise Standard Time Period Noise Sensitive 35 60 dB(A) 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. 50 dB(A) 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m. Other Nonresidential 6§ 75 dB(A) 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. 60 65 dB(A) 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m. If the noise consists entirely of impact noise, simple tone noise, speech or music, or any combination thereof, each of the noise levels specified in the table in this Section shall be reduced by five dB(A). -C. Noise Limits. It shall be unlawful for any person at any location within the City to create any noise, or to allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied or otherwise controlled by such person, when such noise causes the noise level, when measured on any adjacent property, to exceed: 1. The noise standard for a cumulative period of more than 30 minutes in any hour; 2. The noise standard plus five dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than 15 minutes in any hour; 3. The noise standard plus ten dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than five minutes in any hour; 4. The noise standard plus 15 dB(A) for a cumulative period of more than one minute in any hour; or 5. The noise standard plus 20 dB(A) for any period of time. 6. For purposes of this Section, the term cumulative period means the number of minutes that a noise occurs within any hour, whether such minutes are consecutive or not. D. Ambient Noise Level. If the ambient or background noise level exceeds any of the preceding noise categories, no increase above such ambient noise level shall be permitted. E. Exemptions. The following are exempt from the noise restrictions of this Section: 1. Emergency vehicles or other emergency operations. 2. City maintenance, construction, or similar activities. CHAPTER 9.110 SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS ....................... 1 9.110.010 Summary of District Regulations .............................. 1 9.110.020 Types of Special Purpose Districts ............................. 1 9.110.030 PR Parks and Recreation District .............................. 2 9.110.040 GC Golf Course District ..................................... 2 9.110.050 OS Open Space District ..................................... 2 9.110.060 FP Floodplain District ...................................... 2 9.110.070 HC Hillside Conservation Overlay District ...................... 3 9.110.080 SOB Sexually Oriented Business Overlay District ................ 5 9:I0 U90 EOD Equestrn`IIIi"Iav District .............................. 5 CHAPTER 9.120 SPECIAL PURPOSE PERMITTED USES ................ 6 9.120.010 Development Permits Required ............................... 6 9.120.020 Table of Permitted Uses ..................................... 6 CHAPTER 9.130 SPECIAL PURPOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ...... 9 9.130.010 Table of Development Standards .............................. 9 CHAPTER 9.140 SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIAL PURPOSE REGULATIONS . 10 9.140.010 Purpose and Intent ........................................ 10 9.140.020 PR, GC, and OS Regulations ................................ 10 9.140.030 FP Floodplain Regulations .................................. 10 9.140.040 HC Hillside Conservation Regulations ........................ 11 9.140.050 SOB Sexually Oriented Business Regulations ................... 20 9' MOW ]LOU Ikuy Regulations �` � `�'� " y, � -2 , CHAPTER 9.110 SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS Sections: 9.110.010 Summary of District Regulations ..................... 1 9.110.020 Types of Special Purpose Districts .................... 1 9.110.030 PR Parks and Recreation District ..................... 2 9.110.040 GC Golf Course District ............................ 2 9.110.050 OS Open Space District ............................. 2 9.110.060 FP Floodplain District .............................. 2 9.110.070 HC Hillside Conservation Overlay District ............. 3 9.110.080 SOB Sexually Oriented Business Overlay District ....... 5 9.110.090 EOD Equestrian Overlay District ..................... 5 9.110.010 Summary of District Regulations. A. Purpose. This Chapter contains the purpose and intent of each special purpose district together with a summary of the zoning regulations. applicable to each. B. Permitted Uses. Chapter 9.12.0 specifies the land uses allowed in each nonresidential district. C. Development Standards. Development standards (such as setbacks and building heights) for special purpose districts are summarized in this Chapter 9.110 and in Chapter 9.130. D. Supplemental Regulations. 1. Special Purpose Supplemental Regulations. Chapter 9.140 contains supplemental regulations for each special purpose district, such as hillside conservation regulations, flood hazard reduction requirements, and restrictions on sexually oriented businesses. 2. General Supplemental Regulations. General supplemental regulations pertaining to special purpose districts shall be the same as those for nonresidential districts as set forth in Chapter 9.60. Parking shall conform to Chapter 9.150 and Signs to Chapter 9.160. 9.110.020 Types of Special Purpose Districts. A. Base Districts. The PR, GC, OS, and FP districts are base districts designed to provide for park and recreation, golf course, and open space land uses respectively. B. Overlay Districts. The HC, SOB, and EOD districts are overlay districts, i.e. districts to be used only in combination with a base district (such as the OS Open Space or CR Regional Commercial districts) in order to regulate certain special aspects of land use in the interests of public safety and protection of surrounding properties. In cases where there is a conflict between the regulations of an overlay district and its underlying base district, the overlay district regulations shall control. C. Overlay Zoning Designations. When an overlay district is used, the zoning designation shall consist of the base district symbol followed by the applicable overlay district symbol enclosed in parentheses. For example: CR (EM. [Hearing Draft 5161951 9.110: SPECL4L PURPOSE DISTRICTS specifically, the HC district applies to land meeting the criteria for being above "the toe of the slope," as defined in Section 9.140.040, within the following Sections of land (San Bernardino Base and Meridian) within the City: a. T5S, R7E: Sections 19, 30; b. T5S, R6E: Section 36, 25; c. T6S, R6E: Sections 1, 12, 13, 24, 25; d. T6S, R7E: Sections 6, 7, 8, 17, 18, 19, 20, 28, 29, 30, 33; e. T7S, R7E: Sections 4, 5. 2. The provisions of this Section shall also apply to each and every parcel of land within the City (without otherwise being noted on exhibit or map which is added to the City by annexation, dedication, or other means) meeting the criteria for being above "the toe of the slope", as defined in Section 9.140.040. 9.110.080 SOB Sexually Oriented Business Overlay District. A. Purpose and Intent. To designate specific areas where sexually oriented businesses may locate if a conditional use permit is approved and to establish strict standards for the establishment and operation of such sexually oriented businesses in order to ensure that adverse effects caused by their operational characteristics do not contribute to the blighting or downgrading of surrounding areas. B. Development Standards. Development standards for the SOB overlay district shall be as provided in the underlying CR Regional Commercial base district regulations, subject to the additional requirements of the SOB district as set forth in Section 9.140.050. C. District Boundaries. The SOB overlay district includes those parcels located in whole or in part within 600 feet of the centerline of State Highway 111. • i�iisl �i��, �i��-"�•�t�1�i •"��i�,�i�.rs�:i� • • • � 4►�"r..i,�:�i+.i`lij• :. �t i1 • "e :i�'� ' � :�ii:� • �+� ..:5ii •I • . �ia� ii��'i�iiiii �: • - • • • _ii�it"ii`" • • • • � • ' �i i� dr"�� Lei ii� i ii',•' ••_n-• •. • • •- •i • � • • -ir. �: :. •i • • • •i ur+7 .y + r • . •ii ►• « �S7G. • • • • • • i• . iii • • + tt au • • it 4 C-Disp1arB idaries. 'Me boWun-rids of the EOD over4Tdistddt-sliall'be as shown on -the OfciaYZvpa CHAPTER 9.120 SPECIAL PURPOSE PERMITTED USES Sections: 9.120.010 Development Permits Required ...................... 6 9.120.020 Table of Permitted Uses ............................. 6 9.120.010 Development Permits Required. Table 9-8 of this Section specifies whether a use or structure is permitted within a zoning district. However, in most cases development to establish a land use requires approval of a site development permit and/or other permits as set forth in Chapter 9.210. 9.120.020 Table of Permitted Uses. Table 9-8, "Permitted Uses in Special Purpose Districts", following, specifies those uses and structures which are permitted within each special purpose district. The letters in the columns beneath the district designations mean the following: 1. "P": Permitted as a principal use within the district. 2. "A": Permitted only if accessory to the principal use on the site. 3. "C": Permitted as a principal or accessory use if a conditional use permit is approved. 4. `r': Permitted on a temporary basis if a temporary use permit is approved. 5. "X": Prohibited in the district. TABLE 94: PERMI'mb USES IN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS P = Permitted:Use C ^ Conditibnai Use Permit A -Accessory Use T. - Temporary Use Permit X= Prohibited Use . DISTRICT 4J as o a N X C o p '_ fi3 Q rp. a' L�AhTD USE `< PR GC OS FP HC* SOB* EOD* Open Space and Recreational Uses Open sace P I P P P P P *' Public parks, lakes and passive recreation facilities P X P P P x ** Playfields, lighted or unlighted P X X X X X Bicycle, equestrian and hiking trails P X P P P P *" Libraries and museums C X X X C x ** Visitor centers C X C I C C x * Uses are subject to the additional requirements of the overlay district as set forth in Chapter 9.140. ** A_c underi-v"in`a'1 `d siridi ict and in Section-9-34T.060: 31 (Hearing Draft. 5161951 9.120: SPECL4L PURPOSE PERW ITED USES TABLE 9-8: PERMITTED USES IN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS DISTRICT P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use Permit A =Accessory Use T - Temporary Use Permit C. CL 28 to ; a y d X=Prohibited Use a U o 0 _ clu a= a m LAND USE PR GC OS FP HC* SOB* EOD* Clubhouses and community ools/cabanas P A X X X X " Tennis courts or complexes, public P A X X X X Tennis clubs or complexes, private C A X X X X Golf courses and country clubs, including clubhouses C P X X X X and other customary accessory uses. Golf courses without above -ground structures, C P X P C X ** including fairways, greens, tees, and golf -cart paths Accessory Uses and Structures Signs, subject to Chapter 9.160 A A A A A A Fences and walls, subject to § 9.100.030 A A A A A A Satellite dish and other antennas, subject to § A A A A A A " Temporary Uses Tern orate outdoor events, subject to § 9.100.040 T ET T T T X ** Other Uses " Single family residential X X X X C` X '* Multifamily residential, commercial (except sexually X X X X X X oriented businesses), office, or industrial development Sexually oriented businesses, subject to § 9.140.050 X X X X X C Communication towers and equipment, subject to C C C X C' X "' Chapter 9.170 Electrical substations X X M X M` X * Uses are subject to the additional requirements of the overlay district as set forth in Chapter 9.140. **' °iteif �a t� umd�rI •-dtsict and in Section 9:i�tT:06t1: P_.. _ ..._w _�. �.R. _ ' Allowed only if permitted in the underlying base district and only if the additional requirements of the HC overlay district are met (per Section 9.140.040) and a conditional use permit is approved. [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.120: SPECIAL PURPOSE PERMITTED USES TABLE 9-8: PERMITTED USES IN SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICTS DISTRICT P = Permitted Use C = Conditional Use Permit ° o e: A = Accessory Use T = Temporary, Use Permit P d ° �' '.� d V `° & 2 t C y m X =Prohibited Use 0 'a o N 4 C- _ r o o cr o' a: , m w LAND USE PR GC OS FP HC* SOB* EOD* Water wells and pumping stations P P P P M' X Water tanks and reservoirs X M M X M' X Public flood control facilities and devices P P P P P P Other principal, accessory or temporary uses not Director or Planning Commission listed above. to determine whether use is permitted in accordance with § 9.20.040. * Uses are subject to the additional requirements of the overlay district as set forth in Chapter 9.140. 'ct and in S�ecit_oi �_ �_ 64}, _� ' Allowed only if permitted in the underlying base district and only if the additional requirements of the HC overlay district are met (per Section 9.140.040) and a conditional use permit is approved. CHAPTER 9.130 SPECIAL PURPOSE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9.130.010 Table of Development Standards. Table 9-9, following, contains standards for development of property within special purpose districts: TABLE 9-9: SPECIAL PURPOSE DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT STANDARD DISTRICT PR GC. OS FP HC SOB EOD Min. Building Site n/a n/a n/a * * * * * * ' *, Max. Structure Height (ft.) 28 28 1 28 * ** *** *** Max. Number of Stories 2 2 2 * * * * * * *** Min. From Perimeter Street R.O.W.'s Perimeter Building From abutting residential property Setbacks or districts (ft.) From abutting commercial and other nonresidential property or districts 30 30 30 * ** *** ** 30 30 30 20 20 20 Min. setback from interior property lines. within the same project 0 0 0 * As requited.fvr needed flood control structures. ** As provided in HC supplemental regulations, Section 9.140.040.. *** As provided.imthe underlying base: district regulations, subject to the additional requirements of the overlay. district: SOB, Seed& 9.140.050; EOD}Section 9.140.060. wing and Signs. See Chapters 9:150 and 9.160 Fences and Walls See Section 9.100.030 Landscaping .and Screening See Sections 9.100.040 and 9.100.050 I Draft: 5161951 9.140: SUPPLEMENTAL SPECL4L PURPOSE REGULATIONS B. Permit Required. Prior to establishment or transfer of a Sexually Oriented Business, all provisions of Chapter 5.80 of the Municipal Code shall be met including obtaining the required permit. C. Boundaries of SOB Overlay District. 1. Areas of the City hereby designated as being within the Sexually Oriented Business (SOB) Overlay Zone are those parcels located in whole or in part within six hundred feet from the centerline of State Highway 111. 2. The zoning designation for the parcel shall constitute the base or underlying district and the SOB designation shall constitute an overlay district. In the event of conflicting provisions between the underlying zone and the SOB overlay district regulations, the requirements and restrictions of the SOB overlay district shall take precedence over the requirements of the underlying district. 9.140.060 EOD Equestrian Overlay Regulations. B. Definitions. The following definitions apply in the Equestrian Overlay District: 1. "Accessory building" means any building su r iM to a permitted or conditionally permitted equestrian use, including but not limited to hay and tack barns, stables and other structures and uses customarily appurtenant to the primary permitted use. w.,_. I► �, J"77 1eirz sw ii"�i3ft�i " ttr iea! �s7��ti�tti it `zltoxr• :.Aeii5�r � � �±t �� t ..ttt t.-tY•ttitk-Y � �" , n vs��arsi "o*�i PeTJ t t:f±,eKaYitii1 t iii :�r`�i • t :i • i t ifai�'i ''�a"" � t - te�,<fS �aii�s • - � � riff i 3. "Arena" means an enclosure physically similar to a corral, designed and constructed so as to be used for conducting equine -related entertainment and events open to the public, including but not limited to rodeos, polo matches, riding shows and exhibitions, etc. 4. "Commercial stable" means any facility specifically designed or used for the stabling of equine animals not owned by the residents of the subject property, for purposes such as on- 21 [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.140: SUPPLEMENTAL SPEC2AL PURPOSE REGULATIONS site breeding, boarding, training, riding or other recreational use as a commercial service to the owners of said animals. 5. "Corral" means an enclosure designed for use as an open holding area for horses for the purpose of confinement within that area for an indeterminate period of time. 6. "Pasture" means an enclosed holding area consisting of grass or similar vegetation, specifically used for purposes of grazing or feeding of animals. 7. "Riding academy" means a facility designed and used primarily for recreational riding, training and instruction purposes, and allowing both on -site boarding or trailering of horses to the facility. 8. "Stable" means a building or structure containing multiple stalls for the purposes of sheltering, feeding, boarding, accommodating or otherwise caring for several horses at one time. 9. "Stall" means a division of a stable accommodating one horse into an adequately sized enclosure for the purpose of confining individual horses within a sheltered environment as may be necessary for security, safety or other reasons pertinent to the health, welfare and daily care of each animal. C. Principal Uses. Principal uses permitted in the equestrian overlay district shall be as follows: 1. Any use permitted, either expressly or by Conditional Use Permit, in the underlying zone; r 2. The keeping of horses (including ponies or llamas) for personal use of the residents of the property only, not to include any activities beyond that necessary to continue the residents personal use. This may include limited breeding and boarding activities of a non - compensatory nature, such as for other family members' personal use. This may include limited breeding and boarding activities of a non -compensatory nature, such as for other family members' personal use. Up to two horses shall be allowed on a minimum one acre parcel. For parcels in excess of one acre, up to three horses per additional acre or portion thereof, shall be allowed.. Foals under one year of age shall not be counted in the maximum number of horses permitted; 3. Accessory buildings and sixu res, including stables, corrals, barns, tack rooms, exercise rings, hay barns, and other buildings and structures customarily appurtenant to a permitted use; 22 [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.140: SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIAL PURPOSE REGULATIONS 4. Farm projects (Future Farms, 4-H or similar projects) conducted by the residents of the premises. Such projects shall involve only the permitted type and number of animals by this ordinance being trained in connection with the education of a person as a member of a recognized farm education organization; 5. Caretakers and employee housing for on -site employment, providing that the unit does not exceed one thousand square feet and conforms to the setbacks in the underlying zone. D. Conditional Uses. The following uses are permitted if a conditional use permit is approved per Chapter 9.210.020: 1. Commercial stables and riding academies, as defined in thus S tr6h. 2. Arenas for the purpose of conducting events such as rodeos and other equestrian -oriented entertainment. 3. Veterinary offices or hospitals, when established on the same parcel as the principal residence, provided that only temporary boarding facilities may be established for purposes of boarding sick or injured animals, and that animals not permitted in the underlying zone may not remain at the facility. E. Development Standards. The following development standards generally apply to all properties in the Equestrian Overlay district. Commercial equestrian facilities/uses may be subject to more restrictive requirements through the conditional use process 1. t accessory buildings shall be limited to two stories in height and a maximum of 35 feet, measured from finish grade of the pad. 2. The following minimum setback requirements shall apply: a. Pastures shall not require any setback. However, if a pasture does not extend to a property line, a minimum 10-foot setback shall be provided. b. Accessory buildings (barns, stalls, etc.) Shall maintain 25 feet from non -overlay property lines and 10' from overlay property lines. c. Accessory st jjg! � shall maintain 35 feet from any non -overlay properties. A 10-foot setback from adjacent overlay property lines shall be maintained. d. Arenas shall be reviewed for appropriate setback and design as part of the conditional use permit process, as they are not considered accessory uses to residential equestrian. Generally, arenas shall maintain a minimum 75-foot setback from any property line. e. Manure storage. containers shall be set back a minimum of 50 feet from any non -overlay property line and 20 feet from other property lines. f. Manure spreading areas shall not be established within 25 feet of any property line. 23 Draft: 5161951 9.140: SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIAL PURPOSE REGULATIONS g. No accessory building, use or operation described in this Paragraph E.2. shall be established or conducted within 80' of any residential structure. 3. Fencing. a. Pasture and corral areas, as well as all open areas abutting non -equestrian properties, shall consist of fencing at least five feet high and of such construction as to confine the animals. Fences which are on property lines or are adjoining and running parallel to private streets or bridle trails, shall be three -rail, with a minimum height of five feet from grade, and posts spaced not more than ten feet apart. All posts shall be n0ftinai four inches by nominal six inches minimum, with two inch by norrunat six inch minimum rails. This section shall not apply to property lines along any street identified and shown on the circulation element of the general plan, where specific sound attenuation is necessary based on an approved acoustic study prepared for a subdivision map. b. Fencing requirements of this Section shall take precedence in the event of any conflicts with the provisions of Section 9.060.030 (Fences and Walls), for properties keeping horses within the Equestrian Overlay district. 4. Dust Control. Corrals, stables, exercise rings and arenas,s'firlie shall be regularly sprinklered or otherwise treated to a degree so as to prevent the emanation of dust, and in addition, all accumulation of manure, mud or refuse shall be eliminated so as to prevent the breeding of flies. Any open areas shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter 6.16 whenever applicable. All nuisance water runoff must be detained on the subject property. 5. Manure Collection. Removal and treatment of manure must occur on a regular basis so as to promote the health, safety and welfare of residents and visitors to the area in accordance with the following standards: a. Stalls shall be cleaned on a daily basis. Straw, hay, sawdust or other bedding materials may be stored or composted for later disposal, but shall not be spread w2!m over open areas. b. Manure shall be collected ftm all. source a.e daily and may be stored for later disposal in an enclosed container of adequate size. e�'ii�i" estba-_ ;at -- - _-,-,►,r.;�.,,a �,..,,�� .�n t;a. from the nronertv within seven days. c. Manure to be used for composting purposes shall be placed -in an appropriately designed composting bin in order to properly decompose and eliminate parasites. O"y 24 [Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.140: SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIAL PURPOSE REGULATIONS composted manure may be used in any spreading operation. d. Spreading of manure may only occur in conjunction with commercial equestrian uses, and must be conducted over an adequately sized area capable of assimilating the nutrients in the spread material. Such an area may only be operated as part of overall disposal and treatment program approved by ihe. City or established as part of a Conditional Use Permit application. e. Method for removal of manure from the property is at the owner's discretion. Off -site delivery to agricultural or related operations for fertilizer use Na permitted. On -site use of composted material is permitted in new or established vegetated areas, such as gardens, landscaping, re-establishment of pasture vegetation, etc. f. Any condition that results in odors, unsightly areas or infestation shall be deemed a public nuisance and/or health hazard and shall be abated within seven days of proper notice. All violations are subject to enforcement provisions of the La Quinta Municipal Code and applicable County health codes. 6. Parking. Parking shall be provided as required by Chapter 9.150, and shall be based upon the overall use of the property or as required by an approved Conditional Use Permit. 7. Lighting. Any proposed lighting must comply with Sections 9.60.160 and 9.100.150 (Outdoor Lighting). Lighting of equestrian and related activity areas shall not occur beyond 9 p.m. unless otherwise specified by an approved conditional use permit. This restriction does not pertain to general area and yard lighting associated with a primary residential use on equestrian property. 8. Loudspeakers. Loudspeaker systems or other amplified sound are limited to operation or use between 8 a.m. and 9 p.m. unless otherwise specified by an approved conditional use permit. F. Review and Approval Process. Equestrian uses, buildings, and structures shall be reviewed in accordance with the following procedures: 1. Accessory buildings, detached or attached, as defined in this Section: a. Up to four hundred square feet for each building or structure, to be reviewed with the building permit application for approval by the Community Development Director; 25 (Hearing Draft: 5161951 9.140: SUPPLEMENTAL SPECL4L PURPOSE REGULATIONS b. Over four hundred square feet to be reviewed through the site development permit procedures of Section 9.21TO10, by the Planning Commission. 2. All other permitted buildings are subject to the process identified for the underlying base district and this Section. 3. Conditional Uses Permits. a. Conditional uses shall be required to obtain a conditional use permit in accordance with the procedures outlined in Chapters 9.200 (General Permitting Procedures) and 9.210 (Development Review Permits). All uses, buildings and structures identified in F i a-�I pig existing prior to the effective date of this Section shall be considered as nonconformities in accordance with Chapter 9.270 (Nonconformities). Property owners of all such uses, structures and buildings shall file a site plan for the entire facility with the Community Development Department within 30 days of the effective date of this b. In addition to information required for a conditional use permit application filed pursuant to Chapter 9.210, the following information shall be submitted for conditional uses proposed in the EOD overlay district: 1) A proposed program for storage, treatment and removal of manure produced by the operation. 2) A Fugitive Dust Control Plan, as required by Chapter 6.16 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, addressing control of dust and identification of all potential dust sources. 3) Proposed or potential tentative scheduling of any events or other activities which may produce impacts beyond the scope of the proposed use's routine operations. 26 (Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.150: PARKING e. To guarantee a two-year proof period, the land for additional parking is reserved or optioned and a bond or acceptable equivalent mechanism (in favor of the City) is posted to cover the costs plus ten percent for acquiring the land and constructing the credited parking spaces for a period of two years from the commencement of the last joint use at one hundred percent capacity, or until such time prior to the expiration of the two-year period as the City elects to release the guarantee pursuant to the conditions of approval; f. An program of data gathering to document the actual parking demand claimed during the trial period is implemented to the satisfaction of the City. 9.150.080 Parking Facility Design Standards. A. Parking Layout and Circulation. 1. Except for single-family detached, single-family attached, duplex, and townhome residential uses, no parking facility shall be designed so that vehicles are required to back into a public street to exit the facility. 2. No parking space shall be located within three feet of any property line. 3. Tandem parking shall be permitted only in mobilehome parks/subdivisions, as driveway guest . parking for single-family detached, single-family attached, and duplex residential uses, M 4. With the exception of single-family detached, single-family attached, and duplex residential uses, all parking bays shall be bordered by continuous curbs to serve as drainage channels and as wheel stops. Individual wheel stops shall not be permitted in lieu of such curbs. 5. All driveways shall be designed for positive drainage. If an inverted crown is proposed for a driveway, the center portion shall be a ribbon gutter of portland cement concrete rather than asphaltic concrete. 6. Parking lot layouts shall provide a clear hierarchy of major access drives (connecting the parking area to the public street), fire lanes, loading areas, minor drives, parking bay maneuvering areas, etc. Parking shall not be arranged to require backing out into major access drives. 7. In order to avoid dead end aisles, parking bays with ten spaces or more shall connect with other parking bays or drive aisles or shall provide a turnaround area at the end of the bay. 8. Parking accessways are those driveways that provide ingress or egress from a street to the parking aisles, and those driveways providing interior circulation between parking aisles. No parking is permitted on an accessway. Such accessways shall conform to the following 17 [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.150: PARKING standards: a. All parking facilities taking access from a major, primary or secondary arterial highway shall have a parking accessway between the arterial and the parking aisles. b. Parking accessways from, arterial highways shall not have parking spaces taking direct access therefrom and shall not be intersected by a parking aisle or another parking accessway for a minimum distance of 30 feet for projects with zero to 200 parking spaces, 50 feet for projects with 201 to 350 spaces, 70 feet for projects with 351 to 450 spaces, and 90 feet for projects with 451 spaces or more. All distances shall be measured from the curb face of the ultimate curbline of the adjacent street. c. Parking accessways from nonarterial streets and highways shall be not less than 20 feet in length from the ultimate curbline of the adjacent street. d. One-way accessways shall have a minimum width of 15 feet, unless the accessway is a fire lane, which requires a minimum of 20 feet. e. Two-way accessways shall have a minimum width of 28 feet. 9. Entry/exit driveways shall be placed where they result in the least interference with the flow of traffic on the public street to which they connect. 10. Joint entry driveways are encouraged and shall be arranged to allow parking lot maneuvering from one establishment to another without requiring exit to the street. Adjacent properties shall maintain agreements which permit reciprocal driveway connections across property lines. B. Parking Facility Design and Dimensions. 1. Regular Space Dimensions. All parking spaces up to the minimum required shall be designated for regular vehicle parking. Regular vehicle spaces shall have the following minimum dimensions: Width: 9 feet; Length 17 feet to curb plus two feet overhang; where curbs are not provided, a minimum length of 19 feet is required. 2. Compact Space Dimensions. Compact spaces are permitted only if such spaces are in excess of the minimum parking requirement for the use. Compact vehicle spaces shall have the following minimum dimensions: Width: 8.5 feet; Length 16 feet to curb plus 1 Meet overhang; where curbs are not provided, a minimum length of 171/z feet is required. Compact vehicle spaces shall be clearly marked and distributed throughout the parking facility. 3. End Spaces. Parking spaces at the end of a parking aisle against a curb or wall shall be widened by two additional feet and/or shall have a backing -out pocket provided. 18 [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.150: PARKING 4. Parallel Spaces. Spaces provided for parallel parking shall be a minimum of 9 feet wide and 24 feet in length to permit room for maneuvering. If a wall or curb in excess of eight inches in height is adjacent to the parallel parking space, the space shall be ten feet in width. All end spaces confined by a curb shall be 30 feet long. Support Posts. No support posts or other obstructions shall be placed within 1% feet of any parking stall, except that such obstructions are allowed adjacent to the stall within the first six feet of the front of the stall, including any overhang area (see illustration). POSTS • CU • ALLONIED • IN FIRST e• / • PARIaNG OF STALL /(INCLUD{NG OVERHANG) SPACE POSTS ALLOWED IF MIN. IA' FROM EDGE OF STALL \/REEZONE • • OeSTRuCT1oN- 1 3.x I s•_ ,�I ,x oPnoN ovnoN 'A x. VADTH OF POSY Figure 9-10: Limitations on Obstructions Adjacent to Parking Stalls 6. Parking Aisles. Table 9-13 following contains minimum dimensions for parking aisles: TABLE 9•11 MINE IUM PARKINGAISLE DBMNSIONS y wo4ttaisl e Width Parking Angle. '.;€;:.one-Wa Aisle Width . ,. T y >'*18;11 es) (feet) "'`. (feet) 0-44 14 26 (0° = parallel) 45-54 16 26 55-64 18 26 65-79 22 26 80-90 26 26 7. Space Marking. With the exception of single-family detached, single-family attached and duplex residential, all parking spaces shall be clearly marked with white or yellow paint or other easily distinguished material. Marking shall be a minimum four -inch wide single or double ("hairpin" style) stripe. 8. Entry/Exit Driveways. Entry and exit driveways for commercial and multifamily parking lots shall be a minimum of 28 feet wide plus any median width (medians shall be a minimum of 3 feet wide). Additional turning lanes, if required, shall be a minimum of 12 feet in width. One-way entry or exit drives shall be a minimum of 16 feet in width. Maximum driveway width shall be 48 feet plus median width properly radiused. Internal driveways shall conform to the minimum widths, depending on the angle of parking in Table 9-13 of this Section. 9. Curve Radii. Entry driveways shall be radiused at five feet. Internal planter radii shall be a minimum of three feet. Driveway radius shall be a minimum of 16 feet inside and 29 feet outside if confined by a curb or other construction. 19 [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.150: PARKING 10. Sight Distance. No parking space adjacent to a major drive within the parking facility shall encroach on the obstruction -free zone provided for clear view sight distance at access points to major drive where traffic control (such as a traffic signal) is not provided. The obstruction -free zone shall be a six-foot wide linear strip adjacent to the curbline of the street or major drive and shall extend in both directions from the access point in accordance with Riverside County Road Department Standard Drawing No. 806. 11. Handicapped Parking. Handicapped parking shall be provided in accordance with Section 9.150.090. C. Fire Lanes. 1. Fire lanes meeting fire department standards shall be provided to allow access all structures (both front and rear) for fire, law enforcement, and emergency medical purposes. 2. Fire lanes shall be kept separate from loading or service areas and shall have a minimum of parking spaces adjacent to the fire lane in order to minimize possible obstruction of the fire lane. 3. Fire lanes shall be adequately marked and patrolled to prevent parking and other obstructions. D. Pedestrian Circulation. 1. The purpose of a parking lot is to provide for the transition from vehicular to pedestrian movement. All parking lot arrangements shall be designed to provide for the maximum safety and convenience of pedestrians in their movement to and from the parking area. 2. Where possible, landscaped areas shall also contain paved pedestrian walks for the safe movement of pedestrians. 3. On major driveways, crosswalks shall be provided to mark cross -vehicular pedestrian movement. 4. Textured surfaces, signs, and speed bumps shall be used to keep vehicular speeds low. E. Loading and Other Service Facilities. 1. Off -Street Loading .requirements. a. Whenever the City determines that the normal operation of any use or development requires that goods, merchandise, or equipment to be routinely delivered to or shipped from that location, sufficient off-street loading and unloading area must be provided in accordance with this Subsection to accommodate such activities in a safe and efficient manner. For purposes of this Chapter, the term loading means both loading and unloading. b. Fable 9-14 following shows the number and size of loading berths expected to satisfy the standards set forth in this Subsection. However, the Planning Commission may require more or less loading area if it determines such change to be necessary to satisfy the purpose set forth in Subsection La. of this Section: 20 [Hearing Draft- 5161961 9.150: PARKING to form an opaque screen. M. Parking Facility Landscaping. 1. Purpose. Landscaping of parking lots is beneficial to the public welfare in that such landscaping minimizes nuisances such as noise and glare, provides needed shade in the desert climate, and enhances the visual environment. Therefore, landscaping shall be incorporated into the design of all off-street parking areas in accordance with this Subsection. 2. Preservation of Existing Trees. Where trees already exist, the parking lot shall be designed to preserve as many such trees as feasible (in the opinion of the decision -making authority) in order to make the best use of the existing growth and shade. 3. Screening. Screening of parking areas shall be provided in accordance with Paragraph L of this Section. 4. Perimeter Landscaping. Whenever any parking area, except that provided for single-family dwellings, adjoins a street right-of-way, a perimeter planting strip between the right-of-way and the parking area shall be landscaped and continuously maintained. All planting within ten feet of any entry or exit driveway shall not be permitted to grow higher than 30 inches. Berms or low walls may also be incorporated into the planting strip. The width of the planting strip, measured from the ultimate property line (i.e. after street dedication), shall be in accordance with Table 9-15 following. (See also Nonresidential Development Standards, Chapter 9.90). TABLE 9.15: REQUIRED PERIMETER LANDSCAPING Sheet or Highway.: Min. Width o€Planting Strip (feet) Highway 111 50 Primary Image Corridors* 20 Other Streets and Highways 10 * The following are Primary Image Corridors as identified in the General Plan: Washington Street, Jefferson Street, Fred Waring Drive, Calle Tampico, Eisenhower Drive (from Tampico to Washington St.) 5. Interior Landscaping. a. Within open parking lots (i.e. not including parking structures) containing four or more parking spaces, landscaping equal to at least 15 percent of the net project area shall be 28 [Hearing Draft: 5161961 9.200: GENERAL PERMITTING PROCEDURES actions occur within 24 months of the effective date of the approval or within such other time period designated by the approval: 1. In the case of a development review permit where ministerial permits are required, such permits have been issued. 2. In the case of a development review permit where no ministerial permits are required, the use authorized by the permit has been established. In circumstances where a certificate of occupancy is required, such certificate has been issued. C. Expiration. A development review permit shall expire and be of no further force or effect if: 1. The permit is not established within 24 months of the permit's effective date or such other time period designated by the permit approval, by state law, or by this Code; or 2. After establishment, the use or activity for which the permit was approved is discontinued or abandoned for a period of one year. D. Time Extensions. 1. Upon application before expiration of the period of validity, the original decision -making authority may grant an extension to the period of validity for up to one year if it finds that such an extension is justified by the circumstances of the project. The filing of an application for extension shall stay expiration of the permit until action is taken on the time extension by the decision -making authority. n may an'& permif a; mvat' T #�ie�_ cixon ror _ - Y f" ail nrd; moansMPA- W49aJ nn iA a t'l en' an3 s"die ecfa�Atm;tee. extensro�V 9.200.090 Modifications by Applicant. A. Plan Modifications by Applicant. Plans modified at the initiative of the applicant from those approved by the decision -making authority may be submitted to the Director. B. Procedures. If the Director determines that the proposed plan modification is minor, will not result in a significant change in the project approved by the decision -making authority, and complies with the spirit and intent of the original approving action, the Director may approve the modified plan without further compliance with this Section. If the Director determines that the plan modification may result in a significant change in the project, the Director shall refer the change to the original decision - making authority. 9.200.100 Amendments to Development Review Permits. A. Content of Amendments. Permit amendments are required for substantial revisions to conditions of approval, alterations to approved plans which are more substantial than the modifications provided for in Section 9.200.090 preceding, new or additional land uses, or similar major changes. 31 CHAPTER 9.210: DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PERMITS Sections: 9.210.010 Site Development Permits .............................. 11 9.210.020 Conditional Use Permits and Minor Use Permits ........... 13 9.210.030 Variances ............................................ 14 9.210.040 Minor Adjustments ................................... 16 9.210.050 Temporary Use Permits ................................ 17 9.210.060 Home Occupation Permits ............................. 17 9.210.070 Sign Permits ......................................... 19 9.210.010 Site Development Permits. A. Terminology. For purposes of this Code, site, architectural, and landscape plans, related development plans, and sign programs are included within the term "site development permit". B. Purpose. The purpose of a site development permit is to ensure that the development and design standards of this Zoning Code, including but not limited to permitted uses, development standards, and supplemental regulations are satisfied. The site development permit process provides a means of achieving this purpose through City review of detailed plans for proposed development projects. C. Applicability. A site development permit is required for all projects which involve building construction except the following: 1. Individual single family houses and alterations to single family houses or associated accessory structures, unless a site development permit is o he required by an applicable deveetit. reviernr�er:sit rovisz`on� _ . einu' �d # 9—Effl. 2. Temporaryuses (requires temporary use permit per Section 9.210.050). D. Decision -Making Authority. Site development permits shall be processed by the Planning 00 Commission per Section 9.210.010 unless otherwise stipulated in this Code. E. Precise Development Plan. Upon approval, a site development permit constitutes a precise development plan. Therefore, all development authorized under a site development permit and any land uses associated with the development shall be in compliance with the plans, specifications, and conditions of approval shown on and/or attached to the approved permit. F. Required Findings. The following findings shall be made by the decision -making authority prior to the approval of any site development permit: 1. Consistency with General Plan. The project is consistent with the General Plan. 2. Consistency with Zoning Code. The project is consistent with the provisions of this Zoning Code. 11 r I [Hearing Draft. 5161961 9.270: NONCONFORMITIES 9.270.070 Plans Previously Approved. Uses., lots tentati`ve §bhdivisi6n-16ts-.Tentative parcel map lots, or structures approved prior to the effective date of this Zoning Code which are nonconforming under this Code may nevertheless be established, recorded, or constructed in accordance with approved plans or maps provided all other applicable laws and regulations are satisfied. 9.270.080 Illegal Uses and Structures. Nothing in this Chapter shall be construed so as to allow for the continuation of illegal land uses or structures, i.e. uses or structures which did not comply with the zoning ordinance(s) in effect when they were established. Such illegal uses or structures shall be subject to the enforcement provisions of The Municipal Code and shall be removed immediately. 4 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 14, 1996, CONTINUED FROM APRIL 23, 1996 CASE: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-052 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 96-050 INITIATED BY: CITY OF LA QUINTA CONSIDERATION: 1). CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2). APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN TEXT AND LAND USE POLICY DIAGRAM AMENDMENT 3). APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 9, RELATING TO ZONING CODE, REPLACING EXISTING TITLE 9, DELETING CHAPTERS 5.36, 5.37, 5.64, 5.68, AND A PORTION OF CHAPTER 5.72. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-318 FOR THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENT. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WILL OCCUR. THEREFORE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR CERTIFICATION. BACKGROUND: Previous Planning Commission Review This item was considered by the Planning Commission at its meeting of April 23, 1996. At that time, several speakers addressed the Planning Commission regarding specific concerns about the General Plan Amendment and/or updated Zoning Ordinance. Mr. Marvin Roos, Chairman of the BIA Legislative Affairs Committee went over concerns as noted in their letter. A copy of the minutes of the meeting is attached (Attachment 1). Since that meeting, the BIA has submitted a new letter (Attachment 2) dated May 2, 1996. This revised letter addresses the same concerns presented on April 23, 1996, plus an additional three comments. pcss.204 In response to the BIA letter (titles and numbers refer to BIA letter dated May 2, 1996), staff offers the following comments: Qu llitative Issues The BIA is concerned that approved development entitlements (Tentative Tract Maps, Conditional Use Permits, Specific Plans) will be required to be modified due to Ordinance changes such as increased setbacks, parking requirements, etc. Staff Response In Section 9.10.030 B., Specific Plans, site development permits, grading permits, building permits, or similar entitlements issued under the previous Ordinance may be used until a time extension is needed. At the time of time extension, requirements to comply with current requirements may be imposed. They will need to comply with current setback requirements, parking requirements, etc. 2. The BIA feels some standards are misplaced in the Zoning Ordinance and should be located in the local building code. An example that the BIA used pertains to standards for wood fencing and definition of bedrooms. This concern is also raised under Ordinances Specifics #6. Staff Response Fencing - The purpose of this Section (9.60.030) is to require quality materials, i.e., grade - wood, for aesthetic reasons. Only Section 9.60.030 E.l.c. references structural integrity. Therefore, staff is recommending its deletion, with the retention of "The posts shall be installed on the interior side of the lot with fencing material or the outside edge of the support posts." Definition of Bedroom - The Uniform Building Code does not have a definition for "bedroom". The definition used per this Code, is habitable space. Therefore staff is recommending that the definition for "bedroom" be changed to "any habitable room that may be used for sleeping purposes other than a kitchen, dining room or living room." 3. The BIA states that the Zoning Code update lacks the flexibility allowing staff to resolve unique situations that are not otherwise covered in the Code. Examples given are minor glitches in such areas as setbacks, fence heights, and signs. Staff Response Minor adjustment applications for setbacks and other items stipulated in the Code can be approved administratively by the Community Development Director under Section 9.210.040. The Community Development Director is also permitted to approve two or less permanent pcss.204 signs and signs in conformance with a previously approved sign program Section 9.160.090. Also the Director can, under Section 9.20.040, determine if unlisted uses shall be permitted in a zoning district provided specific findings can be made. 4. BIA has concerns regarding requirements which add to the cost of construction in areas such as the amount of covered parking in both residential and commercial areas. Staff Response Due to our climactic conditions, in the desert, the amount of covered parking required is appropriate. The Commissioners requested covered parking as a community amenity unique to the businesses in La Quinta. 5. The BIA states that the Zoning Code is largely regressive in that it seems "more interested in predicting past problems than in assisting in the resolution of the future community needs." An example given is the lack of incentives for non -automotive transportation and the amount of parking required. Staff Response The community and society in general has not yet shown a willingness to extensively utilize non -automotive transportation such as rail and bus service. Therefore, the need for the proposed requirements. It should be noted that since the BIA received their copy of the draft Zoning Code, the general retail parking requirement has been lowered. Previously the general retail requirement for uses under 50,000 square feet was one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area, 50,000 square foot and greater was one space per 250 square feet, and 100,000 square feet and greater was one space per 125 square feet. After a re -study of this requirement it has been changed so that uses of 50,000 square foot and under require one space per 200 square feet of gross floor area while uses of 50,000 square feet and greater require one space per 250 square feet. Ordinance Specifics 1. Section 9.30.020, Affordable Housing Requirements - The BIA recommends that inclusionary zoning for affordable housing should be permissive and not mandatory. Staff Response At the Planning Commission meeting of April 23, 1996, Section 9.30.020 was recommended to be deleted. This change is reflected in the current draft revisions passed out for this meeting. 2. Various pages and sections - The BIA recommends standards for setbacks be revised from "the minimum be ten feet at any point, twenty feet minimum over entire frontage" to read "...twenty feet avers&e over the entire frontage." pcss.204 Staff Response Chapter 9.30 does utilize this wording. Staff is recommending that average be added to the landscape setbacks to read "shall be a minimum ten feet at any point with twenty feet average over the entire frontage." This change is reflected in the current draft revisions passed out for this meeting. Various residential sections - The BIA states that the five-foot minimum interior sideyard setback requirement is well established throughout the community and increasing the setback in the case of buildings over 17 feet in height (add one foot setback up to 10 feet for every foot over 17 feet high) in the RL, RC, RM, RMH, RH (in RH the requirement is for buildings over 28 feet) will be difficult to design given the existing minimum 7,200 square foot lots. This item is the result of Planning Commission direction during the workshop sessions. This increased setback is needed for structures over 17-feet because of their greater impact on neighbors. 4. Section 9.60.030 C.2. and C.3., Fences and Walls - The BIA states that the fence height determination will not be workable where moderate grade deferentials exist and recommends that the Community Development Director be given authority to approve unusual situations. Staff Response A graphic, Section 9.60.030 B, (Measurement of Fence Height), has been added to illustrate how to measure fence height. If an adjustment is needed the Director can review and if findings can be made approve an adjustment of up to 10%. 5. Section 9.60.030 CA.a.2., Fences and Walls - The BIA states that controlling visibility where a driveway meets the street is not feasible because driveways are many times adjacent to a side property line where they have no control over obstructions. Staff Response In most situations the driveway leads to a garage which has a setback of at least five feet. Normally the driveway is setback an additional one to two feet from the side property line which means that the area of visibility will be on the subject property and can be controlled. 6. Section 9.60.030 D.1. and D.2., Fences and Walls - The BIA states that the quality of wood used in gates is not appropriate in a Zoning Code and should be deleted. Additionally, they recommend that the gate width standards in D.2. impose punitive costs to the homeowner. pcss.204 Staff Response As stated previously this standard pertains to aesthetics and not structural integrity. The Uniform Building Code is silent regarding requirements for wood fences. The maximum recommended width allowed is 36", if this size is too costly since the Code does not specify a minimum size the fence width can be reduced. 7. Section 9.65.020.D.6.c., VC- Village Core District - The BIA states that in the Village Section where 50% of all parking is required to be shaded that "shaded" needs to be defined. "Shaded" means that either trees which have a large canopy or carport structures are to be provided. Code Section 9.65.070.L which defines what is considered "shading" in parking lot areas. The Village Specific Plan area is to be studied further. In the study, this requirement will be reviewed and refined as necessary. Section 9.65.070.G., General Development Standards - This Section of the Village zone indicates that blank walls of buildings shall not be permitted facing exterior property lines, at the rear of a structure, or facing interior lot lines where the wall will be visible. The BIA recommends that the standard "blank walls shall not be permitted" should be altered to "shall be discouraged". Staff Response As in the above Section, the study of the Village Specific Plan area may result in revisions to the requirements. 9. Section 9.65.070.K.2. (should read L.2.), Shade Requirements - The BIA states that the requirement for landscaping to mature within two years of installation is unrealistic and will result in overplanting. Staff Response As in the case in the above two items this Section will be studied further for possible revision_ 10. Section 9.80.040, Table 9-5, Table of Permitted Uses - The BIA recommends that uses such as electric substations, water wells, pumping stations, reservoirs, and water tanks allowed under public and semi-public uses are specifically exempted from Zoning Code control by Government Code 53090. Staff Response The draft Ordinance originally required these uses to obtain a Conditional Use Permit in certain zones. After a review by the City Attorney, the Code has been amended to require pcss.204 processing a minor use permit for approval by the Community Development Director in the zones which presently require a conditional use permit as noted on Table 9-5. An item of note is that there is potential for these uses to be private as well as public. 11. Section 9.100.050, Screening - The BIA states that the requirement for trellis -type screening over visible trash areas should be optional and that screening with landscape materials would serve the same purpose. The draft Code presently requires that if a trash enclosure is visible from higher terrain or buildings that a decorative overhead structure such as a trellis shall be integrated into the enclosure design. Staff is recommending this standard be modified by requiring landscaping around the enclosure or requiring trellis structures to be constructed out of a non-combustible material such as metal. 12. Section 9.100.200.C, Trash and Recyclable Materials Storage - This Section implements the provisions of State ]Public Resources Code Section 42900 requiring local jurisdictions to provide for collection and loading of recyclable materials in multi -family and commercial projects. The BIA recommends that the City should research and produce a handout concerning general guidelines for trash/recycling volumes because this research cannot effectively be undertaken by individual projects. Staff Response If necessary, staff can research this and provide additional information regarding these requirements. It would not be necessary to modify this Section of the Code in order to provide this information. 13. Table 9-11 (Section 9.150.060.C), Parking for Residential Land Uses - The BIA indicates a concern regarding the parking requirements for four or more bedrooms in single-family detached, single-family attached, and duplexes. The draft Code requires three garage spaces for units of this size. Additionally, they are concerned about the amount of guest parking required for residential uses. Staff Response The requirement for the three -car garages is the result of Planning Commission direction during the workshop sessions. The requirement for guest spaces is the result of consultants' recommendations. 14. Table 9-12 (Section 9.150.060.1)), Parking for Nonresidential Land Uses - The BIA states that the retail commercial requirements insure that all facilities will be surrounded with "a sea of asphalt". Additionally, they feel the parking requirements for restaurants in a shopping pcss.204 center is regressive. They also state that the hotel parking requirements should be less as the hotel facility gets larger. SlaffResponse As stated earlier in paragraph four under Qualitative Issues, the parking requirement for retail uses has been reduced. The parking requirements for restaurants does not differentiate between whether it is in a shopping center or a stand-alone use. Presently, the parking requirements for a hotel of 200 rooms or less is 1.1 space per guest room which is the same as presently proposed. For facilities of 200 rooms or more the present requirement is 2 spaces per room while the draft Ordinance requires 1.5 space per room. The draft Ordinance does require for all hotels that there be one space per 75 square feet of meeting room plus spaces required for other ancillary commercial uses. The present parking requirement for assembly areas such as conference facilities is one space per 25 square feet. 15. Section 9.150.050.D.3., Required Bicycle Parking - This Section requires bicycle parking for certain non-residential uses. The BIA recommends that bicycle and golf cart parking spaces be encouraged and allowed to be counted as part of the required parking. Staff Response In order to allow golf carts on public streets, special approval from the State must be granted. The City has no plans to pursue this at this time. The bicycle parking requirement is primarily for recreational uses, churches, hospitals and restaurants. Additionally, one bicycle parking space for every 25,000 square feet of gross floor area for governmental, general, medical, and financial office uses is recommended. Five bicycle parking spaces for each tenant over 20,000 square feet is also required for retail users. Due to the size and nature of bicycles, their land requirements are minimal and will not impact or impede development of a project. The use of bicycles presently is not sufficient to warrant an allowance for the required vehicular parking. 16. Section 9.210.040, Minor Adjustments - The BIA recommends that minor adjustments include variance -type findings to insure that special privileges are not granted. Staff Response One of the recommended required findings is that the application will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and welfare or injurious to incompatible with other properties or land uses in the vicinity. This provision is adequate to provide that special privileges are not granted. 17. Section 9.030.050.D. (should read 9.30.050.D.1.), RC Cove - Residential District - The BIA recommends that materials other than exterior stucco walls in the Cove area be pcss.2 04 permitted. They state that if there are particular problem materials that they should be delineated as prohibited or discouraged. Presently, the "Manual on Architectural Standards for Single Family Residences" which has been adopted and applies to the Cove area states that "siding shall be stucco, plaster, masonary, or a similar material. Wood or materials of a similar appearance may be used as trim and design accents for up to a maximum of twenty percent of the surface wall area on any one side of the house." This requirement was initially implemented to provide an upgraded appearance for new homes in the Cove area. Prior to and at the time of incorporation, developments of single family homes in the Cove area were in some cases sub -standard in appearance. In recent years, construction within the Cove area has been substantially upgraded in appearance. Wording similar to the existing wording or deletion of this requirement could be considered. Additional Comments At the meeting, Mr. Bill Hobin, asked that the Planning Commission consider increasing the floor area ratio (FAR) in the Commercial Park District from .25 which is proposed, to .35. He stated that because the Commercial Park District is intended to be a light industrial -type district that the .25 FAR was economically unfeasible. Staff Response Staff has reviewed this Section and determined that, due to the nature of the District and what the City hopes to achieve, that the FAR should be increased to .50. The revised draft page regarding this has been increased under Section 9.90.040, Table 9-6. Affect of New Zoning; Code The new Zoning Code requirements, especially those pertaining to setback requirements will affect any single family lot which has not yet been built. New single family construction for which a building permit is not yet obtained will have to comply with the setback requirements which, in some cases, have been increased depending on building heights and the type of garage door utilized. These requirements will affect nearly all subdivisions in the City which are presently being developed. In those areas which are presently zoned R-1 or R-2 rear yard setbacks increased from 10 feet to 20 feet and 15, respectively. This may affect subdivisions which presently have vacant lots yet to be built. Additional Changes There; have been a number of amendments to the draft Zoning Code since the last meeting. The changes which may be considered significant are as follows: pcss.204 1. Section 9.10.030 B and C, Prior Agreements and Approvals - Specific Plans and all subdivision maps will now be allowed to proceed based upon conditions in effect at the time of their approval, rather than need to comply with the current requirements. However, should these types of projects require a time extension, they shall be required to comply with current requirements. 2. Section 9.40.040, Table 9-1, Table of Permitted Uses - The non-commercial keeping of animals, fowl, and rabbits has been amended to note that they are only allowed in the very low density residential zone on lots of one acre or more. 3. Section 9.40.040, Table 9-1, Table of Permitted Uses - Churches and other places of worship have been included in the RL (Low Density Residential), $M (Medium Density Residential), and RMH (Medium High Density Residential) with a conditional use permit. Previously, these uses were not permitted in residential zones. 4. Section 9.60.040.B.9., Patio Covers, Decks, and Play Equipment - This Section has been added to restrict patio covers, trellises, gazeboes, arbors, or similar structures, or combinations thereof from covering more than 50% of the yard area between the residence and the rear property line. This has been deemed necessary because if approved, we will now allow these types of structures to come within five feet of the rear property line when adjacent to another property or public or private right-of-way and within three feet of a rear property he adjacent to a common use easement or open space area. This restriction will prohibit a rear yard from being completely covered. 5. Section 9.60.130, Recreational Vehicle Parking - This Section has been re -written to clarify the storage and temporary parking requirements for recreational vehicles and the requirements for temporary habitation of a recreational vehicle. 6. Section 9.100.210, Noise Control - This Section has been revised to . note that noise measurements are to be taken using standard noise measuring instruments. Additionally, the noise standard has been revised based upon the guidelines in the General Plan. 7. Section 9.270.070, Plans Previously Approved - This Section has been revised to include Tentative Subdivision lots and Tentative Parcel Map lots. These lots may now be recorded based upon the existing approved maps even if not in compliance with current requirements, provided a time extension request is not made. 8. Equestrian Overlay District - Based on testimony given at the April 23rd Planning Commission meeting on the Equestrian Overlay District (EOD), staff has made further revisions to the ordinance. This Section is codified in the Zoning Code as Section 9.140.060. Many of these changes are related to maintaining a consistent format with the new Zoning Code. However, the following items were revised: pcss.204 1. The number of permitted horses was changed from 5 per additional acre to three, primarily due to the intent that the EOD serve as a base district for residential land use, not intensive commercial equestrian. This is a change that was made prior to the March 12th Planning Commission meeting. As with many of the standards, however, the number of permitted horses could be modified as part of a CUP application. 2. Separated the definitions for accessory building and structure (9.140.060.B.1 and B.2) to make a clear distinction between a building and a structure in the EOD. Each definition provides examples of facilities which would apply to the definition. References to accessory use have been removed to avoid confusion created by the attempt to associate structures and buildings with the use facilitated by their establishment. 3. Revised the setback standard in Section 9.140.060.E.2.c from 50' to 35', primarily in response to the application of accessory structure definition. 4. Expanded Section 9.140.060.E.4 to require dust control for all disturbed soil areas, which would include unpaved roads and driveways. 5. Additional text changes were made to Section 9.140.060.E.5, pertaining to manure treatment requirements. The section has been restructured into six subsections to clarify the requirements. Subsection 5.b has been changed to require manure removal from all areas, and prohibit open stockpiling of manure. Subsection 5.c allows only composted manure to be spread over open areas. Subsection 5.d requires that spreading areas be operated as part of an overall treatment program for manure, and that the program be approved by the City if not established and approved in conjunction with a CUP. Staff contacted several agencies regarding manure handling and composting. The only composting regulations apparently available are established by the California Integrated Waste Management Board ( a copy of these guidelines were requested a few weeks ago, and we were informed last week that they were being mailed). The following facilities and agencies were also contacted: Smoketree Stables, Palm Springs - All manure is removed from the facility. It is taken by the operator to a nearby date orchard and spread. Removal is required by the City. No on -site composting or other use of manure occurs. 2. Pomona ]Fairplex, Livestock Operations - All bedding, straw, etc. are transported by contract hauler to local mushroom plant. Manure, sawdust chips, etc. are hauled to landfill. Manure is generally removed daily, depending on duration of events. No on - site composting or other use of manure occurs. pcss.204 California BioMass, Thermal - This facility will accept manure from local sources. Waste management does some limited haul contracting to this facility. They basically operate under the guidelines put out by the Waste Management Board and their own best management practices. Commented that composting areas should be covered to prevent evaporation, control odor and particulate emissions, and assist in the composting process. 4. City of Chino - No regulations pertaining to composting or manure handling. The City does have a Residential -Agricultural Zone which allows up to three horses on a minimum 18,000 square -foot lot, with variations depending on animal size. Animals must be kept a minimum of 70' from adjacent dwellings and 40' from dwellings on the same parcel. City of Redlands - No standards relating to equestrian or similar uses beyond the typical provisions of single family residential zoning. 6. City of Rancho Cucamonga - Staff attempted to obtain information, but no response had been received at the time this report came due. Any information received will be presented at the meeting. 7. City of Norco - No specific equestrian standards. The only requirement cited is that all animals must be maintained a minimum of 35' from property lines, unless a six foot wall or fence is erected; then there is no setback required. Manure is not specifically addressed either; properties may not create any situation which causes excessive breeding of flies. Determination of what is excessive is made by animal control/code enforcement upon inspection. There is no standard on what constitute "excessive". 8. County of San Bernardino - Manure is considered a liability. Stockpiling or other open storage is not permitted. Manure must be removed or hauled by contractor. Spreading is only permitted with commercial operations (dairies most common) and only if there is adequate are available. Open storage of manure contributes to ozone depletion (methane) and particulate generation (PM10), for which the South Coast Air Basin is in non -attainment status. No standards for composting. An excerpt of the previous staff report for April 23, 1996, is attached for your use. (Attachment 3). GENERAL PLAN AND LAND USE DIAGRAM AMENDMENT The La Quinta General Plan is a statement of development policy reflecting local conditions. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the general distribution and intensity of uses of the land for housing, commercial, office, industrial, open space, parks, and public facilities and services. pcss.204 The :Zoning Code is a tool that implements the General Plan. With the proposed Zoning Code update, the General Plan Land Use Element was reviewed to eliminate development standards that are more appropriately achieved through the Zoning Code. Commercial development standards that are recommended for deletion from the General Plan are now recommended to be included in the Zoning Code. The proposed General Plan Amendment streamlines the development process while maintaining the integrity of the City's General Plan as a guide for the comprehensive development of the City. The proposed General Plan text amendments (Exhibit "A" of GPA 96-052 Resolution) to the Land Use Element eliminate cumbersome development standards from the General Plan. With these amendments, proposed commercial projects that exceed intensity requirements (maximum building heights/stories and floor area ratios) will not require a General Plan amendment to receive approval. The commercial development standards which are recommended for deletion from the General Plan are proposed to be incorporated in the Zoning Code update (Section 9.90.040, Table of Development Standards). Table 9-6: Non -Residential Development Standards, identifies and defines maximum floor area ratio, maximum height, and maximum number of stories for all non-residential structures. This amendment modifies certain residential policies which will be implemented through the Zoning Code. Deletion of Policy c-1.1.3 provides consistency with the newly adopted and certified Housing Element which identifies density bonus provisions required in the Government Code be adopted by ordinance. These provisions are incorporated in the Zoning Code update (Section 9.60.270). Policy 2-1.19 is deleted and revised to recommend these same conditions be implemented through the Zoning Code update (Section 9.40.030). Policy 2-1.2.3 is amended to delete specified standards from the Rural Residential Overlay category. These standards are revised and incorporated into the Zoning Code; update (Section 9.30.100). This amendment also provides an updated Proposed Land Use Policy Diagram to reflect all amendments, annexations, and production errors that have occurred since adoption of the Proposed Land Use Element Policy Diagram in 1992. The amendment changes the land use designation of two areas (as identified on the map) from Mixes/Regional Commercial (M/RC) to Commercial Park (CP). One area consists approximately of 11.5 acres and is located on the north edge of the M/RC land use designation and will be an extension of the existing CP designation on the south side of the Whitewater Channel between Adams Street and Dune Palms Drive. The second area consists approximately of 30 acres and is located on the easterly portion of the M/RC land use designation between Dune Palm Drive and the eastern City limits, 500± feet south of Highway 111. MISCELLANEOUS MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS: There are several chapters in the Municipal Code which are no longer needed because they are addressed in the Zoning Code update and are recommended for deletion or amendment as follows: 1. Chapter 5.36 - Novelty sales at special events 2. Chapter 5.37 - Activities involving outdoor merchandising 3. Chapter 5.64 - Speciai Advertising Devices 4. Chapter 5.68 - Sound Trucks and Advertising by Sound pcss.D4 5. Portion of Chapter 5.72 - Miscellaneous Businesses Regulated a. Section 5.72.010 - City Council permit required for certain businesses. b. Section 5.72.020 - Revocation of permit Delete reference to "5.72.010. or" on first line. 6. Section 6.08.105 (Regarding Animal Manure) - amend last sentence to read, "This section shall not apply to domesticated pets excrement, nor to equestrian facilities regulated under the Equestrian Overlay District except where manure is spread over any area with such a facility." Cam( NCL-USION: During the consideration on April 23, 1996, staff recommended approval of both the General Plan Amendment and updated Zoning Code and map. Since that time, changes to documents have been made: as noted. The updated Land Use Policy diagram will better reflect the most current information regarding land use designations. The draft Zoning Code update is a result of extensive research, review and revision. The Code and map are prepared as comprehensive documents that implement the goals and policies of the General Plan. Findings as noted in the attached resolutions can be made to support staffs recommendation for approval of these applications. RECOMMENDATION: Staffrecommends: 1. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending certification of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for General Plan Amendment 96-052 and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-050, and; 2. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Land Use Element text and Land Use Policy diagram changes General Plan Amendment 96-052; 3. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-050 to La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, relating to Zoning Code, as noted in Exhibit "A" on file in the Community Development Department, replacing existing Title 9, and deleting Chapters 5.36, 5.37, 5.64, 5.68, and a portion of Chapter 5.72 and 6.08.105 per attached Exhibit "B". Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Minutes for the meeting of April 23, 1996 2. Letter from Building Industry Association, Desert Chapter, dated May 2, 1996 3. Excerpt from Planning Commission staff report dated April 23, 1996 4. Revisions to draft Zoning Code (for Planning Commission only) pcss.204 Prepared by: STAN B. SAWA, Principal Planner Submitted by: CHIUSTINE DI IORIO, Planning Manager pcss.204 WAN, ti RAY TROLL DEVELOPMENT CO. 2323 N. TUSTIN AVE., SUITE F SANTA ANA, CA 92705 TEL. ('714) 558-•7311 FAX ('714) 558-•0848 April 29, 1996 Mr. Jacques Abels, Chairman City of La Quinta Planning Commission P.O. Box 1504 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 VIA FACSIMILE (619)777-7155 Dear Mr. Abels: I am a Builder/Developer as well as owner and trustee of several properties in the city of La Quinta. I was informed by Mr. Bill Hobin who addressed the Commission on March 23, 1996 regarding the general plan amendments. Like Mr. Hobin, I respectfully appeal to you to reconsider and increase the Maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) from 25% to 35%. The CP zone is specifically designed for light, industrial, including but not limited, to storage facilities. The 35% FAR is more in line with the light industrial development and is the same as in your CR zone. In the past I have built many commercial parks and the need for parking spaces do not approach the spaces needed for retail commercial. I feel certain that you will be very satisfied with the 35% ground coverage leaving more than adequate area for parking and landscaping. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Very truly yours, Raymond T. Troll TRACT HOUSING - APARTMENTS - MOBILE PARKS - INDUSTRIAL - COMMERCIAL PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CERTIFICATION OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-318 PREPARED FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-052 AND ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 96-050 (ZONING CODE) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-318 CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 23rd day of April, 1996, and 14th day of May, 1996, hold duly noticed Public Hearings to consider the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zoning Ordinance Amendment, and; WHEREAS, said acquisition has complied with the requirements "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 Initial Study EA 96-318; and, WHEREAS, the Community Development Director has determined that said Zoning Ordinance Amendment and General Plan Amendment will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment and that a Negative Declaration of environmental impact should be filed; and, WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts, findings, and reasons to justify a recommendation for certification of said Environmental Assessment: 1. The proposed Amendments will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of the community, either indirectly or directly in that the new standards and regulations are brought into conformance with the 1992 update of the City's General Plan. The Ordinance will apply citywide and provide a comprehensive set of standards and regulations for development thereby improving the quality of life for City residents. 2. The proposed Amendments will not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Appropriate mitigation measures have been adopted in the La Quinta General Plan to ensure minimal impact. 3. The proposed Amendments will not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals in that it will establish more stringent standards and regulations according to the goals and objectives of the General Plan. resope.203 Planning Commission Resolution 96- 4. The proposed amendments will not result in impacts which are individually limited or cumulatively considerable. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: l . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission for this environmental assessment. 2. That it does hereby recommend certification of Environmental Assessment 96-318 for a Negative Declaration for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as stated in the attached Environmental Assessment Checklist and Addendum, labeled Exhibit "A". PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 14th day of May, 1996, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resopc.203 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- 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 AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-052 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did on the 23rd day of April, 1996, and the 14th day of May, 1996, hold duly noticed Public Hearings, and approved the request to amend the City's General Plan Land Use Element text to modify specified policies relating to development standards (Exhibit A) and to modify the Proposed Land Use Policy Diagram; and, WHEREAS,said General Plan Amendment request has complied with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), and adopted by City Council Resolution 83-68, in that the Community Development Department has completed EA # 96-318 which indicates that no significant impacts will occur due to adoption and implementation of the amendment; 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 Plannin& Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said General Plan Amendment: 1. The proposed General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element is consistent with the affected goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that implementation of specified development standards are achieved through the Zoning Ordinance. 2. The proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan in that the proposed changes streamline the development process while maintaining the General Plan as a guide for comprehensive development of the City. 3. The proposed modifications to the Land Use Element are consistent with the other elements of the La Quinta General Plan in that the specified development standards are unique to the Land Use Element. 4 Approval of this proposal will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment. gpa2..res NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the General Plan Amendment 96-052 for the reasons set forth in this resolution and as provided in Exhibit A attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting -of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 14th day of May, 1996, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta gpa2.res EXHIBIT "A" Planning Commission Resolution No. GPA 96-052 May 114, 1996 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT PROPOSED MAP AND TEXT AMENDMENTS TO CHAPTER 2: LAND USE ELEMENT Paee 2_5 Amend Proposed Land Use Policy Diagram as shown on exhibit. Page 2=8 Delete Policy 2-1.1.3. Pale 2-10 Amend -Policy 2-1.1.9 to read as follows: "The City shall establish guidelines in the Zoning Code to allow varying residential densities to locate within a designated residential zone." Page 2-11 Amend Policy 2-1.2.3, second bullet to read: "The front yard setbacks of all structures shall be increased beyond the minimum specified in the applicable zoning district" Pace 2-11. Amend policy 2-1.2.3, fourth bullet to read: "Fencing guidelines representative of a rural theme shall be developed for each project." Page 2:. Amend Policy 2-2.1.1. to read as follows: "The General Plan shall utilize the building floor area to site area ratio (F.A.R.) as the appropriate standard for commercial land use intensity. F.A.R. shall be defined as the gross floor area of a building divided by the net area of the commercial parcel of land. Net area is the total area of the site minus the area dedicated as public street right- of - way. Commercial land use F.A.R.'s shall range from .25 to .50, in accordance with the Zoning Code development standards." Pace 2-12 Delete from Table LU-4, City of La Quinta, Commercial Land Use Category Standards under the column "Development Standards" the following (in italics) standards: Commercial Category NExed/Regional Commercial Development Standards Maximum F.A.R. of 0.35 docfb.202 E)IIBIT "A" Planning Commission Resolution No. GPA 96-052 May 14, 1996 Pa&e 2-13_ (M/RC) Community Commercial (CC) Neighborhood Commercial (NC) Commercial Park (CP) Maximum building height of four stories Maximum F.A.R. of 0.30 Maximum building height of three stories Maximum F.A.R. of 0.25 Maximum building height of two stories Maximum F.A.R. of 0.25 Maximum building height of two stories Office Maximum F.A.R. of 0.30 (0) Maximum building height of three stories Page 2-1- Delete from Table LU-4, City of La Quinta, Commercial Land Use Category Standards the following "Notes" (in italics): Notes to Table LII--4: 1. Development standard defined pursuant to Policy 2-2.1.1. 2. F.A.R. - Building Floor Area to Project Site Ratio. Page 2-14 Delete Policy 2-3.1.2. Pase 2-15 Amend Policy 2-3.2.2 to read as follows: "Projects in CP areas shall be located with direct access to arterial or non-residential collector streets. Projects in CP areas shall be developed in a "campus -like" setting." Pa&e 2-16 Amend Policy 2-4.1.2 to read as follows: "Projects in CC areas shall be located on sites ranging from 10 to 50 acres and shall be located on, and with direct access to and primarily at the intersections of arterial streets." Amend Policy 2-4.2.2 to read as follows: docfb.202 EXHIBIT "A" Planning Commission Resolution No. GPA 96-052 May 14, 1996 "Projects in NC areas shall be located on sites which are a maximum of 20 acres in size and shall be located on, and shall directly access, arterial streets." Pa&e 2-17 Amend Policy 2-6.1.2 to read as follows: "Projects in the Office category shall be located on, and shall directly access, arterial streets" docfb.:202 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 96-050 TO LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 9, RELATING TO ZONING CODE, AS NOTED IN EXHIBIT "A" ON FILE IN THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, REPLACING EXISTING TITLE 9, AND DELETION CHAPTERS 5.36, 5.37, 5.64, 5.68, AND A PORTION OF CHAPTER 5.72 AND SECTION 6.08.105 PER ATTACHED EXHIBIT "B" AND AMENDMENT OF TITLE 9, PER EXHIBIT "C". CASE NO. ZOA 96-050 CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 23rd day of April, 1996, and 14th day of May, 1996, hold duly noticed Public Hearings to consider zoning regulations for use in the City of La Quinta; 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, findings, and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Zoning Ordinance Amendment. 1. The proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not adversely affect the planned development of the City in that the Ordinance will establish more stringent standards and regulations according to the goals and objectives of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment will not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the City in that the new standards and regulations are in conformance with the 1992 update of the City's General Plan. The Ordinance will apply citywide and provide a comprehensive set of standards and regulations for development thereby improving the quality of life for City residents. 3. There will be no significant adverse impacts resulting from this Zoning Ordinance Amendment because the regulations by their nature, create conditions which enhance, control, and are compatible with the environment and designed to mitigate negative impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: l . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; and, resope.201 Planning Commission Resolution 96-. 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-050 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as noted in Exhibit "A", on file in the Community Development Department and known as the City of La Quinta Zoning Code; and, 3. That it does recommend deletion of Municipal Code Chapters 5.36, 5.37, 5.64, and 5.68 in their entirety; and, 4. That it does recommend Amendment of Chapter 5.72 and Section 6.08.105as noted in attached Exhibit `B". 5. That it does recommend Amendment of Title 9 as noted in attached Exhibit "B". PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 14th day of May, 1996, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY BERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resope.201 EXHIBIT "C" Planning Commission Resolution No. 96- Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-050 May 14, 1996 Amend 9.28.030, Definition of Terms, as follows: Bedroom means any habitable room that may be used for sleeping purposes other than a kitchen, bathroom, hallway, dining room or living room. Amend 9.60.030 E. l.c, ]Fence Construction and Materials, as follows: Fence boards may be hotizontal or veitical. Stippoit posts shailbeanfirfiitttttiofiiomiiiai4" x4t'red"od, piessuie-theated himbei, tubtflar steel or block placed five feet-un center. Ad! fbnces shall have a concrete fboting o. appi o ved post base or be embedded in concrete i The posts shall be installed on the interior side of the lot with fencing material on the outside edge of the support posts. Amend 9.100.150.B.2, Screening, as follows: Trash Areas. All outdoor trash and waste bins shall be enclosed by a solid wall not less than six feet in height in accordance with Section 9.100.200 Gates shall not open toward a public street. Decorative overhead structures such as metal trellises shall be integrated into the enclosure design or tall landscaping planted on the affected side if it is visible from higher terrain or buildings. resopc.204 AAAY 14-1 Pqq(,� ATTACHMENT 1 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 12. here being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by mmissioners Barrows/Butler to adopt Resolution 96-011, recommending to t City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28343, subject to the Findi s and Conditions as amended. ROLL CALL: A S: Commissioners Anderson, Barrows, Butler, Gardner, New k, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. STAIN: None B. General Plan Amendment 96-052 and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-050; a 7request of the City for certification of the Environmental Assessment, approval of the General Plan Land Use Element Text Amendment, and update of Title 9 of the La Quinta Municipal Code and a recommendation to repeal various Municipal Code Chapters. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted the changes as follows: the Planning Commission Resolution adopting the Environmental Assessment needs to be corrected by deleting the words "Mitigated" in reference to the Negative Declaration. In addition, the reference to the "Inclusionary Zoning" requirements were recommended for deletion; Exhibit "A" of the General Plan Amendment has been revised; Section 9.30.100.D. Development Standards for the Rural Residential Overlay; Retail Commercial parking requirements in Section 9.150.Table 9.12 has been revised. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff, there being none, the public hearing was opened. 3. Mr. Ed Kibbey, representing the BIA Desert Chapter, stated that their review of the report was not complete, they would like to request the Planning Commission continue this issue to allow time to review all the contents. He stated they had submitted a draft letter addressed some of their concerns, but additional time was needed for an in-depth review. Chairman Abels stated the letter from the BIA had been received by the Planning Commission during their study session and the Planning Commission would need time to review the letter. 4. Mr. Marvin Roos, Chairman of BIA Legislative Affairs Committee, stated he had major concerns with the document. He noted that the floor area ratio requirement had been deleted and he was unaware if the General Plan building intensity issue had been replaced in another part of the document. State Law requires the General Plan identify the commercial building levels intensity. They have a concern about eliminating the policy on the 10% PC4-23 3 Planning; Commission Meeting April 23, 1996 density bonus. He asked which projects are specifically grandfathered in in terms of meeting development standards. He requeted that an analysis of the projects and the impact the new standards would have on them. They question whether the Zoning Ordinance should address specific issues such as fencing or the definition of bedrooms. These could be dealt with in a Building Code Amendment. Once the ordinance is in effect, over time there may be a need for flexibility in the standards. Fence and building pad heights need some flexibility for the Director to have authority to act upon. Market and cost decisions determine such items as three car garages and the like. Requiring these adds to the cost and are micro managing project development rather than setting community standards. Lastly, they believe the proposed ordinance is largely regressive and is not open to the kinds of progressive planning and building programs the Valley will be looking at over the next ten years. The changes over the next five years are going to accelerate rather than slowing down. The section on driveway and street visibility setbacks creates a problem for a property owner. Regulations regarding the size of wood gates may be better suited in the Uniform Building Code. Section 9.65.020(D)(6)(c) on shading for parking or pedestrian areas in the downtown area needs to be defined. Prohibiting blank walls in the Village, should be changed to say "discourage" instead of prohibited. In the Downtown area, the pedestrian landscape shading requirements are too aggressive where they ask for the landscaping to be mature within two years. Seven to ten years to reach maturity is normal. A variety of public and semi-public uses are exempted from Zoning Ordinance regulations by State Law, Government Code 53090, and the Ordinance requires these uses to apply for Conditional Use Permits. The Code requires trash enclosures to have trellis'. Some fire departments are wanting sprinklers installed as this is an area where fires are started. The City may want to look at requiring landscaping instead as it requires less maintenance and deterioration. The new requirement states that a recycling plan is required with any new development. Needs good basic guidelines that could be researched and developed by the City and CVAG. The Table that deals with all the rooms in the house that may be considered a bedroom is necessary, and again the Building code is very specific and adequate to address this. They are very concerned about Table 9-11 regarding three garages and guest parking. Has there been any research to back up the standards for guest parking and how would this be calculated. The retail and commercial uses on Table 9-12 appear to require excessive parking. In particular, the additional parking for restaurants and shopping centers is regressive as these uses can share parking. Under hotels, the amount of parking should go down as facilities grow larger. Bicycles and golf carts should be encouraged and count towards required parking as well as other modes of transportation. Authorization for minor adjustments should include variance type findings to insure that such modifications are not the granting of a special privilege. The BIA concur with the deletion of PC4-23 4 Planning Commission Meeting April 23, 1996 Inclusionary Zoning, would like to reinstate the director's approval of compatibility, and the page numbering system makes it hard to find your way through the document. 5. Mr. Ed Kibbey, BIA, asked for a continuance of the hearing to consider the document further. 6. Mrs. Sharon Kanlian, 50-400 Jefferson, stated she had questions regarding the Equestrian Overlay portion of the General Plan Amendment and she would like to have the answers and clarification regarding these questions at this meeting. On Page 68.E.1 regarding composted manure, she would like to know by whose standards are these materials being measured and whose industry guidelines will the City use. Need to state these in the Code so Code Enforcement is able to enforcement them. She encouraged the Planning Commission to redefine this Section with more detail so there are guidelines to be referred to regarding properly composted manure. On Friday, after receiving a copy of the staff report, they spoke with staff concerning Page 69, Sections G.and H. lighting and loud speakers, and were informed these would fall under the guidelines of a CUP for a commercial equestrian facility. On Monday, a different staff person re-educated them that as written, lights and amplification can be installed by anyone in the Equestrian Overlay District. This is far more liberal than the current guidelines enforced today. So the grandfathering rule does not apply either. They have a hard time understanding this ruling and could someone please explain why this is left so vague. Regarding the site plan submitted by Rancho del Sol, should this not be marked "proposed" for those items that are not yet built. If this is so, then under the current regulations lights would not be allowed. 7. Mr. Walter Hansch, Jefferson Street property owner, stated the City has been dealing with this issue of smell and health for years and now noise and lights. He did not feel there was a need to have a circus regarding this issue. This is a small business venture and it will have a negative effect on the neighboring properties. 8. Mr. Sonny Kanlian, 50-400 Jefferson Street, La Quinta, stated he echoes his wife's requests to have answers at this meeting. Further on Page 67, Section B.6. regarding the spreading areas he would like to see them located further away from adjacent properties and domestic wells. He did want to see any manure or heavy watering along the property line. As stated at the last meeting, the Health Department recommends 100 feet from any domestic well. His well is an older well and does not have the annular seal and earthquakes, time and ware can cause these seals to leak and the surface water PC4-23 5 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 can seep by and get under the claylands. The manure problem has not been answered properly. Temperature and moisture are the two most important factors in breeding cycles of vertebras and insects. One generation of flies can go 12-14 days. The manure, if composted need to be done properly and the ability to have a strong Code Enforcement to enforcement this. It has to be policed and policed properly and he cannot check to see that it is done properly. In addition, he was very disturbed that he could get a report on Friday and on Monday it is 100 degrees turned around. He was assured that lights would not be allowed and now there is a site plan submitted for lights and loudspeakers. He asked if there was a resolution to prevent lights and loudspeakers from being installed until this process is resolved. Staff informed them that they would not be allowed until the Zoning Code is resolved. Now staff informs them they cannot prevent them from installing the lights and loudspeakers. Staff stated that because it was submitted it can be allowed. This is a tremendous noise and light factor to impose on 200 potential homes. This needs to go through the conditional use permit process as suggested. 9. Mrs. Wanda Reese, 80-209 Avenue 50, La Quinta, stated she is glad that she doesn't lives in Russia where everything is controlled. In reference to the use of light and amplification of sound, they would be used very seldom. The lights proposed are no different than those used for tennis courts. As far as noise and circus affect, this does not take place either. They are giving lessons and usually pretty quiet. She is very surprised at the comments made by her neighbors and she is confused about the obsession with manure. She did not know if the Code Enforcement Department would want to inspect their handling of manure each day, but she felt it was ridiculous to get this particular about horse manure. If there is too much there, it is hauled to an organic farmer or used on the site by mixing it into the soil. As far as flies, they do not go more than 150 feet from where they are hatched. She stated she had read the report and the proposed changes and commends staff on their work. She would like to see this approved without any additional time being taken on this matter. 10. Mr. Robert Kuhl, 54-721 Monroe Street, stated he had several areas of concern. First he could not understand the reduction of five to three horses per acre. When he was annexed into La Quinta he was guaranteed he would be allowed to keep the five horses per acre as he had under the County. In addition, he would like to ability to use his entire lot. The setbacks proposed are a problem. If I own the land, I feel I should be able to use the land. He did not understand the reason for a setback that would be non -productive. The problems with the flies and manure, is unfounded. His horses are almost PC4-2.3 6 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 in his front yard, his wife has emphysema, and they have no problem with flies or smells. They are very conscious of potential problems and don't want to cause any problems for themselves or their neighbors. The proposed treatment of manure is not practical. To separate the green manure from the brown manure cannot be done and he did not see a reason for it. He has never been involved in any study sessions, and has not received any notification of the meetings. If there are to be any more meetings he would like to be informed so he could give input. 11. Mr. Harry Loukatos, 77-625 California Drive, Palm Desert, stated he was a farmer in La Quinta and in reference to the "Right to Farm" in this County, and according to Civil Code 3 482.5 -Agriculture Activity Not a Nuisance" gives him the right to farm within the City of La Quinta. The Code reads: "City and County or other political subdivision of the state ... this section shall prevail over any contrary provision of any ordinance or regulation of any city or county, or other." Please take these into consideration regarding his right to farm in the City when making these changes. 12. Mr. Bill Hobin, P. O. Box 1437, Palm Desert, asked that the Planning Commission consider under the Commercial Park Zone increasing the floor area ratio (FAR) to .35. This is a light industrial zone and .25 is less than feasible from an economic development standpoint. He would request the Planning Commission take another look at this. 13. Mrs. Julie Reeske, 54-415 Avenida Vallejo, spoke regarding the Equestrian Overlay. She stated that due to the summer heat it was important to have the lights to ride at night. . 14. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public hearing. Commissioner Anderson addressed issues raised by Mr. Roos. He stated there needed to be an analysis regarding the entitled projects and how the new zoning may affect them. He requested staff put a list together to show who would be affected. As far as trellis screening over trash and fire sprinkling, he has not faced this yet in his profession, but the fire department does make changes and suggested staff review this. The City has accepted the ULI Parking analysis and he assumed they would continue to do so. As far as retail commercial is concerned, the City has a decent standard and the City should continue to support other forms of transportation. He thought the Planning Commission was open to any shared parking ideas an applicant would like to submit. He also agreed with authorization for minor adjustment to be set up with variance type of findings. It would save the City from potential problems happening. He thanked the BIA for their comments. PC4-23 7 Planning Commission Meeting April 2 1996 15. Commissioner Barrows asked Mr. Roos to explain what he meant by his statement that the ordinance might be regressive. She asked Mr. Roos to clarify what he was referring to in relation to commercial and residential changes. In further comments, could he provide specifics as to the issues they are concerned with and relative to non -automotive transportation. 16. Commissioner Newkirk stated that due to the number of questions raised, this item needs to be continued. 17. Chairman Abels stated that in view of the information that had been received, he recommended this item be continued for two weeks to give staff time to review the questions asked and be prepared to address them. Commissioner Anderson asked about the Equestrian Overlay District. In particular, Page 66-Development Standards, the questions raised by Mrs. Kanlian are reasonable and the way it is worded may be confusing. Would a public address system and lights be allowed under any commercial horse use? If there are existing guidelines and standards available, perhaps staff can look into this. Lastly, why has the number of horses allowed per acre changed from five to three? 18. Commissioner Tyler questioned stated that if the interpretation had changed over the weekend then it needed to be addressed and he would support the continuance. The BIA comments need to be reviewed in detail. 19. Chairman Abels asked staff to explain why there appeared to be changes to the ordinance as stated by Mrs. Kanlian. Associate Planner Wally Nesbit stated he had spoken with Mrs. Kanlian regarding the manure composting and the spreading area setback and had explained to her that the City has no set standard for the handling of manure, and had received information and ordinances from other cities. The City's existing ordinance does not have a standard. As the ordinance is currently written, manure can be spread right to the property line. Therefore, staff added a requirement to offer a compromise to allow the spreading of manure. Manure spreading is not allowed unless it is part of a CUP application for a new commercial operation and supplemented with a manure control program. Regarding composting standards, staff was unable to come up with any standards from any of the local waste management companies and was in the process of researching the State guidelines. Regarding lighting and sound amplification, the City currently does not have standards or a permit process. Sound amplification would be monitored by the Code Enforcement Department for sound levels. The Equestrian Overlay District is regulated by the current lighting regulations. The current ordinance is being misinterpreted. The development standards apply to all equestrian overlay properties. As they are written, they do apply, but commercial equestrian facilities or uses may be subject to more PC4-23 8 Planning Commission Meeting April2:3, 1996 restrictive requirements through the CUP process. As this applies to lighting and sound amplification issues, any lighting proposal must comply to the Outdoor Lighting Control requirements as applicable in the current Code or no later than 9:00 P.M. The CUP process could modify these regulations. In addition, staff talked about the pasture fencing, and informed Mrs. Kanlian that there is no setback required for pasture fencing. If the fencing does not extend to the property line in order to allow a reasonable area to maintain the property line and that fencing, staff is recommending an area of 10-feet. A Section was also added for open area fencing that is not addressed in other areas of the ordinance, but this would not be required until a modification or intensifying of the use in accordance with the nonconformity section was made to the property. 20. Mr. Larry Lawrence asked if the Zoning Ordinance update was to be continued to May 14th. Staff stated yes. Mr. Lawrence added that in regards to previously approved plans Section 9.270.070-Nonconformities does address this and he went on to clarify the wording. 21. No further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Barrows to continue to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission at May 14, 1996. Unanimously approved. A. Setback Adjustment 96-394; a request of Mr. & Mrs. R. C. Pierce to appeal the Community Development Director's denial of setback adjustments for the front yard, r r yard, and garage setback on the exterior side yard for a new residence located sou west of the intersection of Calle Potrero and Avenida Juarez. 1. cipal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff rep , a copy of which is on file in the Community Development 2. Commisst er Anderson asked staff to clarify which street frontage is considered the City to be the front of the house when it is located on a corner. Princip Planner Stan Sawa clarified that the front is determined by which frontage i the narrower of the two. Discussion followed. Planning Manager Christine i Iorio stated that this is -referenced in the Architectural Design Manual. 3. Mr. Doug Phillips, lawye or the appellants, stated one of the most important concerns to the applicant is e placementn of the garage. He went on to state the reasons they thought justi d their applying for and receiving a variance: PC4-23 9 MAY 14, t R9 to ATTACHMENT 2 G 1NpG O a to 9SSGCIP'��G? Desert Chapter Building Industry Assoaation of Southern California, Inc. May 2, 1996 La Quinta Planning Commission c/o Mr. Jerry Herman Director of Community Development City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 ,1 t MAY. 1696 p CITY OF LA GUINTA PLANNING `ER RTUENT Re: General Plan and Zoning Ordinance Updates Cornments from Building Industry Association Desert Chapter Legislative Affairs Committee Dear Commissioners: The Building Industry Association Desert Chapter (BLA/DC) appreciates this opportunity to provide input into the update to the City's General Plan and redrafted Zoning Ordinance. By working lly assist the City in adopting a development code that will together at this point, we can hopefu serve the community and the industry well into the future. GENERAL PLAN COMMENTS Relative to the changes suggested for the General Plan Text, the BIA/DC is particularly concerned with the elimination of the Development Standards for the commercial and industrial land use classifications. Such standards are mandatory in the Government Code (Section 65302) and the General Plan would be vulnerable without them. We understand and concur in the desire to avoid having to amend the General Plan if someone were to propose an outstanding project which may be inconsistent with these standards. However, there are alternative approaches that would put the community in a strong position to allow deviations from such standards without jeopardizing the General Plan. We are also concerned about the total elimination of Policy 2-1.1.3 without replacing it with alternative clarifying language. Density bonuses are mandated by the Government Code and without language to the contrary may be demanda�nany residential zone in the ation but should not be entirely deleted unity The current, language may need refinement and 77-564 Country Club Drive, Suite 400-13, Palm Desert, CA 92211 (619) 360-2476 Fax #(619) 772-3372 ZONING ORDINANCE COMMENTS We wish to compliment the Commission, staff and consultants who have developed the text and exhibits. The document is thorough and well organized and generally easy to use. Of course, there are areas that we would like to urge further review and some redrafting prior to sending it on to the Council. BI.A/DC will assist in any way that the Commission and staff might request to resolve these relatively few issues that remain of concern. At this time we will not spend time on minor details such as typing errors and the like. We have already made the consultants aware of those issues where discovered. We would like to focus on a few key areas, some quantitative and some qualitative in nature. Qualitative; Issues 1. Overall the Ordinance presents some concern that the development entitlements (Tentative Tract Maps, Conditional Use Permits, Specific Plans) already in place throughout the community may require major revisions due to proposed ordinance changes such as increased setbacks, additional garaged parking, etc. The Commission and staff should be aware that the very exacting process in place through the Community Development Department is not frivolously undertaken by the weak - hearted. To have to redo a major entitlement seems unfair, particularly in phased projects, where consistency between phases has been a concern of the Commission. Staff should present an analysis of the entitled projects which would require reworking prior to issuance of building permits. Not all projects have Development Agreements, Vesting Tentative Tract Maps, or Specific Plans and even in those instances may merely reference Zoning Ordinance Standards. 2. The Ordinance has set forth some standards that appear misplaced in a Zoning Ordinance and may be better reviewed and presented in the form of local Building Code Amendments. The main area of this concern is the detailed specification set forth for exterior applications for wood fencing. While this may be a valid concern, it is inappropriate in a zoning ordinance. Another is defining various rooms in a residence as bedrooms that don't qualify as bedrooms under the Uniform Building Code (UBC). 3. The Ordinance lacks flexibility to enable the staff to work with unique situations that are not otherwise covered in the ordinance. This concern can be easily overcome with some well placed clauses that empower the Community Development Director to resolve defined, minor glitches in such areas as setbacks, fence heights, signage, etc. 2 The Ordinance has added requirements which add to the cost of construction in areas that, in industry's opinion, should be market decisions; in particular, the amount of covered. parking both residential and commercial land uses. The construction industry finds that old "norms" for setting forth the development parameters for various land uses are being replaced. Additionally, many of the proposed new standards and criteria in this Ordinance tend more toward micro -management of product development rather than setting community standards. The Ordinance is largely regressive. Considering the number of changes that have occurred in both the commercial and residential fields in just the last decade, our comment is that the Ordinance seems more interested in predicting past problems than in assisting in the resolution of future community needs. A particular concern here is the lack of incentives for non -automotive transportation and conversely the seemingly excessive amounts of parking required. Further, the Ordinance does not encourage innovation and experimentation. The Neo- traditional and New Urbanism trends are likely to become more dominant in the future. Rising gasoline prices will cause another reevaluation of our auto -oriented urban/suburban land use patterns. La Quinta, through its General Plan and Zoning Ordinance could help and encourage the evolution of the new solutions. rdinance Specifics . 9.30.020 - EIA/DC is not aware that the City's Housing Element has incorporated such weeping language concerning inclusionary zoning. This section should be reworked to be ermissive and not mandatory. . Various pages and sections - The Ordinance states 1110' min. at any point, 20' min. over entire -outage." The second minimum should probably be "average". Various :Residential Sections - The existing sideyard setbacks (5 ft./5 ft.) is well established hroughout the community. There appears to be no reason to change it at this point and it would hake cul-de-sac lots, in particular, difficult to design since two story structures are commonly leployed. Administratively, this change will also cause problems when owners of existing 'esidences try to remodel and expand their homes only to be told that they can't follow the ;xisting guide lines. Perhaps a better approach is to apply increased setbacks only in new Planned developments and Specific Plans. This would leave existing developments on a level playing field ind reduce 'the amount of non -conformity that will be created. 1. 9.60.030-C.2&3 - The fence height determination may work in flat topographic situations but Is unworkable where moderate grade differentials exist. This is probably best solved by giving the Community Development Director the authority to resolve. 3 1.60.030-CA-a.2 - This section purports to control visibility at driveways and streets. Many :s the driveway is adjacent to the side property line and there is no way to control the ;hbors property. Unless these are specific situations where a problem has existed (major -oughfares, heavy use driveways, e.g.) the City should probably not try to enforce this city- .. 9.60.030-I).1&2 -The quality of wood in gates is out -of -place in a zoning ordinance and to the Uniform Building Code. uld be deleted. it might be better adopted as local amendments JDC would also request deletion of the gate width standards due to the imposition of punitive is to the homeowner to gain simple access to his own property for legitimate construction and intenance reasons. 9.65.020-D.6-c - "Shaded" needs to be defined. 9.65.070-G - The language "blank walls shall not be permitted" should be altered to "....shall discouraged." The review process can deal with individual applications to insure compatibility th the overall proposal and the surrounding conditions. 9.65.070-K.2 - Mature landscaping within two years of installation is unrealistic realisrealistic nd will and >ult in overplanting and future maintenance problems. Se years )rkable. ). 9.80.040-Table 9-5 - Under Public and Semi -Public Uses several uses (Electric Substations, ater Wells and Pumping Stations, and Reservoirs and Water Tanks) are listed as being regulated the Ordinance. These uses are specifically exempted from Zoning Ordinance control by wernment Code 53090. 1. 9.100.O50 - The requirement for trellis type screening over trash areas should be optional. re -Departzrients are starting to require sprinklers due to high incidence of fires. The use of ndscape materials for screening would serve the same purpose. 2.9.100.200-C - The city should research and produce a hand-out concerning general guidelines )r trash/recycling volumes. This research is not effectively undertaken by individual projects. UAG should have this information in its extensive 'research on MURFs and waste disposal issues. .3. Table 9-11 - As noted previously the Uniform Buildingode is quite in this ificregon. Also what onstitutes a bedroom. BIA/DC requests that the Ordinance reflect a this table are very onerous requirements for parking. Of particular mount of to Bt p akmg the s -equirement for three car garages (four or more bedrooms) and th here any research to back up these standards? 11 Table 9-12 - The requirements for Retail Commercial uses ensure that all such facilities will surrounded with a sea of asphalt. In addition, requiring additional parking for restaurants in hopping center is regressive. Allowing a percentage of overall floor area in restaurant usage core appropriate and more easily administered. The requirements for hotels seem high and are ibably not supported by local research. Experience has shown that the larger the hotel facility less parking per room. Also, meeting facilities should be considered as selling rooms, therefore ,,rs are mostly hotel patrons and parking should be considered accordingly. Certainly, if a resort >igns a facility to be primarily marketed to the general public, the parking should be viewed -ordingly. As much as possible, the City's parking standards should be based on local )erience. Has any study been done to document local conditions? . 9.150.050-D.3 - Perhaps bicycle and golf cart parking spaces should be encouraged and owed to count as part of the required parking. Also, other Transportation Demand inagement strategies should be encouraged by allowing reductions in parking requirements. ►. 9.210.040 - The authorization for Minor Adjustments should include Variance type findings insure that modifications, specifically those dealing with dimensional requirements (setbacks, .ice heights, etc.), are not the granting of special privileges. BIA/DC encourages as much lministrative resolution as possible and encourages such provisions in the ordinance. 7. 9.0 3 0.0 50-D. 1 - A concern of BIA/DC is the ordinance's limitation of stucco walls in the cove *ea. Certainly other materials could be designed to be compatible with the surrounding area. there are some particular problem materials, perhaps these could be delineated as prohibited or scouraged. .pally, we anticipate that the page numbering system will be revamped in the final version to lake it easier for one to find their way through the document. IA/DC appreciates the extensive effort the Commission and staff have gone through to get this rdinance to this point. We would request that our areas of concern be addressed prior to sending ie Ordinance to City Council. We are available to assist the City in resolving these final few, but nportant issues. ;xecutive Director "Y 14-, I G9lo ATTACHMENT 3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: APRIL 23, 1996 CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 96-052 ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 96-050 INITIATED BY: CITY OF LA QUINTA CONSIDERATION: RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THE FOLLOWING: 1). CERTIFICATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT APPROVING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION 2). APPROVAL GENERAL PLAN TEXT AND LAND USE POLICY DIAGRAM AMENDMENT 3). APPROVAL OF ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT TO LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE, TITLE 9, RELATING TO ZONING CODE, REPLACING EXISTING TITLE 9, DELETING CHAPTERS 5.36, 5.37, 5.64, 5.68, AND A PORTION OF CHAPTER 5.72. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 96-318 FOR THE PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING CODE AMENDMENT. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT NO ADVERSE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WILL OCCUR. THEREFORE A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED AND IS RECOMMENDED FOR CERTIFICATION. Update of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code began in March, 1994. This document, prepared by Tierra Planning and Design and Lawrence Associates, will bring the Code into conformance with the 1992 update of the City's General Plan. A citizens' workshop was held on June 13, 1994. The proposed Zoning Code update will apply City-wide and provide a comprehensive set of standards and regulations for development. Planning Commission workshops were held on March 14, April 11, April 25, May 9, May 23, June 13, June 27, July 11, July 25, August 8, September 26, October 10, October 24, and November 28, PCSS.200 1995, to review the revisions to the Zoning Code. The minutes of those workshops, except for November 28, 1995 which are not available, are contained in this report (Attachment 1). Because of the desire to revise the Village Specific Plan, the only change to proposed Chapter 9.65 (the Village) has been to reformat and reorganize it. The new sign regulations (Chapter 9.160), processed through Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-049, were approved by the City Council at its meeting of April 2, 1996. These regulations will become effective on May 3, 1996. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT TEXT AND LAND USE DIAGRAM AMENDMENT: The La Quinta General Plan is a statement of development policy reflecting local conditions. The Land Use Element of the General Plan designates the general distribution and intensity of uses of the land for housing, commercial, office, industrial, open space, parks, and public facilities and services. The Zoning Code is a tool that implements the General Plan. With the proposed Zoning Code Revision, the General Plan Land Use Element was reviewed to eliminate development standards that are more appropriately achieved through the Zoning Code. Commercial development standards that are recommended for deletion from the General Plan are now recommended to be included in the Zoning Code. The proposed General Plan Amendment streamlines the development process while maintaining the integrity of the City's General Plan as a guide for the comprehensive development of the City. The proposed General Plan Text Amendments (Attachment 4) to the Land Use Element eliminate cumbersome development standards from the General Plan. With these amendments, proposed commercial projects that exceed intensity requirements (maximum building heights/stories and floor area ratios) will not require a General Plan Amendment to receive approval. The commercial development standards which are recommended for deletion from the General Plan (which are identified in Attachment 4) are proposed to be incorporated in the Zoning Code Revision (Chapter 9.90.040, 'fable of Development Standards). The Zoning Code Revision, Table 9-6: Nonresidential Development Standards (Chapter 9.90), identifies and defines maximum floor area ratio, maximum height, and maximum number of stories for all nonresidential structures. This amendment modifies certain residential policies which will be implemented through the Zoning Code. Deletion of Policy 2-1.1.3 provides consistency with the newly adopted and certified Housing Element which identifies density bonus provisions required in the Government Code be adopted by ordinance. These provisions are incorporated in the Zoning Code Revision (Chapter 9.60.270) as City policy. Policy 2-1.19 is deleted and revised to recommend these same conditions be implemented through the Zoning Code Revision (Chapter 9.40.030). Policy 21.2.3 is amended to delete specified standards from the Rural Residential Overlay category. These standards are revised and incorporated into the Zoning Code Revision ( Chapter 9.30.100). This amendment also provides an updated Proposed Land Use Policy Diagram to reflect all amendments, annexations, and production errors that have occurred since adoption of the Proposed Land Use Element Policy Diagram in 1992. PCSS.200 ZONING CODE UPDATE Goal And Objectives The goal of the Zoning Code is to promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the City's citizens. To achieve this goal the Zoning Code has been drafted with the following objectives (Section 9.10.010(c) of draft Code): 1. To implement the City's General Plan. 2. To classify and designate different land uses and structures in appropriate places as designated in the General Plan, and to regulate such land uses and structures in order to serve the needs of the residential neighborhoods, commerce, recreation, open space, and other purposes. 3. To provide a guide for the development and use of land in the City as required by State Government Code. 4. To secure for the residents of the City the social and economic advantages resulting from the planned and orderly use of its land resources. 5. To establish conditions which allow the various types of land uses to exist in harmony and to promote the stability of existing land uses by protecting them from harmful intrusion. 6. To prevent undue intensity of land use or development, to avoid population overcrowding, to maintain a suitable balance between developed land and open space, and to protect the natural beauty of the City. 7. To insure that adequate off-street parking and loading facilities are provided and maintained for all land uses. 8. To provide land zoned for schools, parks and other public facilities. 9. To insure the provision of affordable housing opportunities. General Zoning; Code Format The Zoning Code chapters are summarized as follows based upon the various subjects, zones and regulations in Attachment 2. General Features of Zoning Code The Zoning Code has been drafted as a comprehensive document that provides regulations and procedures for development in the City. The Code is intended to implement the 1992 General Plan and replace the existing Riverside County based ordinance utilized since incorporation in 1982. All sections now have an Authority and Purpose section that provides a statement of intent. Graphic displays used to help clarify regulations such as setbacks, lot types, and building height measurement, etc. Matrixes are used where possible to eliminate duplication of information. Some examples where a matrix is used is the Residential Uses, Nonresidential Uses, and Development Standards. Some Development Standards such as Floor Area Ratios, Maximum Story Heights and Rural Development Standards, that were a part of the General Plan policies have been incorporated into the Zoning Code. As a part of General Plan Amendment 96-052, these Development Standards are being deleted to eliminate the need to amend the General Plan in the future should the City wish to change the Zoning Code. PCSS.200 Highlights of Code by Chapter Cha4)ter 9.10 General Provisions Provides objectives and establishes authority. Sets ground rules such as Code interpretation and use of terms. "h 2ter 9.20 Zoning Districts Establishes 27 zoning districts which will be utilized in the Code and on the new zoning map. Allows determination of land uses not listed. C h pter 9.30 Residential Districts Provides 6 residential districts and 2 overlay districts. Provides basic development standards for districts. Specifies that a minimum of 15% of dwelling units in all multi -family residential projects, residential specific plans and mixed use areas (permitting residential uses) shall be in the affordable low and/or very low income categories. IRM Provides conditions for varying residential densities within higher and lower density districts. This provision has been added to implement General Plan Policy 2-1.1.9. Provides matrix listing permitted uses in residential districts. Ch inter 9.50 Residential Development Standards Provides matrix listing development standards for residential districts. 'Utilizes graphics to illustrate the application of development standards. :Provides height measurement methodology for residential uses. ,Chapter 9.60 Supplemental Residential Regulations Provides all supplemental residential districts regulations such as walls and fences, accessory buildings, swimming pools, model home complexes, density bonus for affordable housing, and two-story restriction along project boundaries adjacent to existing single family residences. Chapter 9.65 The Village This chapter has been drafted based on the existing Village Specific Plan and current regulations. The chapter provides a matrix listing permitted uses and is drafted using the existing requirements. PCSS.200 C er 9 70 Nonresidential Districts Provides 7 commercial districts and 1 overlay district. Provides purpose and intent for each district Based on General Plan Policy 2-3.1.4 a NR (Nonresidential Overlay) Zone for use on the CR (Regional Commercial) Zone is provided. Allows for incidental residential use in NR overlay areas of the CR Zone. "h )ter 9.80 Nonresidential Permitted Uses Provides matrix listing permitted uses in nonresidential districts - CR Zone allows townhome and multifamily residential uses under specific conditions. Chapigr 9.90 Nonresidential Development Standards Provides matrix listing development standards for Nonresidential Districts. Utilizes graphics to illustrate development standards and method of building height measurement. Chapter 9.100 Supplemental Nonresidential Regulations In addition to general Temporary Use Permits (TUP), Christmas tree sales, Halloween Pumpkin sales, Produce and Flower stands, Outdoor Events are all subject to Administrative approval. Provides regulations for nonresidential related subjects such as outdoor lighting, screening, trash recycling, and service station standards. Provides comprehensive noise control standards for noise sensitive uses such as residential uses (allowed in CR Zone), schools, hospitals, and churches, and for other types of nonresidential uses. Ch W# 9.110 Special P rpose Districts • :Provides Parks and Recreation, Golf Course, Open Space, and Flood Plain Districts as special purpose districts. • :Provides the Hillside Conservation and Sexually Oriented Business Overlay Districts. • Included are some of the general development standards for the districts as well as the regulations for hillside development. • These overlay districts are carried over from the existing regulations and not changed. ,chapter 9_20*ai Purpose Permitted Uses Provides a matrix listing the permitted uses for the Special Purpose Districts and Overlay Districts. PCss.200 Chanter 9.130 Special Purpose Development Standards Provides a matrix listing the development standards for Special Purpose Development Districts. hCK)ter 9.140 Supplement Special Purpose Regulations tions Provides detailed regulations for Special Purpose Districts. Ch )ter 9.150 Parking Provides comprehensive parking requirements including number of spaces, design criteria, and loading requirements, etc. Requires 30% increase of covered parking for office and medical uses. Provides an increase in number of required spaces for three bedroom apartments and retail uses. Ci pter 9.160 i n This chapter has been previously approved and adopted by the City Council at its April 2, 1996, meeting under Ordinance #281. Chapter 9.170 Community Towers and Equipment Regulates communication towers and associated accessory buildings. No changes from the existing Ordinance. Cha.�r 9.180 Transportation Demand Managementg No changes. Cl oter 9. 990 Transfer of Development Rights No changes. Chfjpter 9.200 General Permitting Procedures Provides procedures for processing Development Review applications and the criteria and conditions necessary so that the review and approval body can make an appropriate decision. Authority for approving the various permits, time limits for processing applications, amendments, and appeals are among the items discussed. Provides matrix listing discretionary review authority. PCSS.200 biter 9.210 Development Review Permits • Includes required findings for site development permits, conditional use permits, minor use permits, variances, minor adjustments, temporary use permits, home occupation permits, and sign permits. • With the exception of the conditional use and site development permits, these applications will be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Director. rite 9.220 Zoning Changes and Code Amendments • Provides specific procedures and required findings for zone changes, pre -annexation zoning, and zoning code text amendments. C'hW,2ter 9.230 ,General Plan Amendments • Provides procedures and required findings for amending the General Plan. ,"h ler 9.240 Specific Plans • Provides procedures and required findings for approval and amending of specific plans. ChapiLgr 9.250 Other Actions • Provides information on processing of subdivisions, development agreements and environmental review applications. Ch :pJgr_ 9.260 Fees • Fees for "processing of applications" are set by resolution of the City Council. • Provides a formula for fee refunds of applications which are withdrawn. • Notes that non-profit organizations are exempt from paying processing fees for temporary outdoor event applications. ChjW1gr 9.270 Nonconformities • Provides regulations for uses, lots, or structures which are nonconforming or become nonconforming with adoption of this zoning code. Ch,Wter 9.280 Definitions • This chapter provides a comprehensive listing and definition of terminology used in the Zoning Code. PCSs.2oa ADDITION OF EQUESTRIAN OVERLAY DISTRICT: The Equestrian Overlay District (EOD) has been added to the Zoning Code. Attachment 3 contains the text which will be added as 9.100.090 9.140.060 and reflects the concerns raised by the Planning Commission and the City Attorney at the March 26th meeting on the EOD: Revisions have been made to tine tune the regulations and to address items such as placement of these regulations in the Code. The following list summarizes the changes referred to: • Chapter and section numbers have been struck. The Equestrian Overlay will be incorporated at a later date. Page 1 - added "structure" into accessory building and use definition to address Commissioner Anderson's concern regarding application of development standards to certain types of uses and improvements, and included an example; • Made changes to chapter/section references to apply to the new Code numbers where possible; • Page 5, Section C - made change to address Mr. Kanlian's concern about unfenced horse property adjacent to non -overlay lands; • Added "nominal" to post/rail size standards for fencing requirements; • Page 6 - added conflict provision for fencing standards relative to new standards in the revised Code section; • Page 7, G and FI - added qualifying language for lighting and amplified sound as to regulation by CUP in lieu of general standards. • Pages 8, 9 - the CUP process has been tied in with applicable revised zoning chapters/sections, relating to CUP processing and nonconformities. MPSCELLANEOUS MUNICIPAL CODE AMENDMENTS: There are several chapters in the Municipal Code which are no longer needed because they are addressed in the Zoning Code update and are recommended for deletion as follows: 1. Chapter 5.36 - Novelty sales at special events 2. Chapter 5.37 - Activities involving outdoor merchandising 3. Chapter 5.64 - Special Advertising Devices 4. Chapter 5.68 - Sound Trucks and Advertising by Sound 5. Portion of Chapter 5.72 - Miscellaneous Businesses Regulated a. Section 5.72.010 - City Council permit required for certain businesses. b. Section 5.72.020 - Revocation of permit delete reference to "5.72.010. or" on first line. CONCLUSION: The General Plan Text Amendment of the Land Use Element eliminates standards for development that are more appropriate in the Zoning Code. The updated Land Use Policy diagram will better reflect the most current information regarding land use designations. The draft Zoning Code update is the result of extensive research and review. The Code is prepared as a comprehensive document that implements the goals and policies of the General Plan. Findings as noted in the attached Resolutions can be made to support staff recommendation for approval of this document. PCSs.200 REC'OMMENDATION: Staff'recommends: 1. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending certification of a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact for General Plan Amendment 96-052 and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-050 (Attachment 5) and; 2. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Land Use Element text and Land Use Policy diagram changes General Plan Amendment 96-052; 3. Adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-050 to La Quinta Municipal Code, Title 9, relating to Zoning Code, as noted in Exhibit "A" on file in the Community Development Department, replacing existing Title 9, and deleting Chapters 5.36, 5.37, 5.64, 5.68, and a portion of Chapter 5.72 per attached Exhibit `B". - Attachments: 1. Workshop minutes 2. General Zoning Code format 3. Overlay District for Equestrian uses 4. General Plan Amendment - proposed amendments to Chapter 2: Land Use 5. Environmental checklist form and discussion of Impacts (Environmental Assessment). 6. Draft Zoning Code (for Planning Cornrnission only) Prepared by: 43�C m-' P-? Jay A, STAN B. SAWA, Principal Planner Submitted by: J D, CHRISTINE DI IORIO, Pla ng Manager PCSS.200 APK I L Z3, I" 6P ATTACHMENT 1 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78 495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA MARCH 14,1995 L CALL TO ORDER 4:00 P.M. A. This mee of the Planning Commission was called to order at 4:03 P.M. by Chairman AdoID Commissioner Barrows led the flag salute. IL ROLL CALL A. airman Adolph requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Anderson, t rrows, Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, and Chairman Adolph B. Staff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer Ill. BUSINESS SESSION: A. Workshop an the La Quinta Zoning Ordinance Update: a request of the City for a review of the Zoning Ordinance Update. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa gave a brief review of the sections that would be reviewed and introduced Larry Lawrence, Lawrence Associates who gave an opening statement as to why the update was taking place and an overview of the Draft Ordinance. 2. Commissioner Gardner asked why we were referring to the Update as a Code. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that the proper procedure was to adopt a change to the Municipal Code by Ordinance, but it is a part of the Municipal Code. 3. Mr. Lawrence went through the different sections and explained how the Draft Zoning Ordinance was arranged. 4. Commissioner Butler asked the consultant if the terms being used were the current terms and the current terminology to be used. Mr. Lawrence stated it would be. "MAA Planning Commission Meeting March 14,1995 5. Commissioner Butler asked if there would be a new zoning map showing these changes. Staff stated there would be a new map with the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance Update. 6. Commissioner Gardner asked if the document would be user-friendly and would the language used be uniform throughout the State. Mr. Lawrence stated zoning codes are different from City to City and each is unique. However, most cities are going to this type of format. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that where an area is controlled by State Law, those areas would be similar. Zoning is completely under local control and therefore has its own uniqueness. 7. Commissioner Anderson stated that the overall format is not typical but the Information is similar and easily attainable. A laymen may have difficulty but the professional should be able to understand it. Discussion followed. S. Mr. Tom Davis, Tierra Planning and Design, explained his firm was working jointly with Lawrence Associates on the Update and therefore should be as close as possible to industry standards. Mr. Lawrence was familiar with various zoning codes, and has dealt with development standards and together they brought expertise in both areas. He further explained that this document Implements the General Plan. 9. Chairman Adolph asked if they would be required to update the General Plan so they both agree. Staff stated they would not be necessary as the Zoning Ordinance was written to implement the General Plan and therefore there should be no conflicts. 10. Commissioner Gardner asked what the Commission would have to do if there was an area in conflict. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that public hearings would have to be held to amend the General Plan. It is very likely that as the City uses the Ordinance Update, there will be areas that may need to change. 11. Commissioner Anderson stated he felt there should be a section that defines what the lot coverage is including the garage, as well as livable floor space. There needs to be very definite definitions as to what lot coverage is and what livable floor space is. 12. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell asked that Section 9.10.060 be eliminated as it was contained within another part of the Municipal Code. PCS-14 2 Planning Commission Meeting March 14.1995 13. Chairman Adolph stated that Section 9.10.010(C) did not mention anything about traffic or infrastructure. Staff explained this will be handled in the subdivision Ordinance. Chairman Adolph asked why it was not applicable to this section. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that it is included in the General Plan and the General Plan has different elements such as the Transportation Element. Discussion followed regarding Open Space definition and whether or not it was adequately covered. Following discussion, the consultants were instructed to add a #10 to Section 9.10.10(C) to add something about the "natural beauty of the hillside". 14. Chairman Adolph questioned the verbiage of Section 9.10.020 and asked whether the word "control" shouldn't be used. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained what the proper usage would be. She further stated this was a laymen statement of a legal statement. 15. Commissioner Anderson stated that Page 4 Section 9.10.080 was the logical place to have a statement regarding lot coverage and livable space. Mr. Lawrence stated there was a chapter on definitions and it was more appropriate there. 16. Mr. Lawrence pointed out an editorial note on Page 6 and explained its purpose. 17. Commissioner Newkirk stated there was a PD Zoning on the map, but it was not listed under 9.20.010. Staff stated it should be added. 18. Commissioner Gardner asked what AB Zoning was? Staff explained it was Adult Business and explained what it consisted of. 19. Chairman Adolph asked what Section B on Page 7 referred to. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained this was a safety valve for areas where the zoning lines were not definitely defined. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that should someone not agree with staff, they could appeal the decision to the Planning commission and City Council. 20. Chairman Adolph asked if Section 9.20.030(A) could be written with more clarity. It needed to be simplified. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained what the section meant. Mr. Lawrence stated it was intended to give the Planning Commission more flexibility in setting requirements within each zoning district. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that along the toe of the mountain you want the setback to be more because of slides, etc. This section would allow the City to require additional setbacks. Discussion followed. Commissioners asked that the section be written in a more simplified manner. "".J Planning Commission Meeting March 14,1995 21. Chairman Adolph stated he felt that a sentence should be added to Page 8, Section 920.040 stating "free of all encumbrances". Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained this section was used to give the Director authority to deal with uses that were similar but not specifically mentioned. Discussion followed. 22. Commissioner Abels asked if flat roofs could be banned. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated this was addressed in the Building Code. Commissioner Anderson explained that typically there are no flat roofs, they all have a slight pitch. 23. Chairman Adolph asked that in Section 9.30.010(D) more verbiage could be added regarding shade structures and give some flexibility to the applicant. Chairman Adolph asked that a sentence be added regarding shade structures being required on the south and west elevations for glass areas larger than 16 square feet. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated some flexibility could be added., Principal Planner Stan Sawa stated the Planning Commission had previously required overhangslshade structures for certain glass areas of a certain size. 24. Commissioner Barrows stated this section was specifically addressing an eave or window. If a sentence was added it would need to be consistent and have flexibility. There should be overhangs on the entire building, in addition to the south and west exposure and some type of alternate shading device for any window over a certain size. Discussion followed. 27. Commissioners discussed setbacks and development standards. Commissioners Barrows/Anderson moved to recess at 5:47 P.M. Unanimously approved. .Cnmmi_.imalnu.nconvened at 7:02 P.M. Chairman Adolph called the meeting to order. being no public comment nor any public hearings, Chairman Adolph introduced the Business BUSINESS A. a request of Vintage Homes for approval of a plot plan application to alto edification of a recreation lot at Lake La 4uinta. 1. cipal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained within the sta report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development M14 4 CC MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA April 11, 1995 CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of Chairman Ad U. ROLL CALL IV. 0000, PC4-11 A. B. 3:00 P.M. Planning Commission was called to order at 3:00 P.M. by Commissioner Butler led the flag salute. i Adolph requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, , Butler, Gardner, Newkirk., and Chairman Adolph. ii%ioner Butler moved to excuse Commissioner Barrows. Commissioner seconded the motion and it was unanimous. C. aff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planners Greg Trousdell and Leslie Mouriquand, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer. WORKSHOP A. Zo in_g Ordinance Update: a request of staff for Planning Commission review of proposed changes to the Zoning Ordinance. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. In addition, corrections that were made at the prior meeting were reviewed and the sections to be discussed were stated. Phuming Commission Minutes April ill, 1995 2. Following a brief summary by the Larry Lawrence, Lawrence Associates, consultants preparing the Zoning Ordinance Update, Commissioners discussed the changes with staff and the consultants. The following changes were made: a. Section 9.60.030 Fences and Walls: reword the definition, add "finish grade at the base of the fence" to measurement of fence height, and clarify opening railings and fences less than 30- inches. Under setback areas add City "or state" required, add "c" to visibility at intersections. Eliminate "D" regarding Adjustments for Height Increases. Revise and add to E.2-wood fencing, E.4-Masonry Fencing, E.5-Material Combinations, and E.6-Gates. Add to F-Fence Landscaping and Maintenance. Edit and add to G-Prohibited Fence Materials. b. Section 9.60.040. Patio Covers, Decks, and Play Equipment. Add "uncovered decks and other structures less than 18- inches..." to A -Applicability. Change 3-feet to "3-1/2 feet from any property line" to B.4. Eliminate C-Adjustments. C. Section 9.60.050. Storage and Other Accessory Buildings. Eliminate E-Adjustments. d. Section 9.60.060. Garages and Carports. Add reference to circular driveways and add the maximum height of detached garages. e. Section 9.60.070. Swimming Pools. B.1-Location revise to allow 110" setback for pools within a gated community. f. Section 9.60.100. Guest Houses. D.1-add detached guest houses, and eliminate #7. g. Section 9.60.120. Pets and Other Animals. Add "other than dog runs" to fast sentence. h. Section 9.60.130. Recreational Vehicle Parking. Eliminate "vehicle designed and used for temporary inhabitation" from B.Definitions. Edit C.1 regarding uses permitted in which zones, and add screening requirements to C.6. 3. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell asked that Page 21 under Definitions PC4-11 Planning Commission Minutes April 11, 1995 the words "hedge or thick growth of trees" should be deleted and add thick growth or shrubs of trees. 4. Commissioner Butler asked that the definitions on pedestrian and auto access gates be expanded and clarified. 5. Commissioners Butler and Gardner discussed the pros and cons of wood fencing and the burden of the expense of concrete fences. 6. Commissioner Anderson stated he was comfortable with improving the standard of wood fences. Commissioners discussed the problems that could still be incurred. 7. Discussion followed regarding how to provide for vehicle access and pedestrian gates. 8. Commissioner Anderson stated he did not think access gates should be allowed in a sideyard less than 12-feet. 9. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell asked that verbiage be added to Section 9.60.030(C)(3)(e) to include the word City "and State". In addition, Section 9.60.030(D) would require a variance and should be deleted. Discussion followed regarding reasons for and against the section and possible changes. 10. Chairman Adolph asked that on Page 24 - Masonry fences a statement should be added that requires both sides of a masonry wall must be stuccoed. 11. Commissioner Butler asked if there was a material that could be utilized for patio covers that would not warp after the first summer - Section 9.60.040 - Patio Covers. 12. Commissioner Anderson stated there should be no lumber smaller than 3 X 3. Commissioner Butler stated they should be required to be treated as well. Commissioner Gardner stated there were treated materials that could be used. 13. Community Development Director Jerry Herman asked that additional verbiage be added regarding the height of a detached garages. Discussion followed regarding the height of the garage - should it be as high or higher than a single story (28') residential unit. Following PC4-11 3 Planning Commission Minutes April 11, 1995 discussion it was determined that detached garages shall be no higher than 17-feet. 14. Commissioner Adels what the distance was from the property line for swimming pools. Commissioner Anderson stated no pool could be built closer than five feet from any power pole. Discussion, already covered by staff. Consultant Larry Lawrence stated the three feet was there to allow an area for walking around the pool. Principal Planner Stan Sawa asked that verbiage be added to clarify location encroachments 15. Chairman Adolph asked if a property owner could have a second residential unit on a single lot. Staff stated it would require a conditional use permit and the City has approved one or two. 16. Commissioner Abels asked why the City did not allow cooking facilities in a 1200 sq. ft. second unit. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated it was to discourage duplexes on a single lot. Commissioners discussed kitchens as they related to granny flat or guest houses. 17. Due to the hour, Chairman Adolph continued the Workshop to the April 25, 1995. The discussion would start with Page 35-Screening. 18. Commissioners Anderson and Abels moved to continue the study. Unanimously approved. 19. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated her concern regarding the sensitivity expressed about the EIR and the fact that it was prepared by the developer. State law allowed for the developer to prepare the EIR but the City must adopt it as your own. She asked that during the next meeting the Commissioners address their questions to City staff. All discussion will be between the Commission and staff. Chairman Adolph recessed the Planing Commission meeting until 7:00 P.M. and reconvened the meeting at 7:05 P.M. PUBLIC PC4-11 ® 4 NIINUTES PLANNING CONMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78 495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA APRIL 25,1995 3.100 P.I L I. CALL TO A. Tbffimeetingof the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:00 P.NI. by Chairman olph. Commissioner Abels led the flag salute Chairman Adolph requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Anderson, Barrows, Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, and Chairman Adolph. B. Staff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer. WORKSHOP: A. La Quinta, ZOT-lur1rdluancerftdaft; 1. Commissioners and staff discussed with the consultants the following changes to the Zoning Ordinance update. a. Section 9.60.140. - Screening. B.i.b. change to 1325 feet; BZ Include pool spa equipment; B.3. Commissioners discussed solar panels and the requirement that the underside cannot be seen. Commissioner Barrows stated she did not want the ordinance to be so restrictive as to prevent someone from using solar. Commissioner Anderson asked if a property owner could use curbside collectors (screened like a skylight) if screened and the underside was not seen. Staff stated as long as it is aesthetically screened. Commissioner Anderson asked if the panels were ground mounted will the City require it to be screened. Staff stated that as long as the neighbor could not see it, they would not require screening. b. Commissioner Anderson requested that staff put the requirement of solar water heating be added to the code. C. Section 9.60.150., B.1: 12-foot high chain link fence blocks the view of the mountains. Need conditional use permit to control height of fences; B.3.: lighting should require a conditional use permit; increase the setback or recess the tennis court. Consultants stated that anything over 8-feet must increase the setback, and the City will need to address sideyards as well on a ratio of 3:1. d. Section 9.60.160: all outdoor lighting must conform to the Dark Sky Ordinance. e. Section 9.60.180: Manufactured Housing and Mobile homes. Concern that there is no mention of modular buildings. How does the City inspect something that is already built; C2. Foundations should be checked to see that it addresses earthquake standards and that the units must be placed on a slab. Staff stated the City requires them to be compatible with existing units. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that a manufactured home is the same as a modular house. They must conform to the residential neighborhoods they are going into. Staff further stated the units are required to be connected to the foundation. The City requirements for modular homes are that you can put a mobile home on a lot in the Cove if they can meet the requirements for a single family home. They must refurbish the unit to appear as a single family house. Commissioner Gardner asked that the wording mobile homes should be eliminated as they are all manufactured homes. The consultant stated there needed to be a reference for "mobile home" for identification. Commissioner Gardner asked that it be put in parentheses. f. Section 9.60.190, B.3.; add provisions for all parking, outdoor lighting, and security. g. Section 9.60110. Construction and Guard Offices: Need to simplify this section. h. Section 9.60240. Model Home Complexes: A.i the number of units in a project needs to be clarified and add temporary landscaping for A.4Ju C2., define "conflict". i. Section. 9.60.250. Condominium Conversion: A2., Tenant notification confusion as to notification - simplify. 2 j. Section 9.60260 Density bonuses for Affordable Housing Staff asked that inclusionary zone whereby all residential units need to provide 15% for low moderate income households to meet the state requirements be added. C.7., regulatory incentives needs to be clarified. Commissioners wanted to know if this was enough to know they have to go to compatible issues. The City Attorney stated this was not the appropriate place. It needed to do handled at the tentative tract review. Chairman Adolph asked if the developer has the right of first refusal at fair market value and was this ongoing. Staff explained that this is to keep affordable housing in the housing program; E.3., Chairman Adolph asked what were the reasonable conditions. The consultant stated it was to give the City flexibility with conversions to make sure they can conform to the State affordable housing programs. This section should not be confused with the City's regular apartment conversion provisions. This is part of the density bonus program. The consultant stated it was, but tied back to the other. k. Section 9.60270. Timeshare Regulations. Staff stated the City currently has no time-share units. G.i.g2., need to add language that better defined the proposed regulations L Section 9.300.030. Use of Terms. Automobile Service Station., add drive- thru carwashes and delete the last sentence "a convenience store or mini -mart accessory to the automotive use may be included." Clarify where "gas station" and "service station" refer to each other. One needs to have a definition. Add a definition for a common wall. Need to change the definition of enclosed to state "contained on all four sides". Gross Floor area - need to define what this refers to. Is this outside the wall or inside the wall. The consultant reminded the Commissioner that this needed to apply to commercial requirements as well. Needs to address both non-residential as well as commercial uses. The City Attorney stated that if you want commercial you need to add such appropriate provisions. Commissioner Anderson suggested they add exterior walls not including exterior finishes. Add daily basis for hotels. Kennel or animal shelter - need to add a combination of all or leave it for dogs only. Lot Line -Property Line - should normally mean the same. Reverse Mobilehome to state "see manufactured home". Scenic Highways - add historical highways as well. M. Section 9.80.020 - Overlay uses - need to quantify. Table 9, Page 6 (030) - plant nurseries and garden supply ... not allowed in commercial. Change NC to C. Page 7 - Restaurants, drive-in or fast food should not be allowed in NC. Eliminate the word fast food from both rows. Page 10 - add definition to transitional shelter. Allow mixed -use in the NC. Page 11 - land use, private parking lots should be allowed in 3 Commercial Park, Office and Tourist Commercial, Urban mix as well as major community facilities. Page 13 - should tennis courts be added as an accessory use? Chairman Adolph recessed the meeting at 5:25 P.M. and reconvened at 7:08 P.M. PUBLIC A. Audrey Ostrowsky, La Quinta resident, spoke regarding her concern about the Zoning Ordinance in the Cove in that commercial businesses are working out of their homes. It affects the residents as well as the commercial property. Need to restrict this in the future. A. a Tract 28150; a request of KSL PGA West Corporation for approval to res divide 3.6 acres into 14 single family residential lots. 1. \ Commissioners Anderson and Gardner withdrew due to a possible conflict of 2. As° ciate Planner Greg Trousdell, presented the information contained in the sta report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Dep ent. 3. Commis oner Newkirk asked if the applicant was requesting to start a new homeown ' association (BOA} Associate Planner Trousdell stated that was what he un rstood as it was up to the resubdivider to stay with the current BOA or apply o de -annex and create a new BOA. Staff stated there needed to -be clasificatio the conditions to reflect the Planning Commission's desire. 4. Chairman Adolph d if the original Specific Plan for the community lots on the 13th hole re q d a swimming pool as there was nothing in regards to a swimming pools prlo to this request, and it was conditioned that if they built any type of condo from these lots, pools would be required. In addition, restroom facilities w d be built to handle the gardeners. The Trophy homeowners bought th homes with the understanding that swimming pools would be installed. Staf tated that was correct. 5. Mr. Chevis Hosea, Director d( Recreation, representing KSL Recreation, stated er the creation of a BOA, this map is not an issue maps could be. Their concern is with setting a on to provide adequate amenities to the site. or in the existing, but they do not believe it is trac map to mandate that they be in an existing that regarding the concern with the applicant, but futl precedent and having an ob They will establish a BOA appropriate for a tentative BOA. n 1-: MAY 9,1995 I, CALL TO ORDER A. This m� ROLL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calls Tampico, La Quinta, CA 3:00 P.M. of the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:08 P.M. by Chairman Adolph. . Barrows led the flag salute. A. /hairman Adolph requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Anderson, Barrows, Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, and Chairman Adolph. B. Staff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Leslie Mouriquand, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer. A. Continued - Zoning Code Update a request of the City for review and update of the Zoning Code. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report and reviewed what had been covered to date. 2. Chairman Adolph asked if staff would like to address Mr. Norris Bernard's letter. Staff stated the problem arises with basic compatibility issues where CC & R's do not exist. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that in a Zoning Ordinance. unless there is a specific area of the town, cities do not typically get into real architectural detail or style unless they are trying to create a historical district or feel in town. Discussion followed. Members reviewed the proposed update to the Zoning Code. Those areas addressed were: 3. Section 9.60.030 PC5-9 1 Planning Commission Minutes May 9,1995 PC5.9 Page 004 - c.4.a.1) change the footage to 20-feet Page 004 - 0.1. Gates - Materials. ....Section and provided any wood used is of "no less than a grade of ........ of construction heart 0.2. Width. "Pedestrian" gates ........ except that "other" gates may... E.2.b. All wood fencing "no less than a grade of", shall be put it wherever it appears. Page 005 - E.2.c. Add shall be a minimum of "nominal" 4" X 4" . E.4. Change cinder block to "precision concrete block or cinder block" and "...are covered with stucco, texture coating, "paint" or other....". 4. Section 9.60.040 Page 007 B.B. "...shall be of minimum "nominal" 2" X 2" material...." 5. Section 9.60.050: Page 007 Table 9 change Interior side yard to 3.5' for 0.100 square feet structures 6. Section 9.60.060. Commissioners asked that the wording for Garages and Carports be changed. 7. Community Development Director Jerry Herman relayed information that had been obtained from the other cities in the Valley relating to detached garages. The garage referred to in Mr. Norris' letter is the same height as the house and under the height requirement for the area. Staff will send this information to Mr. Norris. Discussion followed concerning garage heights as they related to compatibility. 8. Section 9.80.060 Page 008 A. Heights. Change "maximum structure height shall be 17-feet". Staff to look into designing a table that makes the determination for height based on lot sizes. 9. Section 9.60.080 Page 009 C.2. Height and Diameter. "...shall be no more than ten feet..." 8. Section 9.60.140 Page 017 B.4. Change "properties" to "features". 2 Planning Commission Minutes allay 9,1995 PC5.9 9. Section 9.60.150 Page 018 B.3. Add shall not exceed 18 feet "from court surface" and delete "or as approved by the Planning Commission." 10. Section 9.60.160 Page 019 2. Height. Pole or fence -mounted, "decorative or landscape type lighting shall be...." 11. Section 9.100.030 Page 052 B. shall be measured from, "the finished grade at the" base of the fence. Page 053 3.a. Change to 30-inches 4. Change to 30-inches 12. Section 9.100.040 Page 054 B.1.a. Change to 15°% B.1.b. Change to 15°% staff to address drought -tolerant and water efficient landscaping Add B.6 Majority of "landscape plants shall be water efficient." Page 056 3. Change to 30" 7.c. Change language regarding wood to agree with language from Residential Standards. Page 057 7.d. Staff to check on wording. 13. Section 9.100.060 Page 057 A.3. On page 058 add sentence "Planting to be maintained and replanted in perpetuity." Page 058 B.1. Change to 30-inches. 14. Section 9.100.070 Page 058 A.2. Height to be same as residential requirements. 15. Section 9.100.080 Page 059 1. Change December 1 to "Monday following Thanksgiving." L] Planning Commission Minutes May 9,1995 PI,5.9 16. Section 9.100.120 Page 061 A. C.3.a Page 062 C.3.b. 0. & 0.1 17. Section 9.100.130 Page 063 C.S. 18. Section 9.100.140 Page 063 1. Remove the word "permanent" Change four inches thick to six inches. Add language from Residential Standards. . Remove the word "permanent". Change Fire Chief to Fire Marshal in both places Change to read %gatherings of 50 to 300 people." Staff to create two temporary use permits. One will only require staff approval. Page 064 e. Change Fire Chief to Fire Marshal. 19. Section 9.100.150 Staff to update to current products and address according to foot candles and limitation to the number allowed. Add this to the Residential requirements as well if necessary. Page 065 A.3. Add "or safety hazard". A. Purpose. Add something about using the most energy efficient lighting Page 068 1.a. Change Planning and Development to Building and Safety Department. Page 069 H.1. Add the original adoption date instead of "date of". Add to the last sentence "...no change other than bulb replacement. 20. Section 9.100.170 Page 071 2. Add language regarding once the building is removed the property must be restored to the original condition which might include dust or weed abatement. 21. Section 9.100.180 Page 073 3. Add cash bond "to guarantee removal and restoration of site" 22. Section 9.100.200 Page 076 0.2. On a concrete pad "sloped to drain to the gate per disposal company..."and City". 4 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78.495 Calle Tampico, CA May 2:3,1995 I. CALL TO ORDER 3:00 P.M. A. This meeting 0 the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:12 P.M. by Chairman Adolph who led the flag lute. II. ROLL CALL: IV. A. Chairma Adolph requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Anderson, Barrows, Butler, GardnVse and Chairman Adolph. Commissioners Anderson/Barrows moved and seconded a motion to exc Commissioner Newkirk. Unanimously approved. B. Staij Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney, Dawn Honeywell, Pr' cipal Planner Stan Sawa, Principal Planner Fred Baker, Associate Planner, Greg Trousdell, Apartment Secretary Betty Sawyer, and The Planning Center Consultant Debra Ezra-Rogoff. WORKSHOP A. Continued - Zoning Code Update: a request of the City for review and approval of the Zoning Code Update. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented an update on what material had been covered and what was to be discussed. 2. Chairman Adolph opened the discussion and reviewed of the document page by page. 3. Page 004 Section 9.110.030. B. Change "maximum structure height" from 30 feet to 28 feet. Do the same wherever it is referred to. 4. Page 005 Section 9.110.060. 4. Add somewhere in the text "Santa Rosa Mountain National Scenic Area". PC5.23 1 Planning Commission Minutes May 23,1995 5. Page 006 Section 9.110.060 A.B. Identify the structure height starting from a point - 28-feet from the mien. Eliminate "Minimum Building Site." C.1.e. Add Sections 4 and 5 to T7S R7E . C.1.b. Change TSS, HE, 36 to T5S C.1.b. Add Section 25 and delete from e.1.a. C.1.d. Add Section 33. 6. Page 009 Section 9.120.020.. Table 9.5 Other Uses. Public flood control facilities and devices should be permitted ("P) in the "G C" category. 7. Page 010 Table 9. Change maximum height to 28-feet on all zones. 8. Page 011 Section 9.140.030 A.1. Some changes as a.5 Section 9.110.060 C.1. 9. Page 012 C.3.d. Eliminate "or painted". C.3.e. Change to "Transmission. lines (properly screened or undergrounded)" 10. Page 013 E. Add "design review by the Planning Commission". 11. Page 014 G.3.b. Add "Native" drought tolerant plants. 12. Page 015 H.3. Add "at such time as the new property owner occupies, or a HOW accepts the responsibility... 13. Page 019 Section 9.140.030 M.2. City Attorney to rewrite. PC5.23 2 Panning Commission Minutes May 23,1995 14. Page 021 Section 9.140.050 Adult Entertainment Overlay District to only contain the Overlay District and everything else moved to the Business District Section and deleted from Planning Commission review. 15. Page 034 Section 9.150.050 C. Eliminate the entire paragraph. 16. Page 036 Section 9.150.060 Table 9 - Off-street Parking Requirements - add 4 bedrooms or more a 3-car garage is required and add "For houses with a room such as a den, study, or sewing room shall count as a bedroom." For room additions it shall be based upon the value of the addition to the overall house. Less than 50% of the current value you are exempt from the garage addition. 17. Page 039 Table 9.Office and Health Care Uses - General offices, other than medical or dental - change from one space per 250 square feet to one space per 350 sq./ft. 18. Chairman Adolph asked that staff bring the Parking Chapter back to next meeting. In addition, staff was to obtain information from Palm Desert for a comparison. Staff stated they would prefer to compare it to the existing Code. Commissioners thought the City should be compared to other cities of the same size and diversity (Palm Desert, the existing, and the proposed). In addition, the Village Specific Plan would be considered. Chairman Adolph recessed the meeting at 5:23 P.M. and reconvened at 7:02 P.M. V. VI. PUBLI&HEARINGS: A. Cog�Street Name Change 95.006: a request of the la Quinta Volunteer Fire Department to change street name of Old 52nd Avenue to Frances Hack Lane. 1. Associ Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of\Community le in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissormed the Commission that the Coachella Valley Recreation and Parks Dishad been contacted regarding La O,uinta's request to change the name of trk. At their May 10th meeting it was determined that since the CVPRin ce to approve such a request, a policy should be put in place FCC 23 3 June 13,1995 I. CALL TO ORDER A. This me 1 ROLL CALL A. Co MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78.495 Calla Tampico, CA 3:00 P.M. of the Planning Commission was called to order -at 3:13 P.M. by Chairman Adolph. r Barrows led the flag salute. -man Adolph requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Barrows, Butler, ner, Newkirk, and Chairman Adolph. Commissioner Anderson arrived late. COMMENT: A. There being no public comment, Chairman Adolph asked City Attorney Dawn Honeywell to update the Commission regarding the status of the Adult Entertainment Ordinance. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained the status of the Ordinance and the proposed changes that WORKSHOP A. Continued . Zoning ode Update: a request of the City for review and approval of the Zoning Code Update. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented an update on what material had been covered and what was to be discussed. 2. Page 5 Section 9.150.040.A.2.b. • Define what "reasonable walking distance" into feet. (Not to exceed 300 feet). 3. Page 6 B.5.. Add "other than approved car sales". 4. Section 9.140.050.A.. Delete the sentence, "In the interests of the public health, safety and welfare, the City's decision -making authority shall be the final judge on how many off-street parking spaces a use or a combination of uses may require." Staff was PCS-13 1 Planning Commission Minutes June 13,1995 requested to correct the wording in following sentence. 5. A.3 and A.5 (Page 7) - Delete both. 6. Page 7 & 8 D. - Staff to review and offer suggestions (a 10% reduction shall apply to the commercial requirements only). 7. 0.3. Add "to a City -created assessmentibenefit for parking improvements, or parking improvement district..." 8. Page 9 Table 9 - Define where the driveway length should be from and to. 9. Page 13 Table 9 - Staff to review section on Automobile Service Stations 10. Page 19 Section 9.150.080.A.4 - "Individual wheel stops IW be permitted." 11. A.8. - Define what a "sufficient throat" is. A.10. - Encourage them to use a common easement use. 12. Page 21 8.7. - staff to check with Engineering Department for driveway width. 13. Page 022 0.4. - add "...and speed bumps and signage shall be used...." 14. Page 25 F.2. - Add "to allow pavers". 15. Page 27 J.7. - Add verbiage "...to include screening by a wall or landscaping, berm or any combination of the three." J.7. - Make reference to refer them to Section "L". 16. Page 28 K.10 and 11. - add "above finish grade". 17. Page 29 3.b. - Remove "decision- making authority" and replace with "City". PCO.13 2 Planning Commission Minutes June 13�,1995 18. Page 30 M.5. - minimum 15 gallon size tree with a 2" diameter trunk. Create a canopy tree palette. M.5. -10% to 15% of overall landscaping should be required. Add native or drought tolerant plants. 19. Page 31 Table 9 - Minimum required parking spaces 5.24 and 25.49 change the amount of shading required to 50%. 29. Page 32 10. - add "in like kind and size". 12. - Eliminate. 30. Page 33 Table 9 - verify it conforms with the American Disabilities Act (ADA) or state "refer to the ADA requirements". Chairman Adolph recessed the meeting at 5:29 P.M. and reconvened at 7:04 P.M. V. VI. PIXIC HEARINGS A. Street Name Change 95.006; a request of the La Quinta Volunteer Fire Department t change the name of a portion of Old 52nd Avenue to Frances Hack Lane. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff ort, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Ther being no questions of staff and no public comment, Chairman Adolph closed the public aring. 3. Commissio\Depart tated that since the Coachella Valley Recreation and Park District had passen renaming the downtown Community Park to "Frances Hack Park", he more appropriate than renaming the street. 4. Staff infommissioners that even though the Park had been renamed, the Volunteer nt still wanted to name Old 52nd Avenue to Frances Hack Lane. Commissise the request FC6.13 3 June 27,1995 I. CALL TO ORDER A. This me IV. ANW-4 ROLL CALL MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 76.495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 3:00 P.M. f the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:07 P.M. by Chairman Adolph. Newkirk led the flag salute. A. Ch rman Adolph requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Abels, Barrows, Butler, rdner, Newkirk, and Chairman Adolph. Commissioners Barrows/Gardner moved and seconded motion to excuse Commissioners Anderson. Motion carried unanimously. B Staff Present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planners Greg Trousdell and Leslie Mouriquand, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer. WORKSHOP A. Continued • Zoning Ordinance Update a request of the City for review and approval of the Zoning Code Update. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented an update on what material had been covered and what was to be discussed. 2. As the City Attorney had not joined the meeting yet, Commissioners elected to discuss Chapter 9.170 (Communication Towers and Equipment) and wait to discuss Chapter 9.160 (Signs). 3. Commissioners discussed various aspects of the towers and their requirements for the equipment. 4. CHAPTER 9.170 • Communication Towers and Equipment Page 6, Section 9.170.060.1.3. Correct "...at least fit" feet..." PC6.27 1 Planning Commission Minutes June 27,1995 5. Page 8, Section 9.170.070.H.2. a. "Identify the site...." 3. The applicant shall provide evidence if the proposed site is located in an urban residential areas as to why there is no comparable site available outside urban residential areas. 6. CHAPTER 9.160 - Signs City Attorney Dawn Honeywell gave an explanation of the changes she had requested. 7. Page 2 - Table 9 - 2. Within residential district signs - building mounted -1 sq. ft. - no illumination. 4. Remove the word "Memorial". B. Within a commercial district, small window or building mounted signs, six signs per premise, six sq. ft. 7. Add "temporary" decorations. Add at the end, "removal shall occur within seven days after the holiday. 13. -Change to read "In commercial district a glass case display or chalkboard." 14. Delete 15. Delete 8. Page 6. Section 9.160.030 H. Add to the last sentence, "The Director may Lest the Director of Building and Safety to order...." J. Change "reasonable" to "ten days". 9. CHAPTER 9.180 - Transportation Demand Management Staff stated there was no real need to update this section, but if the Commissioners have any questions or comments, they should be discussed at this time. 10. Page 3. Section 9.180.030.B. 2. Change Planning and Development to Community Development Department. 11. Page 8 Section 9.180.110 - change Planning and Development Department to Community Development Department. 12. CHAPTER 9.190 - Transfer of Development Rights No changes. PC6.27 2 July 11, 1995 I. C I A. II. RC Ll A. � B. III. P MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 3:00 P.M. TO ORDER This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:12 P.M. by Vice Chairman Gardner who asked Commissioner Adolph to lead the flag salute. CALL Vice Chairman Gardner requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Adolph, Anderson, Butler, Newkirk, and Vice Chairman Adolph. Absent: Commission z Barrows and Chairman Abels. Commissioners Adolph/Butler moved and seconded a motion to excuse Commissioners Abels and Barrows. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Senior Planner Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Department Secretary Betty Sawyer. WORKSHOP A. Continued - Zoning Ordinance Update; a request of the City for a review and approval of the Zoning Code Update. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa informed the Commissioners of the Chapters that had been reviewed. 2. CHAPTER 9.160 - Signs Page 007, Table 9 Eliminate "Building -mounted" from apartment building ID signs and change "top of wall" to six feet. For multi -tenant buildings or complexes eliminate "top of wall or". For free-standing apartment rental change the maximum area to six and eliminate "top of wall or", and require 15 or more units rental information. Change "Church and Institutional Uses" to "Other Residential Uses". PC7.11 Planning Commission Meeting July 11, 1995 Page 008, Table 9 Add to note: "Signs required by law shall be allowed at the minimum size specified." Eliminate "Permanent window signs". Add, "Free-standing center or comp ex ID sign". Add, "Building -mounted permanent window ID sign"; add under maximum area, "Under canopy sign maximum three square feet, one square lineal foot of lease frontage up to a maximum of 50 sq. ft., eliminate top of wall and add eight feet and second story in interior access no outside sign". For Building -mounted ID sign for individual commercial or office building for maximum number add "(one per side of building)". Eliminate hotels and motels line. Page 009, Table 9 For Gas/service stations change the maximum area to 50 sq. ft., and eliminate 12 sq. ft. Vice Chairman Gardner recessed the meeting at 5:17 P.M. and reconvened at 7:02 P.M. a VI. NBLIC HEARINGS A. blic Use Permit 95-016; a request of Desert Sands Unified School District for a roval to construct their District Educational Services Center of approximately 16 , 00 square feet of floor space located northeast of the intersection of Dune Palms Road d 48th Avenue. 1. StXT informed the Commission that the applicant had requested a conilquance to the Commission's July 25th meeting. 2. There bXng no questions of staff, Vice Chairman Gardner opened the public hearing. s no one wished to address the Commission, it was moved and seconded b Commissioners Butler/Adolph to continue this item to July 25, 1995. UnanirXously approved. B Zoning Ordinance a -0 6; a request of the City for an approval of an amendment to the La Qui Municipal Code by adding a new Chapter 5.80 and amending Chapter 9.154 rela 'ng to Adult Oriented Businesses (AE). PC7.11 2 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 75-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA July 25, 1995 1. C*LL TO ORDER 3:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:19 P.M. by bbairman Abels who asked Commissioner Adolph to lead the flag salute. II. ROLL A. Chairm Abels requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Adolph, Anderson, Barrows, tler, Newkirk, and Chairman Abels. Absent: Commissioner Gardner. Commission rs Barrows/Newkirk moved and seconded a motion to excuse Commissione Gardner. B. Staff present: Co unity Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Senior ngineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Sawyer. III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None IV. WORKSHOP A. Cjjntinued - Zoning Ordinance U 2date; a request of the City for a review and approval of the Zoning Code Update. I. Principal Planner Stan Sawa informed the Commissioners of the Chapters that had been reviewed and explained a request by the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce for review of a proposed temporary sign program. 2. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained the proposed program would fall under the Permitted Temporary Sign regulations. He went on to explain the history behind the request and that it consisted of a directional sign program for the Village. 3. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that because there are still concerns about opening,the issue of off -premise signs, if the Commission decides to add this sign. program to the Ordinance, they need to make findings that PC7.25 I Planning Commission Meeting July 25, 1995 exceptions can be made in the Village District. Such findings would show it is difficult to find business locations in the Village District and because of these peculiar situations, findings can be made for off -premise signs for these businesses. It would need to be called the Village Directional Sign Program and would be limited and applicable to the Village District only. In addition, the sign patrons would be rotated on a basis not related to content and must be open to everyone in this Zone. 4. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that if the Commission agreed, staff would add this to the Permitted Temporary Sign section of the Sign Ordinance with the modifications as noted by the City Attorney. 5. Chairman Abels asked if the representatives of the Chamber would like to speak. Ms. Michelle Dallas, Executive Director of the La Quinta Chamber of Commerce, stated she was here to answer any questions the Commission may have. The program stems from their Business Development Task Force. She stated this would not be a revenue generator, but an asset to local businesses to held draw business. 6. Commissioner Butler asked what options were available to the City if the signs were not maintained; would there be any objection to adding a clause to the sign program that would allow the City to remove them if not maintained? Ms. Dallas agreed with the addition of the clause. It was the Chamber's intent that the money received would be for the installation and maintenance of the signs. 7. Ms. Dallas asked if the sign program had to be opened to all businesses and not just Chamber members. Commissioner Anderson stated that if it was limited to just Chamber members it would be discriminatory. Ms. Dallas then asked if they could provide a lower rental rate for members of the Chamber. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated this would be difficult as the only fees to be charged were those for the installation and maintenance of the signs. In addition, as the signs were to be installed in the public right- of-way it would be a problem. The Chamber would need to determine a method of selecting businesses for the sign program that was not discriminatory. Commissioner Anderson asked if the signs used for Chamber members could be made differently. Community Development Director Jerry Herman suggested the Chamber dues reflect a discount for those who are members rather than discounting the sign program. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated this could be an incentive to join the Chamber. PC7.25 2 Planning Commission Meeting July 25, 1995 8. Ms. Dallas asked about Conditions #5 and #6 regarding rotation of the panels, and asked if the Chamber could continue the contract for 11 months, rotated off for a month then continue on. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell clarified this was correct, but a mechanism needs to be put in place that if there are more businesses than panels, a method of rotating the signs that is fair to everyone is somehow put in place. 9. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that the program was limited to only those businesses within the Village boundaries. Discussion followed regarding those businesses that were out of the boundaries. 10. Mr. Greg Shannon, Chamber President asked about placing a sign at 52nd Avenue and Bermudas to direct traffic. Mr. Herman stated this area was not within the Village. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that since the sign was for assistance to direct traffic to the Village, a sign would be needed at this location to direct the traffic to the Village. 11. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the size of the signs was not addressed in the memo. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified that the signs would be the same size and structure as the BIA sign program. 12. Commissioner Newkirk stated the current ordinance allows 12 square feet in size and questioned whether this sign would be larger. Community Development Director clarified that he was unsure whether or not the entire monument would be larger, but the individual signs were for the individual businesses. 13. Commissioner Adolph asked if the Planning Commission would be approving the generic sign and staff approving the individual signs. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated it was up to the Planning Commission to determine whether or not they would want the signs to come back to the Commission for approval or just have the Planning Commission approve the locations and have staff approve the business signs. Discussion followed regarding the wording on. the signs and their locations. 14. Commissioner Adolph stated he felt the location and number of signs should be brought back to the Planning Commission for approval. PCJ•25 3 Planning Commission Meeting July 25, 1995 15. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified the Planning Commissioners' direction: 1) accept the amendments of the City Attorney; 2) a requirement added concerning the City's authority to remove deteriorating signs; 3) clarifying the use of the revenues; and 4) the program would be reviewed by the Planning Commission for the number and locations of the signs. Staff stated this would be a new section entitled "The Village Semi -Permanent Directional Sign Program" under Permitted Temporary Signs. Chairman Abels asked about the boundaries. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified the boundaries. 16. Chairman Abels stated his concern about sign pollution. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell commented that this was what the Commission was to be considering. 17. Commissioner Adolph asked if the Planning Commission was the final authority for approving the signs. Staff stated yes, but all projects go to the City Council if approved. Staff clarified the procedure the ordinance would go through for adoption. 18. Commissioner Anderson stated his concern that the number of signs to be allowed not become visual blights. One of the findings for approving the sign program could be the lack of development in the Village. At such time as the Village is developed, the Ordinance could then be reviewed for any changes needed. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated this would give credence to proving the sign program was temporary in nature. 19. Staff clarified they would send a draft copy of the Ordinance to the Chamber so they would be prepared to address any problems at the public hearing. 20. Commissioner Anderson stated the sign appeared to be constructed out of wood. He suggested the Chamber clarify with the sign company how the signs would be changed without deteriorating the sign frame. 21.. Commissioner Butler questioned how the City could put some enforcement behind the Sign Ordinance to see that illegal signs are removed. He suggested that perhaps during the application process, the applicant could be informed that the City has the right to remove any illegal signs that are not maintained. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the Ordinance now allows the City to remove any illegal sign and impose fines. Staff clarified this was the responsibility of the Code Enforcement Department. Discussion followed regarding the process. PC7.25 4 Planning Commission Meeting July 25, 1995 22. CHAPTER 9.160 - Signs Page 010, Section 9.160.060 D. Maximum Height. Add, "No higher than eave line or top of wall building or 8-feet whichever is less." 23. Page 014, G. Time Extensions. Add "maximum of a one time extension". 24. Page 016, 2. and 5.a. and 5.b. Remove reference to Design Review Board and replace with Community Development Department. Chairman Gardner recessed the meeting at 5:17 P.M. and reconvened at 7:02 P.M. VI. PMLIC HEARINGS A. Public Use Permit 95-016; a request of Desert Sands Unified School District for proto construct their District Educational Services Center of approximately 1 ,000 square feet of floor space located northeast of the intersection of Dune Palms Ro and 48th Avenue. 1. \Staff informed the Commission that the applicant had requested a ntinuance to the'Commission's August 8th meeting. 2. Th being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels opened the public hearing. As n one wished to address the Commission, it was moved and seconded by Co 'ssioners Barrows/Adolph to continue this item to August 8, 1995. Unanim usly approved. B jai ; a request of the City for an approval of an amendment to the a Quinta Municipal Code by revising Title 13-Subdivision Regulations. 1. Associate Engi eer Fred Bouma introduced Mr. Jim Morrissey, of NBS Lowrey, who pre nted the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file ' the Community Development Department. 2. Following the prese tion, Commissioner Adolph asked what the public response had been. Morrissey stated it had been received very well and they felt they had achie d their purpose in the public meetings. PCT•25 5 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA AUGUST\8, 1995 I. CALL 'fi0 ORDER III IV. 3:00 P.M. A. Thi meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:12 P.M. by C an Abels who asked Community Development Director Jerry Herman to lead the fla salute. ROLL CALL A. Chairman Ab s requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Anderson, Barrows, Butler, Gardner, d Chairman Abels. Absent: Commissioners Adolph and Newkirk. Commissioners ardner/Anderson moved and seconded a motion to excuse Commissioners A 1ph/Newkirk. B. Staff present: Comm 'ty Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Senior En 'neer Steve Speer, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Be Sawyer. PUBLIC COMMENT: None WORKSHOP A. Continued - Zoning Ordinance Update; a request of the City for a review and approval of the Zoning Code Update. 1. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained the history behind the Village zoning, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. He went over the Village map and explained the zoning districts. 2. Commissioner Anderson asked why the residential portion was not in the Village zoning. Staff explained it was covered in the residential portion of the Ordinance. PC13.8 I Planning Commission Meeting August 8, 1,995 3. Commissioner Barrows questioned Page 2. C.l.c., and asked how the parameters were derived at. Staff explained these were the existing zoning requirements created in 1989. It was determined to eliminate the time limit of 15 minutes and have it read, "Hours of minor entertainment falling between 9:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m." 4. Commissioner Butler asked for clarification on the boundaries of each of the districts. Staff explained and discussion followed about the lot sizes. 5. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained some history of the C-V-S and whether there was too much commercial in this whole area and whether some of it should be converted to residential. 6. Chairman Abels asked if the two story buildings would be allowed to have Commercial zoning on the bottom floor and Residential on the top or would it require changing the zoning. Staff explained on some areas it would require a zone change. 7. Chairman Abels asked why the Park was zoned R-1. Staff explained this was the original zoning. 8. Community Development Director Jerry Herman explained the meaning for Page 3, D. La. as being for the purpose of having a covered walkway. The problem on Page 3, D.2.b. was that the first lots on Desert Club rear setback requirement did not allow for any innovation in the building structure due to the amount required. Staff suggested a ten foot setback be required instead; this would still leave a need for parking however. 9. The City Attorney and staff reminded the Commissioners that they need to consider pedestrian movement from the front of the businesses to the rear, if parking is to be provided for in the rear. Commissioner Anderson stated he felt the pedestrian paseos would make the districts work. However, the City must solve the problem of parking first. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the Commissioners must determine where the break should fall before a pedestrian break is required. It was felt 8-10 feet was all that was needed to provide the walkway corridor. 10. Chairman Abels asked if the City was going to provide a Parking District. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell explained that it had been discussed, but no impetus had been put on it as of yet. Discussion followed. PC8.8 2 Planning Commission Meeting August 8, 1995 11. Chairman Abels suggested that a letter be written to the Council requesting a joint meeting to discuss the parking issue in the Village. It was felt there could be no further discussion until a joint study session was held regarding the Village prior to the Planning Commission reviewing this portion of the Zoning ®rdinance. Commissioners Butter/Barrows moved and seconded the motion to request staff make a request to Council for a joint meeting regarding the Village zoning and parking problems. Chairman Abels recessed the meeting at 4:09 P.M. and reconvened at 7:00 P.M. V. VI. PXBLIC HEARINGS A. li Use Permit 95-016; a request of Desert Sands Unified School District for a roval to construct their District Educational Services Center of approximately 16 00 square feet of floor space located northeast of the intersection of Dune Palms Roa d 48th Avenue. 1. mmumty Development Director Jerry Herman presented the information con ined in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Deve pment Department. 2. There bel no questions of staff, Chairman Abels opened the public hearing and Mr. Jak Matlock, spoke on behalf of the applicant. 3. Commission Butler asked how long it would take to convert the buses to natural gas. Mr. atlock stated he did not know at this time, but it would be done in phases. a further stated they had been trying to make this change for twenty years. mmissioner Butler commended them for their efforts. 4. Chairman Abels aske for the lifespan of a bus. Mr. Matlock stated it was two years or 200,000 mirqs for a gas vehicle or diesel. The natural gas would be approximately double, r 300,000+ miles. 5. Chairman Abels questioned ondition #40 as to which streets were being referred to. Mr. Matlock state at when the streets are completed the buses will exit and access through 48th venue. He further stated the buses leave the barn at 6:00 A.M. Staff exp fined the streets affected would be 48th Avenue and Dune Palms at the app ved access locations. PC8.8 3 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, CA 26, 1995 I. CALL TO ORDER 3:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:07 P.M. by hairman Abels. Commissioner Adolph led the flag salute. II. ROLL A. Chairan Abels requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Adolph, Barrows, Butler, ardner, Newkirk, and Chairman Abels. B. Commis\Pling lph/Gardner moved and seconded a motion to excuse Commisson. Unanimously approved. C. Staff Present:nity Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywg Manager Christi di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principaan Sawa, Associate Planners Wallace Nesbit, and Executive Secretarer. III.. PUBLIC COMMENT - IV. WORKSHOP A.. Zoning Ordinance Update; a request of staff for a review of the Zoning Ordinance. 1. Staff presented portions of the revised Zoning Ordinance Update for the Commissioners review. Items discussed included clarification of the maximum. building heights and leaf blower regulations. 2. Staff presented information regarding why an "envelope" method of measuring building heights is more desirable than using a "mean" point method. After discussion, the Planning Commission determined that an "envelope" method as originally presented by the consultant should be utilized. PC9-26 1- Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 3. It was determined that exceptions to the development standards for drive thru facilities as presented in Section 9.150.080(J), should be deleted. 4. Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, presented the history of the leaf blower regulations. Commissioners asked questions of staff regarding the proposed regulations. Following discussion, Commissioners asked staff to:. a. Restudy the time frame and hours for the leaf blowers (possibly the same as construction hours) and find a way to enforce it. Automatic exemption between approximately September 15th and December 1 st should be considered. Exact time of exemption to be determined by the survey. b. In addition, the Commissioners asked staff to include a section on golf tournaments and notification to the respective homeowner associations, if hours are to be earlier. C. It was noted that a potential conflict exists between 9.145.030 and 9.145.060 due to the definition of "real property landscape maintenance" and "golf course landscape operations." 4. Page 007, Section 9.145.040A a. The City Attorney noted to staff a need to make a more general statement as to who is subject to time limitations. 5. Page 008, Section 9.145.050B a. The City Attorney noted a need for criteria to determine exemptions by the Community Development Director. 6. Page 011, Section 9.30.020 a. Rewrite to reflect the Housing Element changes for any new developments (not pre-existing) very low, low, and moderate income homes. 7. Page 019, Section 9.40.030. Table 9-1 a. Staff noted a change needed for "apartment projects (rental units)" to PCSI-26 2 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 allow them in the RVL, RL, and RC with a specific plan with restrictions. 8. Page 029, Section 9.50-060 a. Change how the height is measured from using a "mean point" to a building envelope. 9. Page 033, Section C.3.c. a. Change to allow two arches or two pairs of pilasters. 10. Page 038, Section 9.60.060. B.1 a. Check this section to insure that it complies with the Table of Development Standards, Section 9.50.040.B. 11. Page 043, Section 9.60.110C.4. a. Reword or modify to allow home occupations, or rewrite "detached accessory structure" in the Definition Section. 12. Commissioner Butler asked staff to see if there were areas within the City that could be zoned as CP (Commercial Park). Suggestions were: Jefferson Street and the south side of Highway 111 east of Dune Palms. 13. Page 072, Table 9 a. Staff noted a need to add residential as a conditional use in the CR Zone. 14. Page 076 - reword the height definition same as Page 029, Section 9.50.060. 15. Special Advertising devices - staff to go through and eliminate the repetitious areas. Staff with remove most of Chapter 5. Place "Searchlights" under Special Advertising Devices. 16. Commissioner Adolph asked for clarification on the time length a temporary chain link fence may be used. Staff stated generally it runs consecutively with the building permit. As long as the building permit is active, the fence is allowed. Commissioners asked staff to check into the time limits allowed for the temporary fences at the Citrus Course. PC9-26 3 Planning Commission Minutes September 26, 1995 17. Commissioner Adolph asked if political banners were allowed in a commercial zone. He understood banners required to a permit. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the political signs are not enforceable. She would look into the use of a banner in a commercial zone. Chairman Abels stated that due to the hour, he opened the meeting up for "Commissioner Items". V. IROMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Chairman Abels gave a report of the CCAPA Workshop in Diamond Bar held at the offices of the South Coast Air Quality offices attended by Commissioners Butler, ardner, and himself. He stated this was the type of workshop all commissioners sh uld attend. The Workshop was informative and created a number of questions. So a issues that were brought out at the Workshop, he would like to see impl ented here, such as: 1. �naving the Planning Commission packets distributed earlier. Discussion fo owed regarding the mechanics of preparing the agenda. Staff stated they wo d look at the process and see if there was a faster way to get the agenda dis uted. 2. When ew commissioners are appointed, there should be indoctrination process inform them about the planning process and explain what would be expect d of them. Staff should inform all new Commissioners of their duties. 3. Funds shoul be budgeted to allow the Commissioners an opportunity to attend educatio al courses/workshops. 4. A tour of the majkr projects prior to their review and approval. B. Commissioner Butler state that discussions at the Workshop were helpful and he was very appreciative of Ci Attorney's attendance and input at the Commission meetings. C. Commissioner Barrows question d the legality of Commissioners attending meetings with developers prior to the Mee 'ngs. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated that when a Commissioner is voting n a project, this should be stated during the meeting. In addition, if anything at a site influenced their decision, this should also be stated. It needed to be made a art of the record. Due process requires that everyone at the hearing be made a are of how each Commissioner came to a decision on the project. Discussion fo owed. PC;9-26 4 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, CA October 0, 1995 I. C k TO ORDER r11 `#I Melaq A. 3:00 P.M. meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 3:05 P.M. by man Abels. Commissioner Anderson led the flag salute. Chairmki requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Adolph, Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, and Chairman Abels. B. Chairman A I is stated both Commissioners Barrows and Newkirk had informed him they would b late. He therefore, moved and Commissioner Adolph seconded a motion to excu Commissioners Barrows and Newkirk. Unanimously approved. C. Staff Present: Co unity Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planni Manager Christi di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner S Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE A ENDA: I . Chairman Abels asked if 1. Commissioner Add Commissioner Items 2. Chairman Abels asked be added. IV. PUBLIC COMMENT - None were any changes to the Agenda. h asked that "Political Signs" be added to a discussion regarding General Plan Amendments V. WORKSHOP ----------� A. Zoning Ordinance Update; a request of staff for a review of the Zoning Ordinance. 1. Staff presented portions of the revised Zoning Ordinance Update for the Commissioners review indicating proposed changes are written in the draft. Pclo-10 I Planning Commission Minutes October 10, 1995 2. Page 006, Section 9.110.080. Change the title to "Sexually Oriented Businesses". Change it wherever it appears 3. Page 009, Table 9. a. Water wells and pumping stations changed to Permitted Use. b. Water tanks and reservoirs changed to Conditional Use Permit. 4. Staff asked that the following changes be made: a. Page 013.E. Change Design Review to Site Development Review as well as "design review" to "site review" b. Page 014.G.2. To be rewritten by staff to update archaeological requirements. C. Page 015. Add a G.#4. Regarding View sheds from Page 016. d. Page 015.H. - Remove #1 and #2 and move #3 to Page 018 as a separate paragraph under "Landscaping" and renumber the remainder. 5. Page 020. Staff to clarify C.1. and bring back to the Commission. Chairman Abels noted that all Commissioners were now present. 6. Page 040. Table 9. Apartments and airspace a. Change the number of covered parking spaces for three or more bedrooms to 3 covered spaces. 6. Page 043. Table 9 a. Parking for a General Office reduce back to 250 sq./ft. GFA. b. Add a requirement for 30% covered parking for Banks -etc.; Convalescent Hospitals, General Office -etc., and Medical or Dental uses under "Office and Health Care Uses". 7. Page 044. Car Washes a. Staff stated the number of parking spaces may be too high. b. Need to base the number of employees or services being provided. Staff to bring a recommendation back to the Commission. 8. Page 060.M.6. Parking Lot Shading. a. Need to add a requirement requiring covered parking for all parking in apartments for units with including guests. Staff to review and report back to the Commission. Remove "leave as is". Pc10-10 2 Planning Commission Minutes October 1.0, 1995 9. Staff asked that the following changes be made to Chapter 9.160: Signs a. Page 064.Section 9.160.010.A.3. Add "provide directional information". b. Page 069. Clarify "project neighborhood entry sign" and clarify all lighting to be indirect. C. Page 070. Table 9. Lighting - direct or indirect for all signs. d. Page 071. Gas stations. Remove the first sentence under Additional Requirements. e. Page 072 F - total signs shall not exceed 30. f. Page 078 #5.a. Change Director to Planning Commission; (1) Remove # 1 and b. g. Page 081 #4. "...vehicles which are primarily used..." h. Page 082 #25 - Remove; #20, Except in the Village; #21, change neon to illuminated and add "sign program". i. Page 086.X. Eliminate pylon and pole signs. j. Page 088.KK. Change "plate line" to "roof plane". 10. Commissioner Adolph asked to address Political Signs on Page 072 under Permitted Temporary Signs. City Attorney stated the City might be able to put a restriction on the maximum number allowable in the City right-of-way, but not on private property. The Planning Commission felt a maximum of 30 signs was appropriate. Political signs could also be required to be removed by a certain time and a fine imposed. Following discussion it was determined that staff would bring a recommendation back to the Commission regarding aggregate size and deposit amount. Add language to require a refundable deposit for any function requiring more than five signs. Chairman Abels recessed the meeting at '5:00 P.M. and reconvened at 7:03 P.M. VI. - None VII. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. StreVacation-02 ; a request of STAMKO Development for approval to vacate an uni roved section of Westward Ho Drive. 1. Pl ng Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in the st f report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Departn nt. 2. Commissio r Adolph asked if a new tract map would be required. Staff stated no. rCio-io 3 Planning Commission Minutes October 24, 1995 �> B. Zoning Ordinance Update; a request of staff for a review of the Zoning Ordinance. 1. Page 3. Definitions. Automobile service station: leave the last sentence in and add "...to the automotive use may or may be included." 2. Page 10. Grade. Change the grade and finish grade to agree with the how the height of a building is determined. 3. Page 18. Planned Unit Development. Make a correlation between planned unit development and planned development assuming the terminology is the same for single family dwellings as well. Vice Chairman Gardner recessed the meeting at 4:28 P.M. and Chairman Abels reconvened at 7:03 P.M. 0 None Nvironmental Assessment 95-309; a request of The Keith Companies for cert cation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact; approval of a d iation from the development standards to reduce the gross livable area; and approva of a 35% density bonus to allow 11 units per acre, and a reduction in parking s ces for affordable housing to allow a 128 unit apartment project on Washington treet. 1. Chairm Abels explained this was a continued public hearing. Commissi ers Butler and Adolph excused themselves due to possible conflicts of 1 erest. 2. City Attorney D\fmanci eywell explained that the Commissioners withdrew, but the City doee an actual determination as to a conflict of interest. There is a possibfinancial impact to Commissioner Butler's wife's employer under 'a Code of Regulations Section 18702.2 which may exceed $10,000.' sioner Adolph received information that a relative of his campaige is one of the property owners which would be selling the subjety the applicant and therefore, even though there would probably anci interest to either applicant directly, both have withdrawndue the p ssibility of an appearance of a conflict of interest. Pc 10-24 4 API L 23119410 ATTACHMENT 2 General Zoning Code Format C-hapter i le 9.10 1. General Provisions 9.30 2. Residential Districts, permitted uses, standards and supplemental regulations. 9.65 3. Village sections 9.70 4. Non Residential Districts (including commercial, community facilities), permitted uses, standards and supplemental regulations. 9.1.10 5. Special purpose districts (including parks, golf course, open space, and sexually oriented businesses, etc) permitted uses, standards and supplemental regulations. 9.150 6. Parking 9.160 7. Signs - (adopted) 9.170 8. Communication Towers and equipment 9.180 9. Transportation Demand Management 9.190 10. Transfer of Development Rights 9.200 11. General permitting procedures 9.210 12. Development Review permits including site development, conditional use permits, minor use permits, variances, adjustments, temporary use permits, sign permits, etc. 9.220 13. Zone changes and Zoning Code Amendments 9.230 14. General Plan Amendments 9.240 15. Specific Plans 9.250 16. Other actions including subdivisions, Development Agreements, Environmental Review 9.260 17. Fees 9.270 18. Nonconformities 9.280 19. Definitions PCSS.200 AFF-IL'.. 231 ItIlRIP ATTACHMENT 5 EXHIBIT 'A' PLANNIING COMMISION RESOLUTION NO. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM Environmental Assessment No. EA96-318 Case No.: ZOA96-050 Date: April 16, 1996 GPA 96-052 I. Name of Proponent: City of La Quinta Address: 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA Phone: (619) 777-7000 Agency Requiring Checklist: City of La Quinta Project Name (if applicable): La Quinta Zoning Ordinance Update CITY OF LA QUINTA' Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 ECUP.AIRTOUCH II. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. Land Use and Planning Population and Housing Earth Resources Water Air Quality III. DETERMINATION. On the basis of this initial evaluation: Transportation/Circulation Biological Resources Energy and Mineral Resources Risk of Upset and Human Health Noise Mandatory Findings of Significance Public Services Utilities Aesthetics Cultural Resources Recreation I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 94 I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least, 1) one effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable Iegal standards; and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a " potentially significant impact" or "potential significant unless mitigated. " AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. Signature: 17Date: April 16, 1996 Printed Name and Title Denise Ashton, Senior Planner For: City of La Quinta i Potentially Potentially Significant Significant Less Than Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 3.1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? (source #(s): X b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over the project? X c) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g. impact to soils or farmlands, or impacts from ' incompatible land uses)? X d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community (including a low-income or minority community)? X 3.2. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections? X b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g. through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? X c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? X 3.3. EARTH AND GEOLOGY. Would the project result in or expose people to potential impacts involving: a) Fault rupture? X b) Seismic ground shaking X c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? X d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard? X e) Landslides or mudflows? X fl Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? X g) Subsidence of the land? X h) Expansive soils? X i) Unique geologic or physical features? X Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact 3.4. WATER. Would the project result in: a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? X b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding? X c,) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X d.) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? X f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations or through substantial loss of groundwater recharge capability? X g) Altered direction or rate of glow of groundwater? X h) Impacts to groundwater quality? X 3.5. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any air quality standard to contribute to an existing or projected air quality violations? X b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? X c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in climate? X d) Create objectional odors? X iii Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant Impact Mitigated Impact No Impact 3.6. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the project result in: a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? $ b) Hazards to safety from design features (e.g. sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g. farm equipment)? % c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? X d) Insufficient parking capacity on site or off site? X e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? X f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? X g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? X 3.7. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project result in impacts to: a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? X b) Locally designated species (e.g. heritage trees)? X c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)? X iv Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact d) Wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pool)? X e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? X 3.8. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? X b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? X 3.9. RISK OF UPSET/HUMAN HEALTH Would the proposal involve: a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to: oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)? X b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? X c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazards? X d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? X e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? X 3.10. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) Increases in existing noise levels? X b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? X 3.11,. PUIBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas: a'1 Fire protection? X v Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact b) Police protection? X c) Schools? X d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X C) Other governmental services? X 3.12. UTILITIES. Would the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alternations to the following utilities: a) Power or natural gas? X b) Communications systems? X c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities? X d) Sewer or septic tanks? X e) Storm water drainage? X fi Solid waste disposal? X 3.13„ AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: a') Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway? X b1 Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? X c) Create light or glare? X 3.14. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? X b) Disturb archaeological resources? X c) Affect historical resources? X d,i Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? X e) Restrict existing religious of sacred uses within the potential impact area? X .a Vi 3.15. RECREATION. Would the proposal: a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks of other recreational facilities? Potentially Potentially Significant Less Than Significant Unless Significant No Impact Mitigated Impact Impact X b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? X 4. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the Potential to degrade the quality of the environmental, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? c;l Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects). d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? EARLIER ANALYSES. X X ►4 Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets: a; Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review. b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the scope of and adequately analyzed by the earlier document. c} Mitigation measures. For effects that are "potentially significant" or "potentially significant unless mitigated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document and the extent to which they address site -specific conditions for the project. vii CITY OF LA QUINTA ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE General Description The City of La Quinta is undertaking the update of their Zoning Ordinance in order to bring the ordinance into conformance with the 1992 update of the City's General Plan. The proposed Zoning Ordinance Update will apply city-wide and provide a comprehensive set of standards and regulations for development within the City of La Quinta. The Zoning Ordinance Update reflects many changes from the existing ordinance in order to conform with, and implement, the General Plan, create a more user-friendly document for ease of interpretation, establish more stringent standards and regulations according to the goals and objectives of the General Plan and to improve the quality of life for the residents of the City of La Quinta. Significant modifications relating to physical environmental impacts contained in the Zoning Ordinance Update are summarized below: Residential: The rear yard setbacks for all residential districts have been increased, in some cases, double that in the current ordinance. Setbacks for garages are now included in the Update, as well as a minimum common open area requirement where the original existing ordinance had none. These additions and changes to the development standards could result in an increased demand for water due to more open space, however, they could lessen the impacts of surface runoff. The impacts to the physical environment will be positive, with potential improvements to visual aesthetics and viewshed as they relate to setbacks. Non -Residential: Setbacks are proposed to be regulated within these districts for buildings under three stories, where currently it is not addressed. Maximum building heights are proposed to be lowered, in the CC, CR, CP and CT districts, significantly less than allowed for in the equivalent non-residential districts within the existing Zoning Ordinance. These setback additions may, as in the case of the residential districts, increase the demand for water due to the potential for increased landscaping, but the impacts to surface runoff will be less. These changes in the proposed Zoning Ordinance are expected to have no physical impact on the environment with the potential for a positive aesthetic benefit due to increased setbacks and building heights. Parking: The parking requirements have been increased for such uses as office and general retail uses to twice the current standard. This may impact the environment through increased surface runoff with the expanded area required for parking, however, the increase in the above stated setbacks should have a balanced effect resulting in no impact to the environment. It should be recognized that the Zoning Ordinance Update does not encourage growth in itself, but regulates it to ensure adequate and appropriate development in a manner that: is in the best interest of the City and its citizens. Therefore, the potential impact of the proposed ordinance provisions should not be significant. 'The General Plan with its accompanying Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) and Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) were the primary data sources used in developing this initial study checklist and explanation of responses. Land Use Planning 3.1 A-D) No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance is the implementing tool of the General Plan and is consistent with the General Plan and all subsequent Land Use Regulations. In addition, the Zoning Ordinance requires that all new development must be evaluated and approved/denied based upon adopted plans or regulations, such as environmental plans or policies. The General Plan FEIR, prepared in 1992, assessed land use impacts and the proposed Zoning Ordinance Update implements the land use patterns depicted in the General Plan. The La Quinta General Plan has anticipated that lands currently utilized for agriculture purposes will be converted into very -low density residential uses. The proposed Zoning Ordinance retains agriculture as a permitted use within the low and very low density residential zones. The proposed Zoning Ordinance will also help provide for the orderly development of land use and will not physically divide any established community or displace low income families. The project will eliminate existing discrepancies between applicable general plan and zoning regulations and, further, will be compatible with applicable environmental plans/policies, result in consistency between existing land uses, and not adversely affect agricultural resources or operation. Population and Mousing 3.2 A-C) No Impact: Population growth is guided by the City's General Plan. The Proposed Zoning Ordinance will provide an implementation method for achieving its goals and objectives. The Zoning Ordinance itself will not induce growth, however, it will regulate the physical development and existing conditions within the City of La Quinta, consistent with the General Plan policies and Guidelines. The Zoning Ordinance along with the General Plan present the City with the opportunity to reduce land use conflicts and prevent the premature transition of land from rural/open space uses to urban uses. The proposed Zoning Ordinance will not 2 cause population projection to be exceeded nor will it cause significant population growth or displace existing housing as it does not propose new growth beyond that envisioned in the General Plan. Earth and Geology 3.3 A-9) No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance regulates all new development and ensures proper review and approval of each project submittal as it relates to geologic hazards. It is possible for new development to locate near a potential surface rupture (an "inferred fault trace"), however, the proposed Zoning Ordinance contains processing procedures which will help identify and allow for the evaluation bf these types of environmental concerns. Some portions of the City have been identified in the General Plan EIR as being subject to the potential for liquefaction. As noted above, the proposed processing procedures contained in the Zoning Ordinance, the standard CEQA review process, and State Saw provide mechanisms to determine the severity of this issue on a case -by -case basis. The proposed Zoning Ordinance will not expose people to potential landslides or mudflows. The City is not located adjacent to a body of water large enough to create the potential for a tsunami and no active volcanos exist within the area. Grading activities undertaken as part of new development could affect soil erosion, however, the provisions of the proposed Zoning Ordinance would eliminate any potential adverse effects. State law requires the preparation of a soils report prior to approval of a final map and in addition, construction activities mandate particular soil compaction criteria to ensure safe construction techniques. The combined effect of these should eliminate any potential adverse affects resulting from expansive soils. In addition, the proposed Zoning Ordinance provides a Hillside Conservation Overlay District (Chapters 9.110.070 and 9.140.40) to define non - developable areas, regulate limited development unsuitable areas and protect the natural topographic features and hillside ecosystems. Water 3.4 A-H) No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance regulates all new development as set forth in the General Plan and has no growth inducing impacts to water related issues that have not already been assessed through the General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report and Master Environmental Assessment. 3 While the proposed Zoning Ordinance has minimally increased the front yard setbacks and parking standards in some residential districts, which could indicate the potential for increased surface runoff and changes in absorption rates, stringent landscaping standards are provided to ensure no impact to the physical environment (Chapters 9.60.240). The proposed Zoning Ordinance ensures review procedures and criteria which will alleviate potential flood hazards throughout the City. In addition, the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requires improvements to be installed or procedures implemented to reduce the amount of pollutants which are discharged into the storm drain system. All new development reviewed by the City must comply with NPDES. The proposed Zoning Ordinance has no impact on existing water courses, or result In significant changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as: flooding, discharge into surface waters or alteration of surface water quality (e.g. temperature, dissolved oxygen, or turbidity). It does not propose new or altered water related facilities or uses not identified in the General Plan. Water is supplied to uses in the City by the Coachella Valley Water District through the pumping of groundwater or the importation of Colorado River Water. The recharge of aquifers will continue to occur through the retention provisions discussed in the General Plan. The proposed Zoning Ordinance will not alter the direction or rate of glow of groundwater, negatively impact groundwater quality or substantially reduce the amount of groundwater otherwise available for public water supplies. Air Quality 3.5 A-D) No Impact: Both short term and long term mobile emissions and long term stationary source emissions will be generated throughout the City with continued development. The primary source of short term emissions will be construction equipment operation in the course of developing General Plan land uses. The primary source of long term emissions will be project -generated traffic and the on -site emissions from residential and commercial energy consumption. As the implementing tool of the General Plan, the proposed Zoning Ordinance Update does not induce growth, it regulates development with definitive standards. Any impacts to air quality have already been assessed and proper mitigation formulated to address the impact as part of the General Plan process. The proposed Zoning Ordinance Update includes numerous chapters, such as Transportation Demand Management that addresses pollution reduction techniques and vehicle trip reduction. This is an implementation measure from the General 4 Plan. Compliance with the Zoning Ordinance will ensure implementation of the General Plan and that new development projects will not violate any air quality standards or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation, expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, alter air movements, moisture, or temperature, cause any change in climate, or create objectionable odors. Transportation/Circulation 3.6 A-G) No Impact: Under buildout conditions the traffic volumes in certain parts of the City will drastically increase. In addition, the physical geographic setting of La 02uinta, nestled up against the mountains and large resort developments throughout the City, limit any opportunities for construction of new roadways to augment the existing grid network. The primary option to satisfy the growth is to widen and improve operational efficiency of the existing roadways. The Zoning Ordinance contains a Transportation Demand Management Chapter (Chapter 9.180) that is intended to reduce air pollution, traffic congestion and energy consumption attributable to vehicle trips and vehicle miles traveled. Incorporated in this chapter are provisions for bicycle, transit and ride share facilities. In addition, mixed use developments of residential, commercial and office are permitted to further reduce external vehicle trips and increase non - vehicular internal trips consistent with General Plan policies. The proposed Zoning Ordinance regulates all new development and ensures proper review and approval of each project submittal as it relates to transportation and circulation. Adoption of the Zoning Ordinance Update as the implementing tool of the General Plan is not growth inducing, therefore, results in no impact to traffic congestion and vehicle trips from the anticipated new development that would occur under the General Plan Land Use Policy Diagram. No impact will result from hazards to safety due to design features, inadequate emergency access, insufficient parking capacity, hazards or barriers for pedestrians and bicycles, conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation or rail/waterborne or air traffic. Riological Resources 3.7 A-E) No Impact: While it is true that future development could have some impacts on biological resources, upon submittal of new development projects, environmental review and documentation is required by a qualified wildlife biologist and horticulturist to identify any project related impact on habitat areas. Appropriate mitigation 5 measures have been adopted in the La Quinta General Plan to ensure minimal impact. Implementation of the proposed Zoning Ordinance Update will not have any growth inducing impacts beyond those already considered in the General Plan. 'The proposed Zoning Ordinance will not result in significant impacts to endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds), locally designated species, locally designated natural communities (e.g. oak forest, coastal habitat, etc), wetland habitat (e.g. marsh, riparian and vernal pools), or wildlife dispersal or migration corridors. Energy and Mineral Resources 3.8 A-B) No Impact: The only known significant mineral resource in the City is a non -operating sand and gravel mine located in a designated open space area. This site is currently developed with low density residential and a private golf course. The proposed Zoning Ordinance will not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and residents of the state. The proposed Zoning Ordinance will not conflict with any adopted energy conservation plans, or use non-renewable resources in a wasteful or inefficient manner. Risk of Upset/Human Health 3.9 A-E) No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance (Chapter 9.100.230) requires that all new development complies with local, state and federal regulations pertaining to the handling of hazardous substances. Compliance with the Zoning Ordinance ensures that new development will not involve or create any risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemical or radiation). The proposed Zoning Ordinance conforms with and implements the General Plan which ensures measures to mitigate possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard, exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards, development on or near a listed hazardous waste site pursuant to Govt. Code Sec 65962.5, or increase fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees. 0 Noise 3.110 A-B) No Impact: The General Plan FEIR (Chapter 3, Section 3.9) refers to the fact that noise impacts are generated primarily from two sources - noise associated with either construction activities, or with the increase in traffic on City streets. Noise associated with construction activities will typically be short term in nature, and the duration of the exposure will last only as long as the construction activity. Noise associated with the increase in traffic on City streets is long-term, in nature, and will result in an increase of the ambient noise levels in the City. These impacts were considered and mitigation was developed in conjunction with the 1992 La Quinta General Plan Update. The proposed Zoning Ordinance (Chapters 9.60.270 and 9.100.210) establishes noise thresholds to ensure that new development will not contribute to a significant increase in existing noise levels or exposure of people to severe noise levels. Existing City review procedures are sufficient to mitigate all potential noise impacts to a level of no impact. Public Services 3.11 A-E) No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance regulates all new development and ensures proper review and approval of each project submittal as it relates to public services. The General Plan FEIR has assessed the issues of police/fire department personnel, school and library capacity and formulated mitigation for these land use impacts. As the implementation tool of the General Plan, compliance with the proposed Zoning Ordinance Update will ensure no impact to the physical environment. Utilities 3.12 A-F) No Impact: The proposed Zoning Ordinance regulates all new development and ensures proper review and approval of each project submittal as it relates to utilities. The General Plan FEIR has assessed and formulated mitigation for these land use impacts. As the implementation tool of the General Plan, compliance with the proposed Zoning Ordinance Update will ensure no impact to the physical environment. 7 Aesthetics 3.113 A-C) No Impact Development of the City to buildout could potentially impact what are considered the aesthetic qualities of the City of La Quinta. However, existing City review procedures are adequate to identify and mitigate potential impacts on the visual environment. In addition, the increase in setbacks, both in residential and non- residential districts should encourage additional landscaping which will improve the aesthetic quality of new development, as well as lowering maximum building height standards. Development which will occur in conformance with the proposed Zoning Ordinance Will be required to follow the existing review procedures and thus, will not adversely affect a scenic vista highway, have demonstrated negative aesthetic effect, create light or glare. The coastal bluff issue has no impact in the City of La Quinta. Cultural Resources 3.14 A-E) No Impact There are known cultural resources within the City of La Quinta including building structures and sites which are of architectural, social, historical and archaeological significance. The buildout of the City will potentiality result in the loss of their cultural resources as land is disturbed and developed. Mitigation measures adopted with the La Quinta General Plan were prepared to ensure that appropriate steps will be taken to ensure preservation, recordation and/or rehabilitation as development occurs. The proposed Zoning Ordinance has no direct impact on and is not expected to adversely affect existing cultural resources. Existing City review procedures are adequate to identify and mitigate potential impacts on cultural resources including existing structures throughout the City. Recreation 3.1.6 A-B) No Impact The City has mitigation in place to ensure that a total of 3.0 acres of improved neighborhood and community park lands are provided per 1000 City residents, including the dedication of land and/or the payment of fees. The City shall continue to coordinate with the County of Riverside to provide regional parks that range from 31 to more than 1000 acres in size, serve a radius of 10 miles and provide 10 acres of park land per 1000 residents at full buildout of the City. The adoption of the proposed Zoning Ordinance will not increase the demand for parks or recreational facilities. Based upon these factors, the Ordinance will have no impact on recreational issues. Mandatory Findings of Significance The preceding Checklist, data sources, and explanations show that the proposed project: (a) does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment via impacts on plants, animals, fish, or their habitats; (b) does not have the potential to achieve short- term, to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals; (c) will not result in impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable; and (d) will not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse affects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. N PH #2 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE:. MAY 14, 1996 CASE NO.:. TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 26768 REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION (EXTENSION # 1) FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 20 ACRES INTO 21 SINGLE FAMILY AND AMENITY LOTS LOCATION: ON THE WEST SIDE OF MONROE STREET, 1/4 MILE NORTH OF AIRPORT BOULEVARD (ATTACHMENT 1) APPLICANT: DIETRICH AND INGRID WERNER PROPERTY OWNER: SAME AS APPLICANT ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE CITY COUNCIL ON APRIL 7, 1992, ADOPTED A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (E.A. 91-221) IN 1992. BASED UPON THIS ASSESSMENT, THE PROJECT WILL NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT BASED ON MITIGATION MEASURES IMPOSED. THEREFORE, NO ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DEEMED NECESSARY. GENERAL PLAN: VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH RURAL RESIDENTIAL OVERLAY (MAX. 1 DU./AC.) ZONING: R-1 20,000 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING WITH 2O,000 SQ. FT. LOT MIN.) BACKGROUND: Site Background The proposed tract is on the west side of Monroe Street, one -quarter mile north of Airport Boulevard. The City annexed this site and adjacent properties (Annexation 5) in January, 1991. ST.AFFRPT . 8 0 In 19�92, the previous owner, BESTCO Investment Limited, filed the original Tentative Tract Map request to subdivide approximately 20 acres into 21 single family lots. Also processed concurrently was General Plan 91-040 and Zone Change 91-069, requests to change the land use designations from Riverside County designations to Very Low Density Residential (R-1 20,000, Zoning). On April 7, 1992, the Council approved the applicant's request under Resolutions 92-37 (GPA) and 92-38 (TTM) and Ordinance 204 allowing the redesignation of property and subdivision of the parcels into single family lots. A copy of the original tentative map exhibit is attached (Attachment 2). This property is not within the Equestrian Overlay District of Chapter 9.117 of the Municipal Code. In 1993, the State Legislature passed Senate Bill 428 permitting all active tentative maps two additional years without any penalties to the provisions outlined in the City's Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Map Act. The map's expiration was therefore extended to April 7, 1996. Surroundina Zoning/Land Use The properties on the east side of Monroe Street are in the County and are either vacant or developed with single family houses (i.e., 9 to 40-acre parcels). The property to the north is developed with a home and adjacent agricultural field. To the north approximately 640-feet from this site are existing estate houses in The Estates at La Quinta (i.e., Tract 26769) which the City approved in 1991. To the west (i.e., old Landmark Turf Farm), is an approved development proposal to build 1,060 single family dwellings on 265 acres approved by the City in 1991 (i.e., Specific Plan 90-015). To the south is an existing agricultural field. Original Map Approval The approved tentative tract map allows single family lots that range in size from 0.75 to 1.00-acre in size on private streets. The applicant purchased the property in October, 1994. Access to the 21-lot development will be from Lot "B" Street that intersects with Monroe Street approximately 200-feet north of the southeast corner of the site. Lot "B" Street transitions west and connects with three other smaller cul-de-sac private streets. This tract, as Conditioned, is limited to right -in and right -out turn movements. The developer is required to disclose to prospective buyers that the keeping of horses or livestock is allowed on properties to the north of the subject site provided the equestrian and R-1 standards are met. Public Notice The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 1, 1996. All property owner's within 500-feet of the 20-acre site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required. No negative comments have been received. All correspondence received before the meeting will be given to the Commission. STAFFRPT.80 Public Agency Review Staff mailed a copy of the applicant's request to all public agencies on March 25, 1996. We have received no negative comments. All other comments have been incorporated into the attached draft Conditions of Approval. Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment 91-221 was prepared for this case during its original review and approval in 1992. Since the new property owners propose no map changes, no additional environmental consideration is warranted for a time extension request pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act statutes. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: Issue 1 - General Plan Consistency The City updated the General Plan in 1992. As part of the update, the General Plan designates this site as Very Low Density Residential (0-1 dwellings per acre) with a Rural Residential Overlay (RRO) which limits the density to one dwelling per acre and requires that the provisions of Chapter 2 of the General Plan are met (e.g., enhanced setbacks, rural fencing, rural streets, etc.). This map is approved for 21-lots. However, Policy 2- 1.2.3 (Rural Residential Overlay) of the General Plan only allows 20 lots unless a General Plan Amendment is approved allowing modification to the rural design guidelines (Attachment 3). Condition 55 requires the applicant to comply with provisions of the General Plan. Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements One access point is planned on Monroe Street, a primary arterial street (100 to 110' r-o-w). All interior private streets will be 37-feet in right-of-way width and provide access to all single family lots. The Conditions of Approval require improvements for this project that include streets and other infrastructure improvements necessary for development. The recommended Conditions will insure that all on -site work is consistent with City standards. Condition 37 requires the applicant to install an equestrian trail and public sidewalk on Monroe Street in the City's parkway and/or landscape easement. The City in 1992 required the equestrian trail along the west side of Monroe Street to provide a north/south link to Airport Boulevard and/or Avenue 58 which would allow access to Lake Cahuilla and the Santa Rosa Mountains. The City's Equestrian Trail Corridor Map is contained in the Park and Recreation Element of the General Plan (Chapter 5). STAFFRPT.80 (. ( '.� ;k_J Issue 3 - Health and Safety The proposed Conditions of Approval require installation of all necessary infrastructure improvements. These include water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. Electric services will be undergrounded and they meet all requirements of the local service agencies (gas, electric, water, etc.). Private septic systems will be permitted, but piping will be provided to allow connection to an off -site system once one has been installed along Monroe Street. All fees and hookup requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District shall be met at that time. CONCLUSION: Staff has revised and/or added Conditions to this request to comply with the existing provisions of the General Plan, Municipal Zoning Code and Subdivision Ordinance because the map was approved in 1992. This subdivision map request is consistent with all City Codes as Conditioned. No physical constraints prevent the development of the site as planned. Findings for approval are included in the attached draft Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending to the City Council approval of the first one year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 26768, subject to the revised Conditions of Approval as attached. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Exhibit (Reduced) 3. Rural Residential Overlay Policy Information 4. Large Map Exhibit (PC only) Prepared by: GregT,�rouidell Submitted by: Christine di lorio, Planning Manager STAFFRPT.80 RESOLUTION 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 26768 (1ST EXTENSION) TO ALLOW A 21-LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND SALES SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 20 ACRES CASE NO.: TTM 26768 (1ST TIME EXTENSION) APPLICANT: INGRID WERNER WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 14th day of May, 1996, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and recommended approval of a one year extension, for a 20-acre site with 21-lot single family lots, generally on the west side of Monroe Street., 1/4 mile north of Airport Boulevard, more particularly described as: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE SOUTH Y2 OF NE 1/4 OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (APN: 767-330-007 AND 008) WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director has determined that the original environmental assessment (EA. 91-221) approved in 1992, is still valid and binding on this development request. Therefore, no additional environmental review is warranted; 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 Tract Map 26768 (1st Time Extension): A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. The project is a Very Low Density Residential (VLDR) District with Rural Residential Overlay per the provisions of the 1992 General Plan Update; therefore, all provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) shall be met. Tentative Tract 26768 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions, specifically reducing the number of lots to 20, contained herein are required to ensure among other things consistency with the General Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences pursuant to Environmental Assessment 91-211. The site is zoned R-1 20,000 (One Family Dwelling) which permits single family developments. All plans for future single family homes shall be consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are acquired. The development of the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. The density and design standards for the tract will comply with the Rural Residential Overlay as designated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan (Chapter 2). All streets and RESOX. 1, 85p/conaprA.375 Resolution 96- improvements in the project conform to City standards of the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. All on -site streets are private (37-feet wide) and will be maintained by a Homeowner's Association. Access for the single family lots will be provided from internal private streets that provide access to Monroe Street, a primary arterial street. C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed land division as approved in 1992. The original development plan will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures have been required per Environmental Assessment 91-221. Before on -site grading, the applicant shall employ a qualified archaeologist and paleontologist to conduct on -site research and review for prehistoric and historic remains. These findings shall be submitted in report form to staff. The consultant's report shall indicate his or her findings and convey any important information about the site or its development. Monitoring shall be required during site grading work, if deemed necessary by the consultant's report. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Noise impacts from existing and future road noise on Monroe Street shall be analyzed and mitigation measures shall be employed to reduce exterior noise for those houses along this major arterial street to levels consistent with Table EH-1 of Chapter 8 of the General Plan (Environmental Hazards Element). The noise study shall ensure that future roadway noise is less than 60 dB CNEL in outdoor areas and 45 dB CNEL or less for interior areas to conform with the City's 1992 General Plan Update. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. E. The design of the subdivision 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. The proposed private streets are planned to provide direct access to each single family lot. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support necessary infrastructure improvements. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, the Planning Commission has considered, the effect of the contemplated action on housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; REsocc..i s 5P/conaprv1.375 Resolution 96- 2. That it does hereby reconfirm the conclusions of Environmental Assessment 91-221 as approved in 1992; 3. That it does approve Tentative Tract Map 26768 (1 st Time Extension) for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on this the 14th day of May, 1996, by the following vote, to wit: AYES; NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California TO FORM: DAWN HONEYWELL, City Attorney City of La Quinta, California xEsocC. imp/conaprA.375 rK PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 26768, EXTENSION #1 MAY 14, 1996 GENERAL: 1. The City Clerk is instructed to have the final Conditions of Approval for this tract recorded with the Clerk's Office of the County of Riverside (i.e., Assessor's Parcel Numbers 767-330-007 and 767-330-008). 2. Tentative Tract Map 26768, marked Exhibit "A", shall comply with the requirements and standards of Section 66410 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the State Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC), unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 3. This Tentative Tract Map approval shall expire on April 7, 1997, unless approved for a 2nd extension pursuant to the City of La Quinta Subdivision Ordinance. 4. Prior to any site disturbance being permitted, including preliminary site work and/or archaeological investigation, the project developer shall submit and have approved a Fugitive Dust Control Plan (FDCP), in accordance with Chapter 6.16 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. The plan shall define all areas proposed for development and shall indicate time lines for any phasing of the project, and shall establish standards for comprehensive control of both anthropogenic and natural creation of airborne dust due to development activities on the site. Phased projects must prepare a plan that addresses control measures over the entire build out of the project, such as for disturbed lands pending future development. 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. 5. Before the issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: ♦ City Fire Marshal ♦ Public Works Department (Grading Permit/Improvement Permits) ♦ Community Development Department ♦ Coachella Valley Water District ♦ Coachella Valley Unified School District ♦ Imperial Irrigation District ♦ California Regional Water Quality Board (NPDES Permit) ♦ Riverside County Health Department (i.e., Septic Facilities) conaprv1.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning; Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14, 1996 The applicant is responsible for any requirements of the permits or clearances from those jurisdictions. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to City approval of the plans. For projects requiring NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of an approved Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan. 6. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 7. Community Development Department approval shall be secured prior to establishing any of the following facilities uses: A. Temporary construction facilities. B. Sales facilities, including their appurtenant signage. C. On -site advertising/construction signs. 8. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall retain a professionally qualified archaeologist to conduct a field reconnaissance survey and record search of the project site. A report of the result of the survey shall be submitted to the Community Development Department (2 copies) complete with recommendations for further mitigation measures. All testing shall be completed prior to any grading work commencing. The archaeologist shall prepare a mitigation plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to implementation. During grading activities, the project site shall be monitored by a professionally qualified archaeological monitor. The monitor is authorized to temporarily divert or stop equipment in order to investigate exposed cultural deposits. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the project archaeologist shall submit a final report to the Community Development Department. The final report shall follow the report format contained in Preservation Planning Bulletin, No. 4(a), December, 1989 (OHP). The final report shall be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission for completeness and acceptability. Acceptance of the final report by the Commission signifies completion of the archaeological mitigation program. conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a P,j.t� Planning; Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14, 1996 Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall retain a professionally qualified paleontologist to provide monitoring of earth -moving activities, including trenching for both on -site and off -site related work. Prior to commencing grading activities, the paleontologist shall conduct a preliminary survey and surface collection of any paleontological resources. The project paleontologist shall prepare a monitoring and salvage program for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to implementation. During grading activities, the project site shall be monitored by a professionally qualified paleontologist who maintains the necessary paleontologic collecting permits and repository agreements. In areas of known high potential, the project paleontologist may designate a paleontologic monitor to be present during 100% of the earth -moving activities. If, after 50% of the grading is completed, it can be demonstrated that the level of monitoring should be reduced, the project paleontologist may so amend the mitigation program. The paleontologic monitor(s) is authorized to temporarily divert equipment while removing fossils. Prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy, the project paleontologist shall submit a final report to the Community Development Department. The final report shall discuss the methods used, results of the surface survey, identification, cataloging, curation, and storage of fossil materials collected; and the significance of the paleontological resources. A final report of the finds and their significance after all operations are complete shall be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission for acceptability. Acceptance of the final report for the project by the Historic Preservation Commission signifies completion of the program of mitigation. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall have retained a qualified cultural resources management firm and completed the testing and data recovery as noted in the plan. The management firm shall monitor the grading activity as required by the plan or testing results. A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s), cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistants)/representative(s), shall be submitted to the Community Development Department. The list shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the Community Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby areas conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a 4 ' .1 1. ) Planning; Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14, 1996 reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Community Development Department. 9. Street name proposals (3 per street) shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to recordation of a portion of the final map. Street name signs shall be furnished and installed by the developer in accordance with standards of the City Engineer. Sign type and design shall be subject to review and approval of the Community Development Department and the Public Works Department. 10. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the applicant shall meet the parkland dedication requirement as set forth in Section 13.24.030, La Quinta Subdivision Ordinance, by paying parkland fees in -lieu, as may be determined in accordance with said Section. 11. A qualified acoustical engineer shall prepare a noise study, to be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval before final map approval. The study will concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from Monroe Street, and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the tract design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, walls, and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques to avoid the isolated appearance given by walled developments. The Rural Residential Overlay provisions of Chapter 2 of the General Plan shall be met during the preparation of the noise study. 12. If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the Conditions of Approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of homes or occupancy of permanent buildings with the phase unless the City Engineer approves a construction sequencing plan for that phase. If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals (Plot Plans, Conditional Use Permits, etc.), off -site improvements and c onaprv1.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning; Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14,1996 development -wide improvements (i.e., retention basins, perimeter walls and landscaping, gates, etc.) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 13. All exterior lighting including that for signs and landscaping shall comply with "Dark Sky" Ordinance (Chapter 9.210 of the Municipal Zoning Code). FIRE DEPARTMENT 14. Schedule a fire protection approved super fire hydrants, (6" x 4" x 2-1/2" x 2-1/2") shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 gpm for two hours duration at 20 psi. 15. Prior to recordation of the final map, applicant/developer shall furnish one blueline copy of the water system plan to the Fire Department for review/approval. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the 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". 16. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits. 17. Whenever access into private property is controlled though use of gates, barriers, guard houses or similar means, provision shall be made to facilitate access by emergency vehicles in a manner approved by the Fire Department. All controlled access devices that are power operated shall have a Knox Box override system capable of opening the gate when activated by a special key located in the emergency vehicle(s). Devices shall be equipped with backup power facilities to operate in the event of power failure. All controlled access devices that are not power operated shall be approved by the Fire Department. Minimum opening width shall be 16-feet with minimum vertical clearance of 15-feet. r conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a �� Planning; Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14,1996 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 18. The property owner shall dedicate public street right-of-way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable Specific Plans if any, and as required by the City Engineer, as follows: A. Monroe Street - Primary Arterial, 55-foot half width. If the City Engineer determines that public access rights to proposed street rights of way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating the rights of way, the applicant shall grant temporary public access easements to those areas within 60-days of a written request by the City. 19. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured prior to constructing or joining any street improvements. 20. Applicant shall provide a separate lot or lots for private road purposes to be owned in common by the owners of the residential lots in the subdivision. The private road(s) shall conform to the City's General Plan and Municipal Code, and as required by the Public Works Director, as follows: A. "B", "C", "D", and "E" Streets (37-feet wide), and B. Cul-de-sacs (i.e., a 45-foot radius). 21. The property owner shall vacate vehicle access rights to Monroe Street from all abutting lots. Access to Monroe Street from this land division shall be restricted to Lot "B" Street only. No median opening shall be permitted. 22. The applicant shall provide 10-foot wide public utility easements on each side of the private street lot(s) and 20-foot wide landscape easement along Monroe Street. 23. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by professional engineer(s) authorized to practice in the State of California. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC, adopted Standard and Supplemental Drawings and Specifications, and as approved by the City Engineer. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the US Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning; Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14, 1996 Street right of way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckles turns and corner cutbacks shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. All streets proposed to serve residential or other access driveways shall be designed and constructed with curbs and gutters or shall have other approved methods to convey nuisance water without ponding in yard or drive areas and to facilitate sweeping. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design for 20-year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Residential and Parking Areas 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5/6.50" The applicant shall submit mix designs for road base and pavement materials, including complete testing lab results, for review and approval by the City. Paving operations shall not be scheduled until mix design(s) are approved. 24. Miscellaneous incidental improvements and enhancements to existing improvements where joined by the newly required improvements shall be designed and constructed as required by the City engineer to assure the new and existing improvements are appropriate integrated to provide a finished product that conforms with City standards and practices. This includes tapered off -site street transitions that extend beyond tract boundaries and join the widened and existing street sections. 25. The following specific street widths shall be constructed or secured if deferred to conform with the General Plan street type noted therewith: A. ON -SITE STREETS "B", "C", "D" and "E" Streets - full width Local Street, 37-feet wide, refer to Std. Dwg. #105; the cul-de-sac bulb shall have a 45-foot curb radius. conaprv1.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning, Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14, 1996 B. OFF -SITE STREETS 2. Monroe Street (portion contiguous to the tract) - Install half width Primary Arterial (86-feet wide improvement option), bond for half of raised median deferred, refer to Std. Dwg. #100. A bus turnout easement shall be provided on Monroe Street, south of Lot "B" on Lot "A" for the installation of a future shelter pursuant to the request of Sunline Transit. The applicant's obligations for all or a portion of the deferred improvements may, at the City's option, be satisfied by participation in a major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject to such a program. 26. The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or enter into agreement to construct and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to agendization of a final map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13 of the LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions with are not part of the proposed improvements. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City Resolution or Ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas or TV cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the requirements for telephone service to lots within the development. 27. An engineering, geological, and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted with a report submitted for review along with grading plan. The report recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. A statement shall appear on the final subdivision map that a soils report has been prepared for the tract pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. conaprv1.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning; Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative; Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14, 1996 23. The tract grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. Tract grading and drainage shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 29. The tract shall be designed and graded in a manner so the difference in building pad elevations between contiguous lots that share a common street frontage or join lots with adjoining existing tracts or approved tentative tracts does not exceed three (3.0) feet. The pad elevations of contiguous lots within the subject tract that do not share a common street shall not exceed five (5.0) feet. If an applicant is unable to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the City will consider and may approve other alternatives that satisfy the City's intent to promote and ensure community acceptance and buyer satisfaction with the proposed development. 30. The tract shall be graded in a manner that permits storm flow in excess of the retention basin capacity, caused by a storm event greater than a 100-year 24-hour event, to flow out of the tract through a designated emergency overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. Similarly, the tract shall be graded in a manner that anticipates receiving storm flow from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow for those occasions when a storm greater than the 100-year 24-hour event occurs. 31. Storm water runoff produced in 24 hours by a 100-year storm shall be retained on the site in landscaped retention basins designed for a maximum water depth not to exceed six feet. The basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. The percolation rate shall be considered to be zero inches per hour unless the applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. Other requirements include, but are not limited to, a grassed ground surface with permanent irrigation improvements, and appurtenant structural drainage amenities all of which shall be designed and constructed in accordance with requirements deemed necessary by the City Engineer. Stormwater shall normally be retained in common basins. Individual lot basins or other retention schemes may be approved by the City Engineer for lots 2.5-acres in size or larger or where the use of the common retention is determined by the City Engineer to be impracticable. If individual lot retention is approved, the applicant shall meet all individual lot retention provisions of Chapter 13.24, LQMC. No fence or wall shall be constructed around the retention basin except as approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the development. If any storm water or c onaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a ( # I ti Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14,1996 nuisance water from this development is proposed to drain to off -site locations, the applicant may be required to design and install first -flush storage, oil/water separation devices, or other screening or pretreatment method(s) to minimize conveyance of containments to off -site locations. Drainage to off -site locations and methods of treatment or screening shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. The applicant may retain storm water runoff from Monroe Street and "B" Street in a retention basin in the landscape setback lot not to exceed 3-feet in depth with a foreslope not to exceed 5:1. The backslope maybe increased to 3:1. 32. A trickling sand filter and leachfield shall be installed in the retention basin to percolate nuisance water in conformance with requirements of the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 160 gallons per lot per day. 33. Applicants shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet for the street, landscape, irrigation, perimeter wall, and drainage facilities installed in the subdivision. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to help the homeowner's association in planning the routine and long tem maintenance. 34. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped lots, landscape setback areas, medians, common retention basins, and park facilities. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of Chapter 8.13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Landscape and irrigation construction plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The plans are not approved for construction until they have been approved and signed by the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within five feet of the curbs along public streets. conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning, Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14,1996 35. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and approval with respect to the District's Water Management Program. 36. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of drainage, landscaping and on -site street improvements. The applicant shall maintain all other improvements until final acceptance of improvements by the City Council. 37. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall post securities to ensure construction of an eight -foot wide meandering sidewalk between the Monroe Street curbing and landscaped setback lot. The property owner shall provide a blanket easement that covers the entire landscaped setback lot(s) to provide a meandering public sidewalk. The equestrian trail shall be provided between the east edge of the sidewalk and the property line. A split rail fence shall divide the trail and the sidewalk and the trail should be a minimum width of eight feet. 38. The five-foot wide access easement contiguous to the southerly tract boundary shall be extinguished. 39. The Southern Pacific Railroad Company shall vacate the 200-foot wide railroad right-of-way (i.e., not plotable ) in the subdivision, noted as easement note #2, prior to final map approval. 40. The ten -foot wide irrigation easement that runs across Lots 11 and 16 shall be extinguished before map acceptance by the City Council. 41. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines with the power authority will accept underground are exempt from this requirement. 42. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to City standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvements. The applicant's Soils Engineer shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 43. Property Owner/Applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of the final map without the approval of the City Engineer. conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14,1996 44. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the City as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amounts shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. 45. The applicant shall employ or retain a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As - Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. The applicant shall revise the plan computer files previously submitted to the City to reflect the as - constructed condition. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, or surveyor, that lists actual building pad elevations for the building lots. The document shall list the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and the difference between the two, if any. The date shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. PE IAL 46. All single family homes within 150-feet of the ultimate right of way of Monroe Street shall be single -story and no higher than 22 feet as measured from building pad elevation as noted on the approved grading plan. 47. The Planning Commission shall approve the production house plans (or design manual) before the submission of the construction plans to the Building and Safety Department for construction permit issuance via a plot plan application (i.e., Non - Hearing Agenda Item). All homes with sloped roofs having clay or concrete tile. The project design features shall be incorporated in the CC and R's for the development. Two copies of the draft CC and R's for the development shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval before recordation of the final map. Once the draft document is approved as to form by the City, it shall be recorded with the County of Riverside concurrently with the Final map recordation. A copy of the recorded document shall be given to the Community Development Department prior to building permit issuance. 48. The minimum lot size shall be 20,000 square feet. conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a (r `� Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14, 1996 49. The provisions of the Municipal Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are applied for shall be met. 50. All homes shall be required to install front yard landscaping prior to final occupancy. Each lot shall have two 15-gallon shade trees (corner lots five 15-gallon trees), ten 5-gallon shrubs and other landscaping (e.g., turf, turf and gravel, etc.), acceptable to the Community Development Department. The applicant/developer is encouraged to use drought resistant and native plant materials for the project. The landscaping concept shall be approved currently with the review of the model homes plans by the Planning Commission. The applicant will be permitted to post securities to insure that the front yard landscaping is installed for each home if the applicant does not have plant material installed at the time the house is finaled. All landscaping materials shall be installed within 60 days after occupancy clearances have been given. 51. The mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91-221 shall be met. 52. The developer shall disclose in the project's CC and R's that the keeping of horses or other livestock can be permitted on adjacent properties provided the provisions of the Zoning Code are met. 53. Impacts shall be mitigated in accordance with the provisions of AB 1600, Section 53080 and 63995 of the Government Code or the then existing legislation and/or local ordinances adopted pursuant thereto or any applicable mitigation agreement entered into by the developer and the District. In addition, the City, developer and the Coachella Valley Unified School District shall cooperate in exploring alternatives to provide lands or facilities to the District, through joint use agreements, dedications, or Mello -Roos District formation. 54. Perimeter security walls where required by the Noise Study shall be subject to the following standards: (A) Setbacks from right-of-way lines along Madison Street shall average 30 feet, and (B) All wall designs, including location and materials, shall be subject to review by the Planning Commission. 55. The provisions of the Rural Residential Overlay (General Plan Policy 2-1.2.3) shall be met by reducing the number of buildable residential lots in the project to 20 prior to final map approval by the City Council. MISCELLANEOUS 56. Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24" x 36" media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading, "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the Community conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning, Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14, 1996 Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction until they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, equestrian trails, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping" plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 57. The City may maintain standard plans, details and/or construction notes for elements of construction. For a fee established by City resolution, the developer may acquire standard plan and/or detail sheets from the City. 58. As part of the filing of the final map for approval by the City Council, the applicant shall furnish accurate CAD files of the map and improvement plans. The files shall be submitted on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. 59. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the appropriate authority that the applicant has met all requirements for service to lots within the subdivision. 60. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 61. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have their agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings. { 40 conaprvl.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a Planning, Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 26768, Ext. # 1 May 14,1996 62. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans which were signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As - Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the Engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. 63. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposit and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for the plan checks and permits. 64. The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map or issuance of a certificate for any waived final map, the development or portions thereof may be subject to the provisions of the Ordinance. If the development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street/traffic improvements required herein. 65. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. conaprv1.375-a, reso185-p, strp80-a ATTACHMENTS FOR TTM 26768 AVE. -F T- d9v.2G z8S Par 7 y� "X 6�f PN 90/9 I r 1, S t 7 DEL�3 AlCNO Par a QIl � i I par 3 I t�•d I O Ac Ts dui. 4F 14 6a1.9d crs6� vNso/sJ � I5ool-W72iCo- fA — DATE OLD NO NEII NO ATTACHMENT 1 THIS AIAP IS FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY N N ISO/ 1 I o /I t. JSAc.f I1 h A SESs ffS MAP BX 767 Ply,. 33 RIVERSIDE COUNTY, GALI s F5I, o yr ATTACHMENT 2 o 3H �� to 00 L- _ �dW N zs e �W. owa Qa> LL rLo �� o¢ W a nr W C N 1I1 >`WN� 2JJ �tJ.� -0 S O .� uJ OI N Wm ¢22 ww:• n• gg Z O S¢M O Jp <JU <N< Q22 <¢ < < u J JWO < uiWWW2 : :W 0gt1'f.! � F a21 Q r¢M VJ (.16.z.CJ'd WW, tL r'u i¢c<3 zd W �Ld » olaz o : m Cp v W J r W NO< H : : in ppJ IZi=N O : :„r • r ! H rs N \ w r W i'o�^ ::: ❑ �ii0 Ur oocc :r� cn 0 > J- My Z A H JJ4 Z NN2 Z O Ui 14 .UW Q 1- 1J w H ioz J .". m ❑ iw3 Z zo'o LL m Q I i8$ a in Z Z wimp LD p -0 H ¢¢ :jai Z i-o¢o W aWpN O ,,,[,,,,. � ly,l 3 Yrl ICJ Z 000 IW-... WJJ Q WxE O .y+0a� ^ W W O,mn`a W �o� ❑ iHmW11W� J MIR �I Wa¢ Q Q ¢m¢� f= a �~ MONROE ST. _ - ---- LOT .�. LOT 0.31 •c. oreNnwl Aa■■8� F- i W W 03 �Y1 p I l i N I' Ig91 W IV PPj Ili I o { 1 e QQ 11 11 aI I� \ � 'W 5 Wr4o f '' I I ►. z .0 I g Z N c■ ll If Ri� '{ q a1 'i m>t Ill I in I < i .., bpi 1 t 't1 II II I 1 ¢� tl r ado 1` 9 i it a I� {I r g P Q0 c z� I 1 1;;i ' 1 II II x> m> Q '� I iii 5a aWa_ '^w > 1to 8 !{i n 9 ' i ii II ii ' ' f i{{ ~a �. � 1 11 v�Ri� I` Iql •� a y luy —-g =—_;g- - _ -- ------ _-=_; uU,y! NN i ah in M� 7 L mo W I I R I II ri { ' \�i ' - li to: 9 t iJ �V I4i� i I � it • { I I r II P It cu it sip. Jill Id .3. lo)l z P cn P 4 j Pi N W zz- 0 a N a m - A Specific Plan application is filed and tine overall project density is consistent with the underlying Land Use Policy Diagram density. - if the above conditions are not met, then a General Plan Amendment is required to allow the use in a non -designated area. MHDR and HDR uses will be allowed to locate in areas designated on the Land Use Policy Diagram as VLDR, LDR and MDR uses providing: - A Specific Plan application is filed and the overall project density is consistent with the underlying Land Use Policy Diagram density. - The MHDR and HDR uses are, part of a mixed -use, planned development. - LANdes/travisportetion facilities are designed to accommodate the MHDR and HDR uses. - MHDR or HDR uses are located adjacent to or in dose proximity to arterial roadways and intersections. - HDR or MHDR uses buffer VLDR, LDR and/or MDR uses from commercial uses and arterial roadways. - MHDR and/or HDR uses are located in dose proximity to park/open space uses such as neighborhood and community parks, schools or other recreational facilities. H not located in dose proximity to these uses, the MHDR and/or HDR uses must provide substantial recreational amenities within the development - If the above conditions are not met, then a General Plan Amendment is required to allow the use in the non -designated area. Objective 2-1.2 The General Plan shall identify a 'Rural Residential Overiar designation on the land Use Policy Ciiagram to facilitate the preservation and development of a rural character in desirable locations in the City. Policy 2-1.Z 1 A 'Rural Residential Overlay' shall be identified on the Land Use Policy Diagram in the area generally bounded by the Coachella Canal, Jefferson Street, Monroe Street, Avenue 54 and Avenue 55. Policy 2-1.22 The allowable density of areas subject to the Rural Residential Overlay shag be adjusted as follows: Use Element City of La Quinta General Plan ATTACHMENT 3 • The density range of LDR areas shall be 0-3 DU/AC. • The density range of VLDR areas shall be 0-1 DU/AC. Policy 2-1.2.3 Development in areas subject to the Rural Residential Overlay shall conform to the following design guidelines which evoke a rural character • All development in areas subject to the Rural Residential Overlay shall utilize rural street cross -sections (e.g., no vertical curb and gutter). • The front yard setbacks of all swctures shall be increased an additional 20 feet beyond the mini- mum speed in the applicable zoning district • Architectural styles of bu#&W shag emphasize a rural theme (e.g., Ranch, Western, Southwest or Mission styles). • Fencing guidelines representative of a rural, equestrian theme shall be developed for each project Solid, opaque block walls shall be prohibited. • Equestrian paths adjacent to speed collector and arterial streets shall be required to link residential areas with trail systems and Lake C:ahu & County Park. Objective 2-1.3 The General Plan shall utilize alternative means to ensure appropriate diversity of residential uses and development consistent with the General Plan's Housing Element. Policy 2-1.3.1 Projects which include a mixture of residential housing types shall be encouraged to implement the General Plan's Housing Element. Policy 2-1.3.2 The City shall encourage, using appropriate incentives, the voluntary merger of existing, smaller residential lots —particularly those typical of the Cove area for utilization in contemporary residential development. Policy 2-1.3.3 The City should evaluate and establish appropriate standards concerning minimum floor areas for various types of residential uses in order to assure adequate BRIM, inc. Chapter 2 - L un-imw-a�sr , , PH #3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 14, 1996 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) REQUEST: APPROVAL OF FIRST ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SUBDIVISION OF 30.3 GROSS ACRES INTO 111 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF MILES AVENUE, EAST SIDE OF ADAMS STREET. APPLICANT & PROPERTY OWNER: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES ENGINEER: ESGATE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WAS PREPARED AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR TRACT 23519. THE CURRENT MAP IS THE SAME AS TRACT 23519 AND THEREFORE, NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DEEMED NECESSARY. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: R-1 BACKGROUND: Site Background Due: to the expiration on 1991, of approved Tentative Tract 23519, Tentative Tract 27899 was submitted as a replacement in 1994. The lot configuration for both tracts is identical. Tentative Tract 27899 was approved in February, 1994, under Resolution 94-15. Surrounding Zoningland Use The property is located south of Miles Avenue and east of Adams Street and abuts the proposed City part: to the south. To the north across Miles Avenue is a site approved for a church and existing single family residences. To the west and east is single family zoned property which is partially developed with residences. The property is presently vacant and void of any significant vegetation. PCss.2o 1 Original Map Approval The approved Tentative Tract map allows single family lots that are a minimunf 7,200 square feet on public streets. A typical lot measures 72.75 feet wide by 99 feet deep. The Tract is designed with direct access to Adams Street to the west. Diane Drive near the northern end of the Tract will have a direct linkage east to the adjacent Tract 26188 which is developed. Victoria Drive, Desert Stream Drive, and Ashley Place near the south end of the property will have a linkage east to the future Tract 25363. The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 3, 1996. All property owners within 500-feet of the 30+-acre site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required. No negative comments have been received. All correspondence received before the meeting will be given to the Commission. Public Agency Review Staff mailed a copy of the applicant's request to all public agencies on February 28, 1996. We received no negative comments. All other comments have been incorporated into the attached draft conditions of approval. Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment 88-098 was prepared for this Tract during its original review and approval in 1988. Since the new property owners propose no map changes, no additional environmental consideration is warranted for this time extension request pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Statutes. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES• Issue 1 - General ]Plan Consistency The City updated the General Plan in 1992. As part of the update, the General Plan designates this site as Low Density Residential (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) which is the same as the previous General Plan designation. This Tract Map is approved for 111 lots which, based on 27.5 net acres of land, provides a density of 4.036 dwelling units per acre. During the original approval of this Tract, this density was deemed acceptable. Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements Access to the Tract will occur at Adams Street to the west and through four interior streets to the east.. All interior streets will be public with a right-of-way of 50 feet on cul-de-sacs and 60 feet on all remaining streets. The Conditions of Approval require improvements for this project that includes streets and other infrastructure improvements necessary for development. The recommended Conditions will ensure that all on -site work is consistent with City standards. PCSS.201 Issue 3 - Health and Safety The proposed Conditions of Approval require installation of all necessary infrastructure improvements. These include water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. Electric services will be underground and meet all requirements of the local service agencies (gas, electric, water, etc.). All fees and hook up requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District will be met at the time that the sewer and water system are installed. Staff has revised and/or added conditions to this request to comply with existing provisions of the General Plan, Municipal Zoning Code, and Subdivision Ordinance because the map was approved in 1994. This subdivision map time extension request is consistent with all City codes as conditioned. No physical, constraints prevent the development of the site as planned. Findings for approval are included in the attached draft resolution. REICO M1MENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending to the City Council approval of the first one-year extension of time for Tentative Tract Map 27899, subject to the revised Conditions of Approval as attached. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Large Map Exhibit (Planning Commission only) Prepared by: -6. la12i1A -A STAN B. SAWA, Principal Planner Submitted by: CHRISTINE DI IORIO, Planning Manager PCSS.201 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A FIRST ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 TO ALLOW A III -LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND SALES SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 30t ACRES CASE NO.: TTM 27899 (FIRST TIME EXTENSION) APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, 'California, did on the 14th day of May, 1996, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Century - Crowell Communities for a one-year time extension of a previously approved 111 lot single family subdivision on 30± acres, generally on the south side of Miles Avenue, east of Adams Street, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF SECTION 20, T5S, R7E, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director has determined that the original environmental assessment conducted (EA 88-098) in 1988, is still valid and binding on this development request. Therefore, no additional environmental review is warranted; 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 Mandatory Findings of Approval to justify the recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 26148 (First Time Extension): A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, Zoning Code and any applicable specific plans. The project is located in a Low Density Residential (LDR) District of the 1992 General Plan Update that allows 2-4 dwelling units -per acre. Tentative Tract 27899 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions contained herein are required to ensure among other things consistency with the General Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences, pursuant to Environmental Assessment 88-098, are completed. resopc.202 Planning Commission Resolution 96-_ The site is zoned R-1 (Single Family Residential) which permits single family developments. Each home site will be 7,200 sq. ft. or larger. All plans for single family houses shall be consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are acquired. The development of the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. All streets and improvements in the project conform to City standards of the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. All internal streets for the tract will be public. The streets are all 60-foot, or 50-foot, rights -of -way. Project access to the project can take place on Adams Street or to the east. C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed land division as approved by the Commission and Council in 1994. The original development plan will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because the previously adopted Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has required mitigation measures (EA 88-098). Before on -site grading, they shall employ a qualified archeologist to conduct on -site research and review to find out if prehistoric or historic remains are present. The project consultant shall submit these findings in report form to staff. The consultant's report shall indicate his or her findings and convey any important information that we should know about the site or its development. Monitoring shall be required during grading work. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed land division, and the design of Tentative Tract 27899 (First Time Extension) will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures have been required. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. Noise impacts from existing and future road noise on Miles Avenue and Adams Street shall be analyzed and mitigation measures shall be employed to reduce exterior noise for those homes along this Major Arterial street to levels consistent with Table EH-1 of Chapter 8 of resopo.202 Planning Commission Resolution 96-_ the General Plan (Environmental Hazards Element). The applicant's future noise study shall conform with the City's 1992 General Plan standards which require noise to be less than 60 dB CNEL in outdoor areas (45 dB or less for interior areas). To meet these provisions, fencing, landscaping and other noise mitigation measures shall be employed to benefit the future residents. E. The design of the subdivision 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. The proposed public streets will serve all single family lots. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support necessary infrastructure improvements. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map one-year time extension the Plaruung Commission has considered, the effect of the contemplated action of the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing the needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby reconfirm the conclusions of Environmental Assessment 88-098 as approved in 1988; 3. That it does now recommend approval of the Tentative Tract Map 27899 (First Time Extension) for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 14th day of May, 1996, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOTES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: resopc.202 i -fl Planning Commission Resolution 96-_ JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY BERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resope.202 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) M,Vf 14, 1996 * Modified by Planning Commission January 11, 1994 ** Modified by Planning Commission May 14, 1996 *** Added by Planning Commission May 14, 1996 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Tract 27899 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2.** This Tentative Tract Map approval shall expire one-year after the City Council approval of the extension pursuant to the City of La Quinta Subdivision Ordinance. 3.** If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of houses or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a construction sequencing plan for that phase is approved by the City Engineer. 4.** Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by the approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: - Fire Marshal - Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) - Community Development Department - Riverside County Environmental Health Department - Desert Sands Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District Imperial Irrigation District California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) 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 CONAPRVL.401 �tta�� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 approval of the plans. For projects requiring NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of an approved Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan. 5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 6.** PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT, the Applicant shall retain a professionally qualified archaeologist to monitor rough grading and trenching of the project site, as recommended by the archaeological survey report prepared for Tracts 26188, 25303 and 27899 by Archaeological Advisory Group, October 1994. The monitor is authorized to temporarily divert or stop equipment in order to investigate exposed cultural deposits. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE, the project archaeologist shall submit a final report (2 copies) to the Community Development Department. The final report shall follow the report format contained in Preservation Planning Bulletin, No. 4 (a), December 1989 (OHP). The final report shall be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission for completeness and acceptability. Acceptance of the final report by the Commission signifies completion of the archaeological mitigation program. 7.** A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, per the General Plan standards and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the tract design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques so as to avoid the isolated appearance given by walled developments. 8 ** Applicant to maintain the perimeter parkway lots along Miles Avenue and Adams Street until the City Engineer accepts them for maintenance by the City. In no event will the City accept the parkway lots for maintenance until the lots within the subject tract are included on the tax assessment roll and producing tax revenue to the City Lighting and Landscaping District. CONAPRVI-401 0!1it PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 9. Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit or any land disturbing activities, the applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe - Toed Lizard Habitat Conversion Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT 10.** The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or enter into a secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to filing a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all- requirements for telephone service to lots within the development 11. If tract improvements are phased with multiple final maps, off -site improvements (ie; streets) and tract -wide improvements (ie; perimeter walls, common -area and setback landscaping, and gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the engineer. The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the installation of off -site and tract -wide improvements with development of two or more phases within the tentative map. 12. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for required improvements which are deferred for future construction by others. CONAPRW-401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 Deferred improvements for this tract include: A. Traffic signal at Miles Avenue and Adams Street - the applicant is responsible for 20% of the cost to design and construct. The applicant's responsibility for deferred improvements may be satisfied through participation in a City major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject to such a program. DEDICATIONS 13.** The applicant shall dedicate public street right-of-way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. , Dedications required of this tract include: A. Miles Avenue - half of 110-foot right-of-way B. Adams Street - half of 80-foot right-of-way Street right-of-way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. If the City Engineer determines that public access rights to proposed street rights -of -way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating the rights -of -way, the applicant shall grant temporary public access easements to those areas within 60 days of written request by the City. 14.** The applicant shall dedicate common -area setback lots, of minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way: A. Miles Avenue - 20 feet B. Adams Street - 10 feet Minimum widths may be used as average widths for meandering wall designs. 15. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to the following streets from lots abutting the streets: CONAPRVL.401 PLX'4NING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 A. Miles Avenue B. Adams Street Access to these streets shall be restricted to street intersections and approved emergency access locations. 16. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common areas, and mailbox clusters. 17. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval 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. 18. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance shall be met concerning all supplemental accessory facilities. 19.11* Prior to :final map approval by the City Council, the applicant shall meet the Parkland Dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.48.060, La Quinta Municipal Code by paying parkland -fees in -lieu of parkland as determined in accordance with said section. GADIN 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 6.10, La Quinta Municipal Code. In accordance with said Chapter, the applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 21. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 22. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted. The report of the investigation ("the soils report") shall be submitted with the grading plan. 23.** A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to approval of a grading permit. CONAPRVLA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 Budding pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet, except for lots within this development which do not share common street frontage where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If the applicant is unable to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the City will consider and may approve alternatives that preserve community acceptance and buyer satisfaction with the proposed development. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations'of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, for each building pad in the tract, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by tract phase and lot number and shall be. cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 24. The tract shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the tract through a designated overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. The tract shall be graded to receivp storm flow from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow. 25. Storm water run-off produced in 24 hours during a 100-year storm shall be retained on site or in alternate facilities on adjacent property. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. If alternate off -site retention facilities are proposed, the applicant shall execute a written agreement with the owners of said adjacent property and shall provide evidence of the agreement to the City Engineer prior to the City's approval of drainage plans for this development. 26.** In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. A trickling sand filter and leachfield of a design approved by the City Engineer CONAPRVIA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION # 1) MAY 14, 1996 shall be installed to percolate nuisance water. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. If retention is on individual lots, the retention depth shall not exceed two feet. If retention is in one or more common retention basins, the retention depth shall not exceed six feet. No fence or wall shall be constructed around retention basins except as approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 27. The design of the tract shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the tract. 28. The applicant shall install dry wells at selected locations as approved by the City Engineer to remove nuisance water from street gutters. Dry wells shall be located in a manner to intercept nuisance water at tributary flowline distances not to exceed 1,320 feet. Surface drainage systems shall not require crossgutters on local collector streets. UTILITIE 29. All existing and proposed utilities adjacent to or within the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt from this requirement. 30. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports for utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 31.** The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map for this development, the development shall be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein. CONAPRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 32.*'* Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings, and as approved by the City Engineer. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure for a 20- year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Residential 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" The applicant shall submit mix designs for road base and pavement materials, including complete testing lab results, for review and approval by the City. Paving operations shall not be scheduled until mix design(s) are approved. 33.** Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. Prior to occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the development, the applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs along access routes to those buildings. 34. The City Engineer may require miscellaneous incidental improvements and enhancements to existing improvements as necessary to integrate the new work with existing improvements and provide a finished product conforming with City standards and practices. This may include, but is not limited to, street width transitions extending beyond tract boundaries. - 35. The following street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Miles Avenue (Primary Arterial) - applicant is responsible for half CONAPRVLAC1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDIT:ONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAC' 14, 1996 of 86-foot improvement with 18-foot raised landscape median plus a six-foot sidewalk. 2) Adams Street (Secondary Arterial) - applicant is responsible for half of 64-foot improvement plus a six-foot sidewalk. Adams Street shall be designed to the ultimate grade desired by the City for the area between Miles Avenue and Westward Ho Drive. The full required improvement shall be constructed along the frontage of this development. B. ON -SITE STREETS 1) Cul-de-sacs - 36-foot curb -to -curb improvement within a 50-foot right-of-way. The applicant shall dedicate five foot -wide public utility easements outside the right-of-way on both sides. 2) All remaining streets - 40-foot curb -to -curb improvement within a 60-foot right-of-way. The applicant shall dedicate five foot wide public utility easements outside the right-of-way on both sides of all interior streets. Initially, one publicly maintained road shall be provided connecting this development to Adams Street, Miles Avenue, or Dune Palms Road. Prior to issuance of the 31st Occupancy Permit for the development, a second such publicly maintained road shall be provided. 36. The termination point of the streets shown as Diane Drive, Victoria Drive, Desert Stream Drive, and Ashley Place on Exhibit "A' (Tentative Tract Map), shall be barricaded to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. If the road network for the adjoining tracts have been constructed and completed, then the above streets shall be constructed to connect with these subdivisions, in accordance with the approved street improvement plans and the requirements of the City Engineer. LANDSCAPING 37."* The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the setback lots along the following streets: A. Miles Avenue CONAPRVLA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 B. Adams Street Slopes in landscape areas shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights -of -way and 3:1 outside the right -of --way. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5-feet of street curb.. 38.** Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during the grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a. The use of irrigation during any construction activities; b. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and, C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and/or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and the Director of Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blowsand. 39.lt* Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for review and approval a plan (or plans) showing the following: a. Landscaping, including plant types, sizes, spacing locations, and irrigation system for all landscape buffer areas. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting materials shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required walls. C. Exterior lighting plan, emphasizing minimization of light and glare impacts to surrounding properties. 40.1'* Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Common basins and park areas shall be CONAPRVIA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor - mounted equipment. Landscape and irrigation plans shall meet the requirements of and be signed by the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. 41. The applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 42.** The applicant shall provide public transit amenities if required by Sunline Transit and/or the City Engineer. These amenities shall include, as a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter. The precise location and character of the turnout and shelter shall be as determined by Sunline Transit and the City Engineer. 43. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. . 44. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have his or her agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings and certify compliance of all work with approved plans, specifications and applicable codes. 45. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. MAINTENANCE 46. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of landscaping and related improvements. 47. The applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the subdivision such as common dots, landscaped setbacks and retention basins until those areas have been accepted for maintenance by the City's Landscape and Lighting District or a homeowner's association (HOA). The applicant shall maintain all other CONAPRVLA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 improvements until final acceptance of tract improvements by the City Council. FEES AND DEPOSITS 48. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for the plan checks and permits. FIRE 49. Schedule "A" fire protection approved Super fire hydrants, (6' x 4" x 2%" x 2Y2I shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 gpm for 2 hours duration at 20 psi. 50. 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. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the 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." 51. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 52. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits. TRACT DESIGN 53.''F* A minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be required along Miles Avenue; a minimum 10-foot setback along Adams Street. Design of the setbacks shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way lines. a. The minimum setbacks may be modified to an "average" if a meandering or curvilinear wall design is used. b. Setback areas shall be established as a separate common lot and be CONAPRVI-401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CO:VDIT'IONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 maintained as set forth in Condition #8, unless an alternate method is approved by the Community Development Department. 54. The tract layout shall comply with all the R-1 zoning requirements, including minimum lot size and minimum average depth of a lot. The minimum lot size to be recorded in a final map shall be 7,200 square feet. 55.* All dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-ways of Miles Avenue shall be limited to one story, not to exceed 20 feet in height- 56. The appropriate Planning approval shall be secured prior to establishing any of the following uses: a. Temporary construction facilities b. Sales facilities, including their appurtenant signage C. On -site advertising/construction signs 57.** The applicant shall submit complete detailed or architectural elevations for all units, for Planning Commission review and approval as a Business Item prior to building permit issuance. The architectural standards shall be included as part of the CC & R's (if any). The latter shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review. 58.** :Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of TT 27899 and Environmental Assessment 88-098, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 88-098 and TT 27899 which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessments 88-098 and TT 27899. The Community Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. PLBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES CONAPRIVL A01 6 r , j t PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 59. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District as stated in their letter dated December 21, 1993, attached to these conditions. Any necessary parcels for district facility expansion shall be shown on the final map and conveyed to the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. MISCELLANEOUS 60. Grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping & irrigation, park, gate, and perimeter wall plans are not approved for construction until they have been signed by the City Engineer. 61. Prior to issuance of the first Certificates of Occupancy for buildings within the tract, the applicant shall install traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads to those buildings. . 62. The applicant shall include the following statement in the tract's CC & R's: "There will be a City park on land adjacent to the south of the tract. Within this park there will be recreational and outdoor activities and facilities which could include, but are not limited to, ball fields, parking lots, and exterior lighting'. 63.***Upon their approval by the city Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 64.***Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24' x 36' media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction unfil they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping"plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, COMWRVIA01 s 1 ' 1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 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. 65.'`**As part of the filing of a final map for approval by the City Council, the applicant shall furnish accurate CAD files of the map and improvement plans. The files shall be submitted on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. CONZWRVL.401 j PH #3 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 14, 1996 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) REQUEST: APPROVAL OF FIRST ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR SUBDIVISION OF 30.3 GROSS ACRES INTO 111 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF MILES AVENUE, EAST SIDE OF ADAMS STREET. APPLICANT & PROPERTY OWNER: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES ENGINEER: ESGATE ENGINEERING ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WAS PREPARED AND CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR TRACT 23519. THE CURRENT MAP IS THE SAME AS TRACT 23519 AND THEREFORE, NO FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS DEEMED NECESSARY. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONING: R-1 BACKGROUND: Site Background Due to the expiration on 1991, of approved Tentative Tract 23519, Tentative Tract 27899 was submitted as a replacement in 1994. The lot configuration for both tracts is identical. Tentative Tract 27899 was approved in February, 1994, under Resolution 94-15. Surrounding ZoningLLand Use The property is located south of Miles Avenue and east of Adams Street and abuts the proposed City park to the south. To the north across Miles Avenue is a site approved for a church and existing single family residences. To the west and east is single family zoned property which is partially developed with residences. The property is presently vacant and void of any significant vegetation. Pcss.2o1 Original Map Approval The approved Tentative Tract map allows single family lots that are a minimum 7,200 square feet on public streets. A typical lot measures 72.75 feet wide by 99 feet deep. The Tract is designed with direct access to Adams Street to the west. Diane Drive near the northern end of the Tract will have a direct linkage east to the adjacent Tract 26188 which is developed. Victoria Drive, Desert Stream Drive, and Ashley Place near the south end of the property will have a linkage east to the future Tract 25363. Public Notice The case was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 3, 1996. All property owners within 500-i'eet of the 30+-acre site were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required. No negative comments have been received. All correspondence received before the meeting will be given to the Commission. Public Agency Review Staff mailed a copy of the applicant's request to all public agencies on February 28, 1996. We received no negative comments. All other comments have been incorporated into the attached draft conditions of approval. Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment 88-098 was prepared for this Tract during its original review and approval in 19,88. Since the new property owners propose no map changes, no additional environmental consideration is warranted for this time extension request pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Statutes. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES: Issue 1 - General Plan Consistency The City updated the General Plan in 1992. As part of the update, the General Plan designates this site as Low Density Residential (2 to 4 dwelling units per acre) which is the same as the previous General Plan designation. This Tract Map is approved for 111 lots which, based on 27.5 net acres of land, provides a density of 4.036 dwelling units per acre. During the original approval of this Tract, this density was deemed acceptable. Issue 2 - Tract Design/Improvements Access to the Tract will occur at Adams Street to the west and through four interior streets to the east. All interior streets will be public with a right-of-way of 50 feet on cul-de-sacs and 60 feet on all remaining streets. The Conditions of Approval require improvements for this project that includes streets and other infrastructure improvements necessary for development. The recommended Conditions will ensure that all on -site work is consistent with City standards. PCSS.201 Issue 3 - Health and Safety The proposed Conditions of Approval require installation of all necessary infrastructure improvements. These include water, sewer, streets, and other necessary improvements. Electric services will be underground and meet all requirements of the local service agencies (gas, electric, water, etc.). All fees and hook up requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District will be met at the; time that the sewer and water system are installed. CONCLUSION: Staff has revised and/or added conditions to this request to comply with existing provisions of the General Plan, Municipal Zoning Code, and Subdivision Ordinance because the map was approved in 1994. This subdivision map time extension request is consistent with all City codes as conditioned. No physical. constraints prevent the development of the site as planned. Findings for approval are included in the attached draft resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending to the City Council approval of the first one-year extension of time for Tentative Tract Map 27899, subject to the revised Conditions of Approval as attached. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Large Map Exhibit (Planning Commission only) Prepared by: STAN B. SAWA, Principal Planner Submitted by: CHRISTINE DI IORIO, Planning Manager PCSS.201 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A FIRST ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 TO ALLOW A III -LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND SALES SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 30f ACRES CASE NO.: TTM 27899 (FIRST TIME EXTENSION) APPLICANT: CENTURY-CROWELL COMMUNITIES WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, lCalifornia, did on the 14th day of May, 1996, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Century - Crowell Communities for a one-year time extension of a previously approved 111 lot single family subdivision on 30t acres, generally on the south side of Miles Avenue, east of Adams Street, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF SECTION 20, T5S, R7E, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-63), in that the Community Development Director has determined that the original environmental assessment conducted (EA 88-098) in 1988, is still valid and binding on this development request. Therefore, no additional environmental review is warranted; 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 Mandatory Findings of Approval to justify the recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map 26148 (First Time Extension): A. The proposed map is consistent with the City of La Quinta General Plan, Zoning Code and any applicable specific plans. The project is located in a Low Density Residential (LDR) District of the 1992 General Plan Update that allows 2-4 dwelling units per acre. Tentative Tract 27899 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions contained herein are required to ensure among other things consistency with the General Plan and mitigation of environmental consequences, pursuant to Environmental Assessment 88-098, are completed. resopc.202 Planning Commission Resolution 96-_ The site is zoned R-1 (Single Family Residential) which permits single family developments. Each home site will be 7,200 sq. ft. or larger. All plans for single family houses shall be consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are acquired. The development of the project, as conditioned, will be compatible with the surrounding area. B. The design or improvement of the proposed subdivision is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and any applicable specific plans. All streets and improvements in the project conform to City standards of the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. All internal streets for the tract will be public. The streets are all 60-foot, or 50-foot, rights -of -way. Project access to the project can take place on Adams Street or to the east. C. The design of the subdivision or the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed land division as approved by the Commission and Council in 1994. The original development plan will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because the previously adopted Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact has required mitigation measures (EA 88-098). Before on -site grading, they shall employ a qualified archeologist to conduct on -site research and review to find out if prehistoric or historic remains are present. The project consultant shall submit these findings in report form to staff. The consultant's report shall indicate his or her findings and convey any important information that we should know about the site or its development. Monitoring shall be required during grading work. D. The design of the subdivision or type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed land division, and the design of Tentative Tract 27899 (First Time Extension) will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife, or their habitat because mitigation measures have been required. The design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will not cause serious public health problems because they will install urban improvements based on City, State, and Federal requirements. Noise impacts from existing and future road noise on Miles Avenue and Adams Street shall be analyzed and mitigation measures shall be employed to reduce exterior noise for those homes along this Major Arterial street to levels consistent with Table EH-1 of Chapter 8 of resopc.202 Planning Commission Resolution 96-_ the General Plan (Environmental Hazards Element). The applicant's future noise study shall conform with the City's 1992 General Plan standards which require noise to be less than 60 dB CNEL in outdoor areas (45 dB or less for interior areas). To meet these provisions, fencing, landscaping and other noise mitigation measures shall be employed to benefit the future residents. E. The design of the subdivision 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. The proposed public streets will serve all single family lots. All required public easements will provide access to the site or support necessary infrastructure improvements. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map one-year time extension the Planning Commission has considered, the effect of the contemplated action of the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing the needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La. Quinta, California, as follows: That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby reconfirm the conclusions of Environmental Assessment 88-098 as approved in 1988; That it does now recommend approval of the Tentative Tract Map 27899 (First Time Extension) 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 Planting Commission, held on the 14th day of May, 1996, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOTES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: resopc.202 Planning Commission Resolution 96-_ JACQUES ABELS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERR.Y HEERMAN, Community Development Director City of La Quinta, California resopc 202 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 * Modified by Planning Commission January 11, 1994 ** Modified by Planning Commission May 14, 1996 *** Added by Planning Commission May 14, 1996 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Tract 27899 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2.** This Tentative Tract Map approval shall expire one-year after the City Council approval of the extension pursuant to the City of La Quinta Subdivision Ordinance. 3.** If the applicant desires to phase improvements and obligations required by the conditions of approval and secure those phases separately, a phasing plan shall be submitted to the Public Works Department for review and approval by the City Engineer. The applicant shall complete required improvements and satisfy obligations as set forth in the approved phasing plan. Improvements and obligations required of each phase shall be completed and satisfied prior to completion of houses or occupancy of permanent buildings within the phase unless a construction sequencing plan for that phase is approved by the City Engineer. 4.** Prior to the issuance of a grading or building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by the approval, the applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: - Fire Marshal - Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Improvement Permit) - Community Development Department - Riverside County Environmental Health Department - Desert Sands Unified School District - Coachella Valley Water District - Imperial Irrigation District - California Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES Permit) 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 CONAPRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION # 1) MAY 14, 1996 approval of the plans. For projects requiring NPDES construction permits, the applicant shall include a copy of the application for the Notice of Intent with grading plans submitted for plan checking. Prior to issuance of a grading or site construction permit, the applicant shall submit a copy of an approved Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan. 5. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 6.** PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A GRADING PERMIT, the Applicant shall retain a professionally qualified archaeologist to monitor rough grading and trenching of the project site, as recommended by the archaeological survey report prepared for Tracts 26188, 25303 and 27899 by Archaeological Advisory Group, October 1994. The monitor is authorized to temporarily divert or stop equipment in order to investigate exposed cultural deposits. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY CERTIFICATE, the project archaeologist shall submit a final report (2 copies) to the Community Development Department. The final report shall follow the report format contained in Preservation Planning Bulletin, No. 4 (a), December 1989 (OHP). The final report shall be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Commission for completeness and acceptability. Acceptance of the final report by the Commission signifies completion of the archaeological mitigation program. 7.** A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, per the General Plan standards and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the tract design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (terming and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques so as to avoid the isolated appearance given by walled developments. 8.** Applicant to maintain the perimeter parkway lots along Miles Avenue and Adams Street until the City Engineer accepts them for maintenance by the City. In no event will the City accept the parkway lots for maintenance until the lots within the subject tract are included on the tax assessment roll and producing tax revenue to the City Lighting and Landscaping District. CONAPRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 9. Prior to issuance of any Grading Permit or any land disturbing activities, the applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe - Toed Lizard Habitat Conversion Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT The applicant shall construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations, or enter into a secured agreement to construct improvements and/or satisfy obligations required by the City prior to filing a final map or parcel map or issuance of a certificate of compliance for a waived parcel map. For secured agreements, security provided, and the release thereof, shall conform with Chapter 13, LQMC. Improvements to be made or agreed to shall include removal of any existing structures or obstructions which are not part of the proposed improvements. If improvements are secured, the applicant shall provide approved estimates of improvement costs. Estimates shall comply with the schedule of unit costs adopted by City resolution or ordinance. For items not listed in the City's schedule, estimates shall meet the approval of the City Engineer. Estimates for utilities and other improvements under the jurisdiction of outside agencies shall be approved by those agencies. Security is not required for telephone, gas, or T.V. cable improvements. However, tract improvements shall not be agendized for final acceptance until the City receives confirmation from the telephone authority that the applicant has met all- requirements for telephone service to lots within the development 11. If. tract improvements are phased with multiple final maps, off -site improvements (ie; streets) and tract -wide improvements (ie; perimeter walls, common -area and setback landscaping, and gates) shall be constructed or secured prior to approval of the first final map unless otherwise approved by the engineer. The City Engineer may consider proposals by the applicant to stage the installation of off -site and tract -wide improvements with development of two or more phases within the tentative map. 12. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for required improvements which are deferred for future construction by others. CONAPRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 Deferred improvements for this tract include: A., Traffic signal at Miles Avenue and Adams Street - the applicant is responsible for 20% of the cost to design and construct. The applicant's responsibility for deferred improvements may be satisfied through participation in a City major thoroughfare improvement program if this development becomes subject to such a program. DEDICATIONS 13.*'11 The applicant shall dedicate public street right-of-way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans, and as required by the City Engineer. Dedications required of this tract include: A. Miles Avenue - half of 110-foot right-of-way B. Adams Street - half of 80-foot right-of-way Street right-of-way geometry for cul-de-sacs, knuckle turns and corner cut -backs shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawings #800, #801, and #805 respectively unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. If. the City Engineer determines that public access rights to proposed street rights -of -way shown on the tentative map are necessary prior to approval of final maps dedicating the rights -of -way, the applicant shall grant temporary public access easements to those areas within 60 days of written request by the City. 14.** The applicant shall dedicate common -area setback lots, of minimum width as noted, adjacent to the following street rights of way: A. Miles Avenue - 20 feet B. Adams Street - 10 feet Minimum widths may be used as average widths for meandering wall designs. 15. The applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to the following streets from lots abutting the streets: CONAPRVLAC1 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION # 1) MAY 14, 1996 A. Miles Avenue B. Adams Street Access to these streets shall be restricted to street intersections and approved emergency access locations. 16. The applicant shall dedicate any easements necessary for placement of and access to utility lines and structures, park lands, drainage basins, common areas, and mailbox clusters. 17. The applicant shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval 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. 18. The requirements of the City's Off -Street Parking Ordinance shall be met concerning all supplemental accessory facilities. 19.** Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the applicant shall meet the Parkland Dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.48.060, La Quinta Municipal Code by paying parkland fees in -lieu of parkland as determined in accordance with said section. GR_ADIN 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 6.10, La Quinta Municipal Code. In accordance with said Chapter, the applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the provisions of the permit. 21. The applicant shall comply with the City's Flood Protection Ordinance. 22. A thorough preliminary engineering, geological and soils engineering investigation shall be conducted. The report of the investigation ("the soils report") shall be submitted with the grading plan. 23.** A grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. The plan must meet the approval of the City Engineer prior to approval of a grading permit. CONAPRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 Building pad elevations on contiguous lots shall not differ by more than three feet, except for lots within this development which do not share common street frontage where the differential shall not exceed five feet. If the applicant is unable to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the City will consider and may approve alternatives that preserve community acceptance and buyer satisfaction with the proposed development. The grading plan shall conform with the recommendations'of the soils report and shall be certified as adequate by a soils engineer or an engineering geologist. A statement shall appear on the final map(s), if any are required of this development, that a soils report has been prepared pursuant to Section 17953 of the Health and Safety Code. Prior to issuance of any building permit the applicant shall provide a separate document bearing the seal and signature of a California registered civil engineer, geotechnical engineer, or surveyor that lists actual building pad elevations. The document shall, for each building pad in the tract, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as -built elevation, and shall clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by tract phase and lot number and shall be. cumulative if the data is submitted at different times. DRMNAGE 24. The tract shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the tract through a designated overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. The tract shall be graded to receive storm flow from adjoining property at locations that have historically received flow. 25. Storm water run-off produced in 24 hours during a 100-year storm shall be retained on site or in alternate facilities on adjacent property. The tributary drainage area for which the applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of adjacent public streets. If alternate off -site retention facilities are proposed, the applicant shall execute a written agreement with the owners of said adjacent property and shall provide evidence of the agreement to the City Engineer prior to the City's approval of drainage plans for this development. 26.** In design of retention facilities, the percolation rate shall be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. A trickling sand filter and leachfield of a design approved by the City Engineer CONAPRVLA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 shall be installed to percolate nuisance water. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per day per 1,000 square feet of drainage area. Retention basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. If retention is on individual lots, the retention depth shall not exceed two feet. If retention is in one or more common retention basins, the retention depth shall not exceed six feet. No fence or wall shall be constructed around retention basins except as approved by the Community Development Director and the City Engineer. 27. The design of the tract shall not cause any change in flood boundaries, levels or frequencies in any area outside the tract. 28. The applicant shall install dry wells at selected locations as approved by the City Engineer to remove nuisance water from street gutters. Dry wells shall be located in a manner to intercept nuisance water at tributary flowhne distances not to exceed 1,320 feet. Surface drainage systems shall not require crossgutters on local collector streets. UTILITIE 29. All existing and proposed utilities adjacent to or within the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt from this requirement. 30. In areas where hardscape surface improvements are planned, underground utilities shall be installed prior to construction of the surface improvements. The applicant shall provide certified reports for utility trench compaction tests for approval of the City Engineer. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 31.** The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement program. If the program is in effect 60 days prior to recordation of any final map for this development, the development shall be subject to the provisions of the ordinance. If this development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street and traffic improvements required herein. CONAPRVLA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 32.** Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets and access gates shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the La Ruinta Municipal Code, adopted Standard Drawings, and as approved by the City Engineer. Street pavement sections shall be based on a Caltrans design procedure for a 20- year life and shall consider soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including site and building construction traffic). The minimum pavement sections shall be as follows: Residential 3.0" a.c./4.50" a.b. Collector 4.0"/5.00" Secondary Arterial 4.0"/6.00" Primary Arterial 4.5"/6.00" Major Arterial 5.5"/6.50" The applicant shall submit mix designs for road base and pavement materials, including complete testing lab results, for review and approval by the City. Paving operations shall not be scheduled until mix design(s) are approved. 33.** Improvements shall include all appurtenances such as traffic signs, channelization markings, raised medians if required, street name signs, sidewalks, and mailbox clusters approved in design and location by the U.S. Post Office and the City Engineer. Mid -block street lighting is not required. Prior to occupancy of homes or other permanent buildings within the development, the applicant shall install all street and sidewalk improvements, traffic control devices and street name signs along access routes to those buildings. 34. The City Engineer may require miscellaneous incidental improvements and enhancements to existing improvements as necessary to integrate the new work with existing improvements and provide a finished product conforming with City standards and practices. This may include, but is not limited to, street width transitions extending beyond tract boundaries. - 35. The following street improvements shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted in parentheses: A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Miles Avenue (Primary Arterial) - applicant is responsible for half CONAPRVLA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CON]DITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION # 1) MAY 14, 1996 of 86-foot improvement with 18-foot raised landscape median plus a six-foot sidewalk. 2) Adams Street (Secondary Arterial) - applicant is responsible for half of 64-foot improvement plus a six-foot sidewalk. Adams Street shall be designed to the ultimate grade desired by the City for the area between Miles Avenue and Westward Ho Drive. The full required improvement shall be constructed along the frontage of this development. B. ON -SITE STREETS 1) Cul-de-sacs - 36-foot curb -to -curb improvement within a 50-foot right-of-way. The applicant shall dedicate five foot -wide public utility easements outside the right-of-way on both sides. 2) All remaining streets - 40-foot curb -to -curb improvement within a 60-foot right-of-way. The applicant shall dedicate five foot wide public utility easements outside the right-of-way on both sides of all interior streets. Initially, one publicly maintained road shall be provided connecting this development to Adams Street, Miles Avenue, or Dune Palms Road. Prior to issuance of the 31st Occupancy Permit for the development, a second such publicly maintained road shall be provided. 36. The termination point of the streets shown as Diane Drive, Victoria Drive, Desert Stream Drive, and Ashley Place on Exhibit "A' (Tentative Tract Map), shall be barricaded to the satisfaction of the Public Works Department. If the road network for the adjoining tracts have been constructed and completed, then the above streets shall be constructed to connect with these subdivisions, in accordance with the approved street improvement plans and the requirements of the City Engineer. LANDSCAPING 37.** The applicant shall provide landscape improvements in the setback lots along the following streets: A. Miles Avenue CONAPRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 B. Adams Street Slopes in landscape areas shall not exceed 5:1 within public rights -of -way and 3:1 outside the right-of-way. Use of lawn shall be minimized with no lawn or spray irrigation within 5-feet of street curb. 38.** Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during the grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a. The use of irrigation during any construction activities; b. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and, C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and/or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and the Director of Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent emission of dust and blowsand. 39.** Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall submit to the Community Development Department for review and approval a plan (or plans) showing the following: a. Landscaping, including plant types, sizes, spacing locations, and irrigation system for all landscape buffer areas. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting materials shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required walls. C. Exterior lighting plan, emphasizing minimization of light and glare impacts to surrounding properties. 40.1'* Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots, common retention basins and park facilities shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the City Engineer. Common basins and park areas shall be CONAYRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 designed with a turf grass surface which can be mowed with standard tractor - mounted equipment. Landscape and irrigation plans shall meet the requirements of and be signed by the Community Development Director, the City Engineer, the Coachella Valley Water District, and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner. 41. The applicant shall insure that landscaping plans and utility plans are coordinated to provide visual screening of above -ground utility structures. 42.** The applicant shall provide public transit amenities if required by Sunline Transit and/or the City Engineer. These amenities shall include, as a minimum, a bus turnout location and passenger waiting shelter. The precise location and character of the turnout and shelter shall be as determined by Sunline Transit and the City Engineer. QUALITY ASSURANCE 43. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 44. The applicant shall employ or retain California registered civil engineers, geotechnical engineers, or surveyors, as appropriate, who will provide, or have his or her agents provide, sufficient supervision and verification of the construction to be able to furnish and sign accurate record drawings and certify compliance of all work with approved plans, specifications and applicable codes. 45. Upon completion of construction, the applicant shall furnish the City reproducible record drawings of all plans signed by the City Engineer. Each sheet of the drawings shall have the words "Record Drawings," "As -Built" or "As -Constructed" clearly marked on each sheet and be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy of the drawings. MAINTENANCE 46. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous maintenance of landscaping and related improvements. 47. The applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the subdivision such as common lots, landscaped setbacks and retention basins until those areas have been accepted for maintenance by the City's Landscape and Lighting District or a homeowner's association (HOA). The applicant shall maintain all other CONA.PRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONIDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION # 1) MAY 14, 1996 improvements until final acceptance of tract improvements by the City Council. FEES AND DEPOSITS 48. The applicant shall pay all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for the plan checks and permits. FII E 49. Schedule "A" fire protection approved Super fire hydrants, (6' x 4" x 2%2" x 2Y2") shall be located at each street intersection spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction with no portion of any frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1000 gpm for 2 hours duration at 20 psi. 50. 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. Plans shall conform to the fire hydrant types, location and spacing, and the system shall meet the 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 Rivel-side County Fire Department." 51. The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and accepted by the appropriate water agency prior to any combustible building material being placed on an individual lot. 52. A temporary water supply for fire protection may be allowed for the construction of the model units only. Plans for a temporary water system must be submitted to the Fire Department for review prior to issuance of building permits. T]LACT DESIGN 53.** A minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be required along Miles Avenue; a minimum 10-foot setback along Adams Street. Design of the setbacks shall be approved by the Community Development Department. Setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way lines. a. The minimum setbacks may be modified to an "average" if a meandering or curvilinear wall design is used. b. Setback areas shall be established as a separate common lot and be CONAPRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION # 1) MAY 14, 1'.996 maintained as set forth in Condition #8, unless an alternate method is approved by the Community Development Department. 54. The tract layout shall comply with all the R-1 zoning requirements, including minimum lot size and minimum average depth of a lot. The minimum lot size to be recorded in a final map shall be 7,200 square feet. 55.* All dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-ways of Miles Avenue shall be limited to one story, not to exceed 20 feet in height_ 56. The appropriate Planning approval shall be secured prior to establishing any of the following uses: a,. Temporary construction facilities b,. Sales facilities, including their appurtenant signage C. On -site advertising/construction signs 57.** The applicant shall submit complete detailed or architectural elevations for all units, for Planning Commission review and approval as a Business Item prior to building permit issuance. The architectural standards shall be included as part of the CC & R°s (if any). The latter shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review. 58.** Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of TT 27899 and Environmental Assessment 88-098, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with those Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 88-098 and TT 27899 which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Community Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining Conditions of Approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessments 88-098 and TT 27899. The Community Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES CONAPRVL.401 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96•_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 59. The applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District as stated in their letter dated December 21, 1993, attached to these conditions. Any necessary parcels for district facility expansion shall be shown on the final map and conveyed to the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. MISCELLANEOUS 60. Grading, drainage, street, lighting, landscaping & irrigation, park, gate, and perimeter wall plans are not approved for construction until they have been signed by the City Engineer. 61. Prior to issuance of the first Certificates of Occupancy for buildings within the tract, the applicant shall install traffic control devices and street name signs along access roads to those buildings. 62. The applicant shall include the following statement in the tract's CC & R's: "There will be a City park on land adjacent to the south of the tract. Within this park there will be recreational and outdoor activities and facilities which could include, but are not limited to, ball fields, parking lots, and exterior lighting". 63.***Upon their approval by the city Council, the City Clerk is authorized to file these Conditions of Approval with the Riverside County Recorder for recordation against the properties to which they apply. 64.***Improvement plans submitted to the City for plan checking shall be submitted on 24' x 36' media in the categories of "Rough Grading," "Precise Grading," "Streets & Drainage," and "Landscaping." All plans except precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the City Engineer. Precise grading plans shall have signature blocks for the Community Development Director and the Building Official. Plans are not approved for construction unfil they are signed. "Streets and Drainage" plans shall normally include signals, sidewalks, bike paths, gates and entryways, and parking lots. If water and sewer plans are included on the street and drainage plans, the plans shall have an additional signature block for the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD). The combined plans shall be signed by CVWD prior to their submittal for the City Engineer's signature. "Landscaping"plans shall normally include landscape improvements, irrigation, CONAPRVLA01 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 27899 (EXTENSION #1) MAY 14, 1996 lighting, and perimeter walls. Plans for improvements not listed above shall be in formats approved by the City Engineer. 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. 65.***A,s part of the filing of a final map for approval by the City Council, the applicant shall furnish accurate CAD files of the map and improvement plans. The files shall be submitted on storage media and in a program format acceptable to the City Engineer. CONA "RVL.101 BI #1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 14, 1996 CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 96-341 REQUEST: TO APPROVE A MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED BOGAN VILLAS COMMERCIAL CENTER PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 9.160 (SIGN ORDINANCE) OF THE MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE LOCATION: 78-120 CALLE ESTADO APPLICANT: MR. GERALD H. BOGAN REP: MRS. LUCIA MORAN SIGN CONTRACTOR: SIGNS BY MEL (MEL WACHS) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL ZONING: COMMERCIAL VILLAGE "THE CORE" BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Prq.ject History On June 14, 1994, the Comnssion approved a two-story commercial building (approximately 6,800 sq. ft.) at the northwest corner of Calle Estado and Desert Club Drive under Plot Plan 94-522 (Revised) by adoption of Minute Motion 94-016. The City Council accepted the Commission's approval of the case as conditioned. The construction permit for the project was issued last year, and the building was recently finished. The reduced site plan is attached (Attachment 1). The lower story is for retail or office uses, and the upper story is for office uses. The Commission approved a 39 square foot identification sign for this building during approval of the plot plan application in 1994. The sign was to be painted on the south side of the building facing Calle Estado with it reading `Kogan Villas" in stylized print (Attachment 2) but was never installed. Village at La Quinta Specific Plan The City Council approved the Village Plan (SP 87-009) under Ordinance 88-7 on February 2, 1988. This property is in the Area #2 of the Plan which encourages "retail uses on the ground floor and office uses above. Apartments, artists studios and workshops should also be considered as second floor uses." Chapter 6.5 (Signs) of the Village Plan describes the characteristics of the type of signs that are encouraged in the Village. The context of this Chapter is to encourage signs that are not internally illuminated and the information on the business sign is limited to the name only. A copy is attached (Attachment 3). On April 11, 1996, staff received a request by Mr. Bogan to establish a sign program for his commercial building at 78-120 Calle Estado. The applicant/owner has requested that the Commission permit non -illuminated, flush mounted building signs for each lease space of the building (Attachments 4 and 5, Building Elevations). The sign placards consist of a compressed wood product (Medex) with painted sign copy. The background color for each placard is tan with blue lettering and black trim. A color sample will be provided at the meeting. The signs vary in overall size from 10 to 20 square feet depending on the tenant space (Attachment 6, 7 and 8, Sign Placards). Proposed signs will be placed on the first and second floor levels of the north (facing the parking lot) and south (facing Calle Estado) building elevations. Mrs. Lucia Moran, representative for the applicant, has said that the elevation drawings presented with signs would reflect the leasing program at this time. The 8' long signs are for each tenant space, and additional 4' signs are used if the tenant has more than one lease space. Specific signs for their first two tenants are included. Multiple signs are proposed for the La Quinta Antique store because the business owner leased more than one lease space on the first floor of the building. The Commission and Council recently reviewed revisions to City rules and regulations for signs, and on April 2, 1996 the City Council passed Ordinance 281 establishing new sign regulations for the City. (The Sign Ordinance became effective on May 3, 1996.) The pertinent provisions for this application are: Building Mounted Signs (Table 9-3) - One flush mounted sign plus one under canopy sign per tenant frontage along a street or along common -use parking lot with no direct street frontage. The maximum sign area of a flush mounted sign is one sq. ft. per lineal foot of lease frontage up to 50 sq. ft. (i.e., aggregate size). An under canopy sign of 3 sq. ft. is also allowed. Identification signs are not permitted for tenants above the ground floor in buildings with only interior access above the ground floor. Staff Comments Based on Chapter 6.5.1 of SP 87-009 (Village Specific Plan) and the Sign Ordinance for the City, staff provides the following evaluation for this project: sTPT.ss-a 4 Every sign shall have good scale and proportion in its design and in its visual relationship to buildings and surroundings. Res onse: Calle Estado Elevation (south building elevation) - The signs have been placed on the facade to reflect the lease spaces proposed for this multi -tenant building. The signs are vertically centered between the different building elements (e.g., between the windows and beams building elements, etc.). Neither signs for the second floor offices nor this design layout are consistent with other previously approved sign programs. Village Core upper level offices do not have independent building mounted signs. Directory style signs are normally used to direct tenants to upstairs businesses (i.e., La Quinta Executive Office Building on Calle Estado). Additionally, the wall mounted signs are too large for placement on the building. Signs placed immediately above the Calle Estado pedestrian arcade and the second floor windows disrupts the architectural elements of the building facade. The placement of the signs, centered above the second floor windows (or offset) creates visual confusion on this primary building elevation because the building elements are symmetrical. The Commission required symmetrical building elements during the approval of the project. In the past, the Commission has supported maintaining equal distances between the sign and adjacent building elements. Additionally, the previous ID sign planned for the building solved this problem since no tenant signs would be allowed on the building facade. One problem that this sign proposal may create is a disjointed program for placing signs on a building elevation based on allowing various sign sizes that do not have a proper relationship to the other building elements. Recommendation - Staff is recommending mounting the first floor level retail business signs on the structural support beam for the upper level of the building between the vertical columns of the pedestrian arcade to reduce sign clutter on the building facade. Under canopy signs would have been recommended but the vertical clearance between the sidewalk and the bottom of the beam is too small for hanging 30" wide signs (i.e., Meet high). Secondly, staff is recommending that the second floor signs be deleted because pedestrian access was not provided from Calle Estado to the parking lot thus upstairs advertising is not critical for the future office use tenants based on the design of the building. The original building identification sign, approved previously by the Commission, would be allowed as a supplement to the sign needs of the tenants especially the upstairs tenants. North Building, Elevation (facing the parking lot) - The City's recently adopted Sign Ordinance does allow signs for the upstairs tenants if access to the upstairs area is gained from exterior stairwells. This project has two outdoor stairways on the north side of the building abutting the parking lot that would permit upstairs tenants to have signs. There is a need to provide signs on this side of the building to help patrons find the upper level tenants than exists on the other side of the building. However, the proposed signs detract from the stair -stepped nature of the roof parapet, a significant feature of this building. Again, so as not to detract from the Southwest architectural features, it would be better to integrate beam mounted or under canopy signs if adequate vertical clearances can be provided. These changes would conform with the sign policies contained in the Village Flan and the newly adopted Sign Ordinance. STPT.85-a Recommendation - Staff recommends the upper floor office uses be allowed to hang signs under the second level facade to identify the location of their business provided the width of each sign is uniform. This program would be similar to the existing sign program at the Plaza La Quinta Shopping Center on Highway 111, west of Washington Street. Lower level tenants could have a beam mounted signs that would be consistent with the signs recommended for the front of the building, facing Calle Estado. The draft Conditions of Approval define the allowable limits of signs for this building (Condition #3, Attachment 9). 2. Every sign shall be designed as an integral architectural element of the building and site to which it principally relates. The number of graphic elements on a sign shall be held to a minimum needed to convey the sign's major message and shall be composed in proportion to the area of the sign face. Response: The preliminary sign copy provided by the applicant is consistent with the Village Specific Plan because logos and business names are used without other miscellaneous copy (i.e., excluding the three signs proposed by the Antique store). The sign placement recommended by staff in the above section would create a unified sign program for the building whereas the proposed sign locations are not architecturally compatible with the building facades. Recommendation - Staff is recommending all signs should be no greater than 1-foot in width nor exceed 8-feet in overall length. Staff recommends that all signs be either mounted on the lower level support beam between the vertical columns and hung from the under side of the support beam for the upper level tenants on the north side of the building. 3. The colors, materials and lighting of every sign shall be restrained and harmonious with the building and site to which it principally relates. Signs on glazed tiles with indirect lighting are to be encouraged. Back lit (box or can) signs are to be discouraged, directly illuminated signs shall be limited to individual letters. Exposed bulb or garish neon lighting is prohibited. Response: The signs are non -illuminated which is consistent with the Village Plan. The selected colors for the signs (tan, black and blue) will accent exterior white building and blue building doors. Recommendation - Staff supports the sign program colors and sign placard design as submitted. 4. Each sign shall be compatible with signs on adjoining premises and shall not compete for attention. Identification signs of a prototype design and corporation logos shall conform to the criteria for all other signs. Resn_ronse: Many existing buildings on Calle Estado either were built in the last few years or are more than 20 years old. The adjacent building, which houses Anchovies' Pizzeria, was built approximately four years ago. This single story building has an approved canvas canopy on the front of the building with painted sign copy on the front of the canopy with back lighting on the underside of the canopy. The multi -story building to the west of Anchovies' that houses the La Quinta Library has wood sandblasted signs with painted copy on the sign SM.ss-a f placard for lower level businesses. The other buildings in the area have painted signs on the building or wood signs with painted sign copy. Recommendation - Star supports signs made of wood or other durable materials that are flush mounted to the building surface (i.e., a support beam) or hung on the underside of the second level on the north building elevation. These signs are designed to be consistent with other existing business signs for the shops along Calle Estado, as modified. CONCLUSION: By limiting the number of signs on the building, the building's architectural features will not be diminished thus enhancing its character and overall relationship with the other downtown businesses. The sign modifications recommended by staff will enforce the policies and goals of the Village Specific Plan which encourages a pedestrian environment. RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion 96- , approve the Bogan Villas Master Sign Program under Sign Application 96-341, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments 1. Site Plan 2. Original Sign Exhibit - Bogan Villas 3. Chapter 6.5 of SP 87-009 (Village Plan) 4. Calle Estado Building Elevation (Front) 5. Parking Lot Building Elevation (Rear) 6-8. Sign Exhibits 9. Findings and Draft Conditions of Approval Associate Planner Submitted by: Christine di Iorio, Planning Manager SM.85-a MAY 14,1996 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ATTACHMENTS FOR SIGN APPLICATION 96-341 BOGAN VILLAS ATTFORM4-A 1 3pp11 h , ,�P� $b4 z I b=sb y63& R O O o' I• 100 00 I: . � ill 1 1 1.1 I I ATTACHMENT I � 1� 1, � 1 d I ��HIII I j i i � I 0 01 •i. 1.1❑ � ae. Desert Club Drive lk FW o o. 0 cj U �I U 'ATTACHMENT 2 n IN I� t ATTACHMENT 3 6.5 Signs - Village Plan 6.5.1 Building Signs - Every sign shall have good scale and proportion in its design and in its visual relationship to buildings and surroundings. - Every sign shall be designed as an integral architectural element of the building and site to which it principally relates. - The colors, materials, and lighting of every sign shall be restrained and harmonious with the building and site to which it principally relates. - Signs on glazed tile with indirect lighting are to be encouraged. - Back lit (box or can) signs are to be discouraged, directly illuminated signs shall be limited to individual letters. Exposed bulb or garish neon lighting is prohibited. - The number of graphic elements on a sign shall be held to the minimum needed to convey the sign's major message and shall be composed in proportion to the area of the sign face. - Accessory signs shall be given the same careful consideration of approval as that given for main signs. - Each sign shall be compatible with signs on adjoining premises and shall not compete for attention. - Identification signs of a prototype design and corporation logos shall conform to the criteria for all other signs. BOOK STORE BOUTIQUE RESTAURANT I AMU WORa ATTACHMENT 4 'ACHMENT 5 :Ul 4 o� o Y L O z� •U ti. ATTACHMENT 6 ATTACHMENT 7 I mn Ed I� E, 1 2 ATTACHMENT 8 � 4 30� II �ohctobho g "4a/4e: I "= t' ATTACHMENT 9 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SIGN APPLICATION 96-341 MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR BOGAN VILLAS MAY 14, 1996 ry Q I 1 1► The Master Sign Program is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15311(a), Class 11 which allows placement of minor accessory structures to existing commercial facilities (i.e., on -premise signs, etc.). 2. The Master Sign Program (SA 96-341) for the Bogan Villas commercial center as conditioned is consistent with the provisions of the Village at La Quinta Specific Plan (SP 87- 009) and Sign Ordinance (Chapter 9.160) in that the proposed signs limit how much copy information is provided on each sign placard to the name and/or logo of the business. The graphics and colors are consistent with other existing signs along Calle Estado provided the following Conditions of Approval are imposed. CONDITIONS: That the approval of this request shall be subject to the plans on file in the Community Development Department, as amended. 2. That before issuance of a Building Permit for installation of the signs, the property owner/leasing agent for the center, shall review and approve the sign exhibit for each tenant space to insure compliance with the approved sign program. Permits for signs shall be consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code in effect at that time. The Community Development Department shall approve all final sign exhibits. 3. Prior to issuance of a sign permit, the following modifications shall be made to the Master Sign Program for the center: A. Exterior exposed signs for second floor office tenants shall be limited to the north building elevation. All second floor level signs shall be bracketed to the under side of the structural support member of the covered walkway. If upper level signs are not installed, a directory sign can be installed for these tenants if the property owner deems it necessary (See Table 9-3 of the Sign Ordinance). B. All signs for first floor retail business tenants shall be mounted on the horizonal wood beam which supports the cantilevered portion of the two-story building. All tenant signs will be centered between the vertical support columns along the pedestrian arcade. Cond.341-a C. The business identification signs shall be reduced to 1-foot in width and not exceed 8-feet in overall length. D. One business identification sign shall be permitted for each tenant space excluding accessory under canopy signs along the Calle Estado arcade permitted in Subitem F. E. No signs are allowed to face toward Desert Club Drive. F. Pedestrian arcade signs (under canopy signs) are permissible provided the sign matches the design style/color of the main sign(s) and does not exceed three square feet. The height of the sign from the ground to the bottom of the sign placard is 7'- 6". These signs shall be placed perpendicular to the storefront. 4. The placard material (Medex) shall be sealed and painted as required by the manufacture to withstand the climatic conditions of this area. 5. The Planning Commission shall review any future amendments to the Master Sign Program proposed by the property owner as required by Chapter 9.160.090(M4) of the Municipal Code. 6. The revised document shall be stamped approved by the Community Development Department and filed with this case and Plot Plan 94-522 (Revised). Cond.341-a BI #1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: MAY 14, 1996 CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 96-341 REQUEST: TO APPROVE A MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR THE NEWLY CONSTRUCTED BOGAN VILLAS COMMERCIAL CENTER PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 9.160 (SIGN ORDINANCE) OF THE MUNICIPAL ZONING CODE LOCATION: 78-120 CALLE ESTADO APPLICANT: MR. GERALD H. BOGAN REP: MRS. LUCIA MORAN SIGN CONTRACTOR: SIGNS BY MEL (MEL WACHS) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: VILLAGE COMMERCIAL ZONING: COMMERCIAL VILLAGE "THE CORE" BACKGROUND AND OVERVIEW: Project HistoU On June 14, 1994, the Commission approved a two-story commercial building (approximately 6,800 sq. ft.) at the northwest corner of Calle Estado and Desert Club Drive under Plot Plan 94-522 (Revised) by adoption of Minute Motion 94-016. The City Council accepted the Commission's approval of the case as conditioned. The construction permit for the project was issued last year, and the building was recently finished. The reduced site plan is attached (Attachment 1). The lower story is for retail or office uses, and the upper story is for office uses. The Commission approved a 39 square foot identification sign for this building during approval of the plot plan application in 1994. The sign was to be painted on the south side of the building facing Calle Estado with it reading `Bogan Villas" in stylized print (Attachment 2) but was never installed. STPT.85-a Village at La Quinta Specific Plan The City Council approved the Village Plan (SP 87-009) under Ordinance 88-7 on February 2, 1988. This property is in the Area #2 of the Plan which encourages "retail uses on the ground floor and office uses above. Apartments, artists studios and workshops should also be considered as second floor uses." Chapter 6.5 (Signs) of the Village Plan describes the characteristics of the type of signs that are encouraged in the Village. The context of this Chapter is to encourage signs that are not internally illuminated and the information on the business sign is limited to the name only. A copy is attached (Attachment 3). Mplicant Request On April 11, 1996, staff received a request by Mr. Bogan to establish a sign program for his commercial building at 78-120 Calle Estado. The applicant/owner has requested that the Commission permit non -illuminated, flush mounted building signs for each lease space of the building (Attachments 4 and 5, Building Elevations). The sign placards consist of a compressed wood product (Medex) with painted sign copy. The background color for each placard is tan with blue lettering and black trim. A color sample will be provided at the meeting. The signs vary in overall size from 10 to 20 square feet depending on the tenant space (Attachment 6, 7 and 8, Sign Placards). Proposed signs will be placed on the first and second floor levels of the north (facing the parking lot) and south (facing Calle Estado) building elevations. Mrs. Lucia Moran, representative for the applicant, has said that the elevation drawings presented with signs would reflect the leasing program at this time. The 8' long signs are for each tenant space, and additional 4' signs are used if the tenant has more than one lease space. Specific signs for their first two tenants are included. Multiple signs are proposed for the La Quinta Antique store because the business owner leased more than one lease space on the first floor of the building. Sign Ordinance Update The Commission and Council recently reviewed revisions to City rules and regulations for signs, and on April 2, 1996 the City Council passed Ordinance 281 establishing new sign regulations for the City. (The Sign Ordinance became effective on May 3, 1996.) The pertinent provisions for this application are: Building Mounted Signs (Table 9-3) - One flush mounted sign plus one under canopy sign per tenant frontage along a street or along common -use parking lot with no direct street frontage. The maximum sign area of a flush mounted sign is one sq. ft. per lineal foot of lease frontage up to 50 sq. ft. (i.e., aggregate size). An under canopy sign of 3 sq. ft. is also allowed. Identification signs are not permitted for tenants above the ground floor in buildings with only interior access above the ground floor. Staff Comments Based on Chapter 6.5.1 of SP 87-009 (Village Specific Plan) and the Sign Ordinance for the City, staff provides the following evaluation for this project: szPr.s5a Every sign shall have good scale and proportion in its design and in its visual relationship to buildings and surroundings. Response: Calle Estado Elevation (youth building elevation) - The signs have been placed on the facade to reflect the lease spaces proposed for this multi -tenant building. The signs are vertically centered between the different building elements (e.g., between the windows and beams building elements, etc.). Neither signs for the second floor offices nor this design layout are consistent with other previously approved sign programs. Village Core upper level offices do not have independent building mounted signs. Directory style signs are normally used to direct tenants to upstairs businesses (i.e., La Quinta Executive Office Building on Calle Estado). Additionally, the wall mounted signs are too large for placement on the building. Signs placed immediately above the Calle Estado pedestrian arcade and the second floor windows disrupts the architectural elements of the building facade. The placement of the signs, centered above the second floor windows (or offset) creates visual confusion on this primary building elevation because the building elements are symmetrical. The Commission required symmetrical building elements during the approval of the project. In the past, the Commission has supported maintaining equal distances between the sign and adjacent building elements. Additionally, the previous ID sign planned for the building solved this problem since no tenant signs would be allowed on the building facade. One problem that this sign proposal may create is a disjointed program for placing signs on a building elevation based on allowing various sign sizes that do not have a proper relationship to the other building elements. Recommendation - Staff is recommending mounting the first floor level retail business signs on the structural support beam for the upper level of the building between the vertical columns of the pedestrian arcade to reduce sign clutter on the building facade. Under canopy signs would have been recommended but the vertical clearance between the sidewalk and the bottom of the beam is too small for hanging 30" wide signs (i.e., Meet high). Secondly, staff is recommending that the second floor signs be deleted because pedestrian access was not provided from Calle Estado to the parking lot thus upstairs advertising is not critical for the future office use tenants based on the design of the building. The original building identification sign, approved previously by the Commission, would be allowed as a supplement to the sign needs of the tenants especially the upstairs tenants. North Building Elevation (facing the parking �lot) - The City's recently adopted Sign Ordinance does allow signs for the upstairs tenants if access to the upstairs area is gained from exterior stairwells. This project has two outdoor stairways on the north side of the building abutting the parking lot that would permit upstairs tenants to have signs. There is a need to provide signs on this side of the building to help patrons find the upper level tenants than exists on the other side of the building. However, the proposed signs detract from the stair -stepped nature of the roof parapet, a significant feature of this building. Again, so as not to detract from the Southwest architectural features, it would be better to integrate beam mounted or under canopy signs if adequate vertical clearances can be provided. These changes would conform with the sign policies contained in the Village Flan and the newly adopted Sign Ordinance. sTPr.ss-a Recommendation - Staff recommends the upper floor office uses be allowed to hang signs under the second level facade to identify the location of their business provided the width of each sign is uniform. This program would be similar to the existing sign program at the Plaza La Quinta Shopping Center on Highway 111, west of Washington Street. Lower level tenants could have a beam mounted signs that would be consistent with the signs recommended for the front of the building, facing Calle Estado. The draft Conditions of Approval define the allowable limits of signs for this building (Condition #3, Attachment 9). 2. Every sign shall be designed as an integral architectural element of the building and site to which it principally relates. The number of graphic elements on a sign shall be held to a minimum needed to convey the sign's major message and shall be composed in proportion to the area of the sign face. Reaponse: The preliminary sign copy provided by the applicant is consistent with the Village Specific Plan because logos and business names are used without other miscellaneous copy (i.e., excluding the three signs proposed by the Antique store). The sign placement recommended by staff in the above section would create a unified sign program for the building whereas the proposed sign locations are not architecturally compatible with the building facades. Recommendation - Staff is recommending all signs should be no greater than 1-foot in width nor exceed 8-feet in overall length. Staff recommends that all signs be either mounted on the lower level support beam between the vertical columns and hung from the under side of the support beam for the upper level tenants on the north side of the building. 3. The colors, materials and lighting of every sign shall be restrained and harmonious with the building and site to which it principally relates. Signs on glazed tiles with indirect lighting are to be encouraged. Back lit (box or can) signs are to be discouraged, directly illuminated signs shall be limited to individual letters. Exposed bulb or garish neon lighting is prohibited. Response: The signs are non -illuminated which is consistent with the Village Plan. The selected colors for the signs (tan, black and blue) will accent exterior white building and blue building doors. Recommendation - Staff supports the sign program colors and sign placard design as submitted. 4. Each sign shall be compatible with signs on adjoining premises and shall not compete for attention. Identification signs of a prototype design and corporation logos shall conform to the criteria for all other signs. RRe5ponse: Many existing buildings on Calle Estado either were built in the last few years or are more than 20 years old. The adjacent building, which houses Anchovies' Pizzeria, was built approximately four years ago. This single story building has an approved canvas canopy on the front of the building with painted sign copy on the front of the canopy with back lighting on the underside of the canopy. The multi -story building to the west of Anchovies' that houses the La Quinta Library has wood sandblasted signs with painted copy on the sign STPT.85-•a placard for lower level businesses. The other buildings in the area have painted signs on the building or wood signs with painted sign copy. Recommendation - Staff supports signs made of wood or other durable materials that are flush mounted to the building surface (i.e., a support beam) or hung on the underside of the second level on the north building elevation. These signs are designed to be consistent with other existing business signs for the shops along Calle Estado, as modified. CONt:LUSION: By limiting the number of signs on the building, the building's architectural features will not be diminished thus enhancing its character and overall relationship with the other downtown businesses. The sign modifications recommended by staff will enforce the policies and goals of the Village Specific Plan which encourages a pedestrian environment. RECOMMENDATION: By Muiute :Motion 96- , approve the Bogan Villas Master Sign Program under Sign Application 96-341., subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Attachments 1. Site Plan 2. Original Sign Exhibit - Bogan Villas 3. Chapter 6.5 of SP 87-009 (Village Plan) 4. Calle Estado Building Elevation (Front) 5. Parking Lot Building Elevation (Rear) 6-8. Sign Exhibits 9. Findings and Draft Conditions of Approval Ppared by? Trot ell, Associate Planner Submitted by: Christine di Iorio, Planning Manager STPT.85-a MAY 14, 1996 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ATTACHMENTS FOR SIGN APPLICATION 96-341 BOGAN VILLAS ATTFC►RM4-A $g Igoe ## 9 �o �BE I I %ATTACH ,��I� � � •; � MENT 1 �ic oi•I.i• ❑ d 3nlaa arras u�s3a �.. _ -�'�� ------ Desert Club Drive - _ � I � dw !V O� 0. 9 Wo Q. U i • p) ` f li• e fo i ❑ ' x1 fo 0- X ❑ /x y I° i O Y w C U h to ❑ r /X�, \ti t , / OO • 0 /. / wovw yy o • .�L ra i � I tX, 0 U I•I i�� I U �+.us• t � � � EeE � 1 c o•a R v 4 a 0 A �U00 O 00 000 ATTACHMENT 2 n ATTACHMENT 3 6.5 Signs - Village Plan 6.5.1 Building Signs - Every sign shall have good scale and proportion in its design and in its visual relationship to buildings and surroundings. - Every sign shall be designed as an integral architectural element of the building and site to which it principally relates. - The colors, materials, and lighting of every sign shall be restrained and harmonious with the building and site to which it principally relates. - Signs on glazed tile with indirect lighting are to be encouraged. Back lit (box or can) signs are to be discouraged, directly illuminated signs shall be limited to individual letters. Exposed bulb or garish neon lighting is prohibited. - The number of graphic elements on a sign shall be held to the minimum needed to convey the sign°s major message and shall be composed in proportion to the area of the sign face. - Accessory signs shall be given the same careful consideration of approval as that given for main signs. - Each sign shall be compatible with signs on adjoining premises and shall not compete for attention. - Identification signs of a prototype design and corporation logos shall conform to the criteria for all other signs. BOOK STORE BOUTIQUE RESTAURANT I my :W:(0=RF, ATTACHMENT 4 3.L TACHMENT 5 O } 4-1 O O ._]C 5-. •U Li. ATTACHMENT 6 �F ATTACHMENT 7 a ATTACHMENT 8 AntRo liam seale.I"=I" CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SIGN APPLICATION 96-341 MASTER SIGN PROGRAM FOR BOGAN VILLAS MAY 14, 1996 1" ATTACHMENT 9 The Master Sign Program is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Section 15311(a), Class 11 which allows placement of minor accessory structures to existing commercial facilities (i.e., on -premise signs, etc.). 2. The Master Sign Program (SA 96-341) for the Bogan Villas commercial center as conditioned is consistent with the provisions of the Village at La Quinta Specific Plan (SP 87- 009) and Sign Ordinance (Chapter 9.160) in that the proposed signs limit how much copy information is provided on each sign placard to the name and/or logo of the business. The graphics and colors are consistent with other existing signs along Calle Estado provided the following Conditions of Approval are imposed. CONDITIONS• That the approval of this request shall be subject to the plans on file in the Community Development Department, as amended. 2. That before issuance of a Building Permit for installation of the signs, the property owner/leasing agent for the center, shall review and approve the sign exhibit for each tenant space to insure compliance with the approved sign program. Permits for signs shall be consistent with the provisions of the Municipal Code in effect at that time. The Community Development Department shall approve all final sign exhibits. 3. Prior to issuance of a sign permit, the following modifications shall be made to the Master Sign Program for the center: A. Exterior exposed signs for second floor office tenants shall be limited to the north building elevation. All second floor level signs shall be bracketed to the under side of the structural support member of the covered walkway. If upper level signs are not installed, a directory sign can be installed for these tenants if the property owner deems it necessary (See Table 9-3 of the Sign Ordinance). B. All signs for first floor retail business tenants shall be mounted on the horizonal wood beam which supports the cantilevered portion of the two-story building. All tenant signs will be centered between the vertical support columns along the pedestrian arcade. Cond.341-a C. The business identification signs shall be reduced to 1-foot in width and not exceed 8-feet in overall length. D. One business identification sign shall be permitted for each tenant space excluding accessory under canopy signs along the Calle Estado arcade permitted in Subitem F. E. No signs are allowed to face toward Desert Club Drive. F. Pedestrian arcade signs (under canopy signs) are permissible provided the sign matches the design style/color of the main sign(s) and does not exceed three square feet. The height of the sign from the ground to the bottom of the sign placard is 7'- 6". These signs shall be placed perpendicular to the storefront. 4. The placard material (Medex) shall be sealed and painted as required by the manufacture to withstand the climatic conditions of this area. 5. The Planning Commission shall review any future amendments to the Master Sign Program proposed by the property owner as required by Chapter 9.160.090(M4) of the Municipal Code. 6. The revised document shall be stamped approved by the Community Development Department and filed with this case and Plot Plan 94-522 (Revised). Cond.:341-a PLANNING COMMISSION B I #2 STAFF REPORT DATE: MAY 14, 1996 CASE NO.: SIGN APPLICATION 96-344 APPLICANT: LA QUINTA CAR WASH (JIM JARNAGIN) SIGN COMPANY: ACADEMY SIGNS REQUEST: APPROVAL OF THREE SIGNS FOR THE LA QUINTA CAR WASH REQUIRING THREE MODIFICATIONS TO THE ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER SIGN PROGRAM: 1). TO ALLOW CURSIVE -STYLE LETTERING 2). TO INCREASE THE LETTER HEIGHT FROM 24-INCH TO 3 6- INCH,AND 3). TO ALLOW A 60-SQUARE FOOT SIGN WHERE 50-SQUARE FEET IS ALLOWED LOCATION: NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, WEST OF ADAMS STREET IN THE ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER ZONING: C-P-S (SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL) GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: MIXED/REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT WAS APPROVED FOR THE ONE -ELEVEN LA QUINTA SHOPPING CENTER (SPECIFIC PLAN 89-014) DURING THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL IN 1990. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION (EA 95-294) WAS ADOPTED FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR THE CAR WASH WHEN IT APPROVED IN MAY, 1995. ADDITIONALLY, SIGNS ARE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED PER SECTION 15303, CLASS 3(e) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT. THEREFORE, NO ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION IS DEEMED NECESSARY. SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USE: NORTH: C-P-S/THE LUBE SHOP (PART OF THE SHOPPING CENTER) SOUTH: C-P-S/VACANT COMMERCIAL LAND EAST: C-P-SNACANT LAND (PART OF THE SHOPPING CENTER) WEST: C-P-SNACANT LAND (PART OF THE SHOPPING CENTER) pess.203 BACKGROUND: General In April, 1995 the Planning Commission approved the site plan and building elevations for this car wash and detail shop under Conditional Use Permit 95-017. The City Council accepted the Planning Commission action in May, 1995. Construction began on the facility in early 1996, with completion in the next several weeks. Sign Program Provisions The approved sign program for the One -Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center provides for satellite buildings to have one internally -illuminated, individually mounted, channel letter building sign per street or parking lot frontage. One square foot is allowed for every linear foot of frontage up to 50-square feet per sign. The letter height allowed is 24-inches and letter style Helvetica (block). National or regional businesses with at least five outlets can request to use their corporate style signs. The sign program stipulates that deviations require Planning Commission approval. Sign Consideration During Project Approval During consideration of approval for Conditional Use Permit 95-017, a sign reading "La Quinta Car Wash" on the north and south building fascia above the car preparation drive -through lanes was shown on the rendering. These signs were approximately three -feet high by 44-feet long totaling a 132-square feet in area. Staff noted that these signs did not comply with the sign program and that a separate sign request would need to be processed and approved by the Planning Commission. Current Sign Request The applicant has revised the sign package from the previous submittal. Three signs, located on the north, south and east building elevations, are individually -mounted letter signs. The proposed sign copy reads "La Quinta Car Wash". The proposed "Car Wash" copy will be internally illuminated channel letters. The sign size will be 2-1/2-feet in height and 20-feet in length. The proposed copy "La Quinta" will be 20-inches in height and 6-1/2-feet in length. The total sign area will be approximately 61 square feet. "La Quinta" consists of foam letters covered in medium -dark green Plexiglas with the edges painted black. The letter style is cursive, matching the City's Chamber of Commerce advertising letterhead. This portion of the sign will be slightly angled and non -illuminated. The remainder of the copy "Car Wash" will have Plexiglas faces with medium -dark green with black returns and trim caps. The letter style is block, Helvetica-type. The letters will be internally illuminated. The proposed signs will be mounted on the fascia which wraps around the building which is eight feet high including the top and bottom molding. The actual vertical face upon which the signs are placed is approximately six -feet tall. The signs will be centered between the top and bottom. The signs on the south and east elevations will be located on the left side of the structure when facing the building. On the north elevation the sign will be located near the right side of the building. pcss.203 The "exit only" sign would be ground -mounted on a stucco base and be a non -illuminated, cabinet -type sign with a matching green background and white letters. The sign would be placed at the southwest corner near the "escape" driveway to stop cars from entering. ANALYSIS: The proposed signs do not meet the requirements of the sign program in that the total sign area exceeds 50-square feet, the "Car Wash" letters exceed 24-inches in height, and the letter style of "La Quinta" is not Helvetica block. The car wash owner does have five other car washes, however each has a different name. The design and letter style of the copy "La Quinta" could be considered as the logo and therefore in compliance with the sign program. The second issue regarding the sign size of 60-square feet, exceeds the required size of 50-square feet per the approved sign program and should be reduced. The other single tenant signs: Eisenhower (33-square feet), The Lube Shop (40-square feet), Green Burrito/Carl's Jr. (50-square feet), AAA (31-square feet), Red Robin (40-square feet) and Taco Bell (14-square feet) all generally meet the required size maximum and only McDonald's at 66-square feet exceeds the 50-square foot maximum. This was because of the introduction of their new national sign program. Therefore, staff is recommending that the letter height of the copy "Car Wash" be reduced to 24-inches in height for a total not exceeding 50-square feet for the entire sign. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends, by Minute Motion 96-_, that the Planning Commission approve deviations from the existing sign program, subject to the following conditions: That a building permit shall be obtained for the new signs with the following modifications: a. That each "La Quinta Car Wash" sign shall not exceed 24-inches in height and 50-square feet in area. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Proposed Sign Exhibits Prepared by: STAN B. SAWA, Principal Planner Submitted by: CHRISTINE DI IORIO, Principal Planner pcss.203 ATTACHMENT CASE MAP CASE No. '$A 014-34-4' J.L. JARNAGIN (LA QUINTA CARWASH) ORTH SCALE: NTS MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA April 23, 1996 CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:04 P.M. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Anderson to lead the flag salute. II. ROLL CALL A. Chairman Abels requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Anderson, Barrows, Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. B. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineers Steve Speer and John Freeland, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Tentative Tract 28343; a request of TD Desert Development, Mr. Tom Cullinan, for approval of a subdivision consisting of 23.5 acres into 74 single family and other amenity lots. 1. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels opened the public hearing. 3. Mr. Tom Cullinan, representing the applicant, TD Desert Development, stated he had met with the Parc La Quinta Homeowners' Association. The homeowners were very clear that they did not want the well site at the proposed location. He was therefore proposing to move Lot 31, at end of the cul-de-sac, and creating two additional residential lots to replace the well site. Discussion followed regarding the site and proposed location for the well. PC4-23 Planning Commission Meeting April 23, 1996 4. Commissioner Butler asked if the new well site, proposed outside of the tentative tract, would be a problem to the residents at a later date. Mr. Cullinan stated he did not believe it would and showed a possible location for the well. Commissioner Butler asked if CVWD had proposed any locations within the development for the well. Mr. Cullinan stated CVWD only required Rancho La Quinta to have eight well sites and they could not be closer than 1,000 feet to each other. 5. Chairman Abels asked if the residents had been informed of the new location for the well and if any objections had been raised. Mr. Cullinan stated he had discussed the proposed well location, but the residents had not expressed any concern. 6. Commissioner Butler asked if a 40 dba noise level was possible for the well site. Mr. Cullinan stated this was the information he had received from their consultant. 7. Commissioner Tyler asked if the residents had any noise concerns regarding the placement of the common area pool. Mr. Cullinan stated it was not an issue at the homeowners meeting. 8. Mr. Peter Murray, 49-005 Quimerra Court, stated he wanted to thank Mr. Cullinan for working with them to solve this problem and he concurred with Mr. Cullinan that the meeting went well. He further stated the location of the pool was not an issue nor were the proposed home sites to replace the well site. 9. Staff suggested modifications to the conditions. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio reviewed the condition modifications: Condition #54: Prior to issuance of final map, the well site (Lot 7) shall be deleted and substituted with residential lots. Condition #50: Prior to issuance of final map, relocate Lot 31 in accordance with the Specific Plan requiring a 50-foot building setback along all property lines. 10. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public hearing. 11. Commissioner Anderson stated he was comfortable with the fact that the two parties had met and came to a satisfactory conclusion to the problem and any details could be worked out with staff. PC4-23 2 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 12. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Butler to adopt Resolution 96-011, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract Map 28343, subject to the Findings and Conditions as amended. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Anderson, Barrows, Butler, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAIN: None B. General Plan Amendment 96-052 and Zoning Ordinance Amendment 96-050; a request of the City for certification of the Environmental Assessment, approval of the General Plan Land Use Element Text Amendment, and update of Title 9 of the La Quinta Municipal Code and a recommendation to repeal various Municipal Code Chapters. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff noted the changes as follows: the Planning Commission Resolution adopting the Environmental Assessment needs to be corrected by deleting the words "Mitigated" in reference to the Negative Declaration. In addition, the reference to the "Inclusionary Zoning" requirements were recommended for deletion; Exhibit "A" of the General Plan Amendment has been revised; Section 9.30.100.D. Development Standards for the Rural Residential Overlay; Retail Commercial parking requirements in Section 9.150.Table 9.12 has been revised. 2. Chairman Abels asked if there were any questions of staff, there being none, the public hearing was opened. 3. Mr. Ed Kibbey, representing the BIA Desert Chapter, stated that their review of the report was not complete, they would like to request the Planning Commission continue this issue to allow time to review all the contents. He stated they had submitted a draft letter addressed some of their concerns, but additional time was needed for an in-depth review. Chairman Abels stated the letter from the BIA had been received by the Planning Commission during their study session and the Planning Commission would need time to review the letter. 4. Mr. Marvin Roos, Chairman of BIA Legislative Affairs Committee, stated he had major concerns with the document. He noted that the floor area ratio requirement had been deleted and he was unaware if the General Plan building intensity issue had been replaced in another part of the document. State Law requires the General Plan identify the commercial building levels intensity. They have a concern about eliminating the policy on the 10% PC4-23 3 Planning Commission Meeting April 23, 1996 density bonus. He asked which projects are specifically grandfathered in in terms of meeting development standards. He requeted that an analysis of the projects and the impact the new standards would have on them. They question whether the Zoning Ordinance should address specific issues such as fencing or the definition of bedrooms. These could be dealt with in a Building Code Amendment. Once the ordinance is in effect, over time there may be a need for flexibility in the standards. Fence and building pad heights need some flexibility for the Director to have authority to act upon. Market and cost decisions determine such items as three car garages and the like. Requiring these adds to the cost and are micro managing project development rather than setting community standards. Lastly, they believe the proposed ordinance is largely regressive and is not open to the kinds of progressive planning and building programs the Valley will be looking at over the next ten years. The changes over the next five years are going to accelerate rather than slowing down. The section on driveway and street visibility setbacks creates a problem for a property owner. Regulations regarding the size of wood gates may be better suited in the Uniform Building Code. Section 9.65.020(D)(6)(c) on shading for parking or pedestrian areas in the downtown area needs to be defined. Prohibiting blank walls in the Village, should be changed to say "discourage" instead of prohibited. In the Downtown area, the pedestrian landscape shading requirements are too aggressive where they ask for the landscaping to be mature within two years. Seven to ten years to reach maturity is normal. A variety of public and semi-public uses are exempted from Zoning Ordinance regulations by State Law, Government Code 53090, and the Ordinance requires these uses to apply for Conditional Use Permits. The Code requires trash enclosures to have trellis'. Some fire departments are wanting sprinklers installed as this is an area where fires are started. The City may want to look at requiring landscaping instead as it requires less maintenance and deterioration. The new requirement states that a recycling plan is required with any new development. Needs good basic guidelines that could be researched and developed by the City and CVAG. The Table that deals with all the rooms in the house that may be considered a bedroom is necessary, and again the Building code is very specific and adequate to address this. They are very concerned about Table 9-11 regarding three garages and guest parking. Has there been any research to back up the standards for guest parking and how would this be calculated. The retail and commercial uses on Table 9-12 appear to require excessive parking. In particular, the additional parking for restaurants and shopping centers is regressive as these uses can share parking. Under hotels, the amount of parking should go down as facilities grow larger. Bicycles and golf carts should be encouraged and count towards required parking as well as other modes of transportation. Authorization for minor adjustments should include variance type findings to insure that such modifications are not the granting of a special privilege. The BIA concur with the deletion of PC4-23 4 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 Inclusionary Zoning, would like to reinstate the director's approval of compatibility, and the page numbering system makes it hard to find your way through the document. 5. Mr. Ed Kibbey, BIA, asked for a continuance of the hearing to consider the document further. 6. Mrs. Sharon Kanlian, 50-400 Jefferson, stated she had questions regarding the Equestrian Overlay portion of the General Plan Amendment and she would like to have the answers and clarification regarding these questions at this meeting. On Page 68.E.1 regarding composted manure, she would like to know by whose standards are these materials being measured and whose industry guidelines will the City use. Need to state these in the Code so Code Enforcement is able to enforcement them. She encouraged the Planning Commission to redefine this Section with more detail so there are guidelines to be referred to regarding properly composted manure. On Friday, after receiving a copy of the staff report, they spoke with staff concerning Page 69, Sections G.and H. lighting and loud speakers, and were informed these would fall under the guidelines of a CUP for a commercial equestrian facility. On Monday, a different staff person re-educated them that as written, lights and amplification can be installed by anyone in the Equestrian Overlay District. This is far more liberal than the current guidelines enforced today. So the grandfathering rule does not apply either. They have a hard time understanding this ruling and could someone please explain why this is left so vague. Regarding the site plan submitted by Rancho del Sol, should this not be marked "proposed" for those items that are not yet built. If this is so, then under the current regulations lights would not be allowed. 7. Mr. Walter Hansch, Jefferson Street property owner, stated the City has been dealing with this issue of smell and health for years and now noise and lights. He did not feel there was a need to have a circus regarding this issue. This is a small business venture and it will have a negative effect on the neighboring properties. 8. Mr. Sonny Kanlian, 50-400 Jefferson Street, La Quinta, stated he echoes his wife's requests to have answers at this meeting. Further on Page 67, Section B.6. regarding the spreading areas he would like to see them located further away from adjacent properties and domestic wells. He did want to see any manure or heavy watering along the property line. As stated at the last meeting, the Health Department recommends 100 feet from any domestic well. His well is an older well and does not have the annular seal and earthquakes, time and ware can cause these seals to leak and the surface water PC4-23 5 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 can seep by and get under the claylands. The manure problem has not been answered properly. Temperature and moisture are the two most important factors in breeding cycles of vertebras and insects. One generation of flies can go 12-14 days. The manure, if composted need to be done properly and the ability to have a strong Code Enforcement to enforcement this. It has to be policed and policed properly and he cannot check to see that it is done properly. In addition, he was very disturbed that he could get a report on Friday and on Monday it is 100 degrees turned around. He was assured that lights would not be allowed and now there is a site plan submitted for lights and loudspeakers. He asked if there was a resolution to prevent lights and loudspeakers from being installed until this process is resolved. Staff informed them that they would not be allowed until the Zoning Code is resolved. Now staff informs them they cannot prevent them from installing the lights and loudspeakers. Staff stated that because it was submitted it can be allowed. This is a tremendous noise and light factor to impose on 200 potential homes. This needs to go through the conditional use permit process as suggested. 9. Mrs. Wanda Reese, 80-209 Avenue 50, La Quinta, stated she is glad that she doesn't lives in Russia where everything is controlled. In reference to the use of light and amplification of sound, they would be used very seldom. The lights proposed are no different than those used for tennis courts. As far as noise and circus affect, this does not take place either. They are giving lessons and usually pretty quiet. She is very surprised at the comments made by her neighbors and she is confused about the obsession with manure. She did not know if the Code Enforcement Department would want to inspect their handling of manure each day, but she felt it was ridiculous to get this particular about horse manure. If there is too much there, it is hauled to an organic farmer or used on the site by mixing it into the soil. As far as flies, they do not go more than 150 feet from where they are hatched. She stated she had read the report and the proposed changes and commends staff on their work. She would like to see this approved without any additional time being taken on this matter. 10. Mr. Robert Kuhl, 54-721 Monroe Street, stated he had several areas of concern. First he could not understand the reduction of five to three horses per acre. When he was annexed into La Quinta he was guaranteed he would be allowed to keep the five horses per acre as he had under the County. In addition, he would like to ability to use his entire lot. The setbacks proposed are a problem. If I own the land, I feel I should be able to use the land. He did not understand the reason for a setback that would be non -productive. The problems with the flies and manure, is unfounded. His horses are almost PC4-23 6 Planning Commission Meeting April 23, 1996 in his front yard, his wife has emphysema, and they have no problem with flies or smells. They are very conscious of potential problems and don't want to cause any problems for themselves or their neighbors. The proposed treatment of manure is not practical. To separate the green manure from the brown manure cannot be done and he did not see a reason for it. He has never been involved in any study sessions, and has not received any notification of the meetings. If there are to be any more meetings he would like to be informed so he could give input. 11. Mr. Harry Loukatos, 77-625 California Drive, Palm Desert, stated he was a farmer in La Quinta and in reference to the "Right to Farm" in this County, and according to Civil Code 3482.5-Agriculture Activity Not a Nuisance" gives him the right to farm within the City of La Quinta. The Code reads: "City and County or other political subdivision of the state ... this section shall prevail over any contrary provision of any ordinance or regulation of any city or county, or other." Please take these into consideration regarding his right to farm in the City when making these changes. 12. Mr. Bill Hobin, P. O. Box 1437, Palm Desert, asked that the Planning Commission consider under the Commercial Park Zone increasing the floor area ratio (FAR) to .35. This is a light industrial zone and .25 is less than feasible from an economic development standpoint. He would request the Planning Commission take another look at this. 13. Mrs. Julie Reeske, 54-415 Avenida Vallejo, spoke regarding the Equestrian Overlay. She seated that due to the summer heat it was important to have the lights to ride at night. . 14. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public hearing. Commissioner Anderson addressed issues raised by Mr. Roos. He stated there needed to be an analysis regarding the entitled projects and how the new zoning may affect them. He requested staff put a list together to show who would be affected. As far as trellis screening over trash and fire sprinkling, he has not faced this yet in his profession, but the fire department does make changes and suggested staff review this. The City has accepted the ULI Parking analysis and he assumed they would continue to do so. As far as retail commercial is concerned, the City has a decent standard and the City should continue to support other forms of transportation. He thought the Planning Commission was open to any shared parking ideas an applicant would like to submit. He also agreed with authorization for minor adjustment to be set up with variance type of findings. It would save the City from potential problems happening. He thanked the BIA for their comments. PC4-23 7 Planning Commission Meeting April 23, 1996 15. Commissioner Barrows asked Mr. Roos to explain what he meant by his statement that the ordinance might be regressive. She asked Mr. Roos to clarify what he was referring to in relation to commercial and residential changes. In further comments, could he provide specifics as to the issues they are concerned with and relative to non -automotive transportation. 16. Commissioner Newkirk stated that due to the number of questions raised, this item needs to be continued. 17. Chairman Abels stated that in view of the information that had been received, he recommended this item be continued for two weeks to give staff time to review the questions asked and be prepared to address them. Commissioner Anderson asked about the Equestrian Overlay District. In particular, Page 66-Development Standards, the questions raised by Mrs. Kanlian are reasonable and the way it is worded may be confusing. Would a public address system and lights be allowed under any commercial horse use? If there are existing guidelines and standards available, perhaps staff can look into this. Lastly, why has the number of horses allowed per acre changed from five to three? 18. Commissioner Tyler questioned if the interpretation of Equestrian requirements had changed over the weekend then it needed to be addressed and he would support the continuance. The BIA comments need to be reviewed in detail. 19. Chairman Abels asked staff to explain why there appeared to be changes to the ordinance as stated by Mrs. Kanlian. Associate Planner Wally Nesbit stated he had spoken with Mrs. Kanlian regarding the manure composting and the spreading area setback and had explained to her that the City has no set standard for the handling of manure, and had received information and ordinances from other cities. The City's existing ordinance does not have a standard. As the ordinance is currently written, manure can be spread right to the property line. Therefore, staff added a requirement to offer a compromise to allow the spreading of manure. Manure spreading is not allowed unless it is part of a CUP application for a new commercial operation and supplemented with a manure control program. Regarding composting standards, staff was unable to come up with any standards from any of the local waste management companies and was in the process of researching the State guidelines. Regarding lighting and sound amplification, the City currently does not have standards or a permit process. Sound amplification would be monitored by the Code Enforcement Department for sound levels. The Equestrian Overlay District is regulated by the current lighting regulations. The current ordinance is being misinterpreted. The development standards apply to all equestrian overlay properties. As they are written, they PC4-23 8 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 do apply, but commercial equestrian facilities or uses may be subject to more restrictive requirements through the CUP process. As this applies to lighting and sound amplification issues, any lighting proposal must comply to the Outdoor Lighting Control requirements as applicable in the current Code or no later than 9:00 P.M. The CUP process could modify these regulations. In addition, staff talked about the pasture fencing, and informed Mrs. Kanlian that there is no setback required for pasture fencing. If the fencing does not extend to the property line in order to allow a reasonable area to maintain the property line and that fencing, staff is recommending an area of 10-feet. A Section was also added for open area fencing that is not addressed in other areas of the ordinance, but this would not be required until a modification or intensifying of the use in accordance with the nonconformity section was made to the property. 20. Mr. Larry Lawrence asked if the Zoning Ordinance update was to be continued to May 14th. Staff stated yes. Mr. Lawrence added that in regards to previously approved plans Section 9.270.070-Nonconformities does address this and he went on to clarify the wording. 21. No further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Barrows to continue to the next regular meeting of the Planning Commission at May 14, 1996. Unanimously approved. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Setback Adjustment 96-394; a request of Mr. & Mrs. R. C. Pierce to appeal the Community Development Director's denial of setback adjustments for the front yard, rear yard, and garage setback on the exterior side yard for a new residence located southwest of the intersection of Calle Potrero and Avenida Juarez. 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. Commissioner Anderson asked staff to clarify which street frontage is considered by the City to be the front of the house when it is located on a corner. Principal Planner Stan Sawa clarified that the front is determined by which frontage is the narrower of the two. Discussion followed. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated that this is referenced in the Architectural Design Manual. PC4-23 9 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 3. Mr. Doug Phillips, lawyer for the appellants, stated one of the most important concerns to the applicant is the placementn of the garage. He went on to state the reasons they thought justified their applying for and receiving a variance: A) Special Circumstances: 1) the lot is 7,500 square feet and not very large; 2) its shape is 75-feet wide and 100-feet long, very narrow; and 3) located on the corner with a radius causing less buildable area. B) Depravation to the Property Owner: Mr. Phillips stated there are ten locations located nearby where there are setback deviations for garages that had been approved by the County or the City. Discussion followed regarding the examples supplied by the applicant. C) What exits now is a vacant lot with debris, what the City will get is a new home built by local developer. The applicants need the same consideration and flexibility as they believe has been afforded to other property owners in the same vicinity. 4. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated that staff would clarify the ten houses setbacks referred to by the appellant. Two setback adjustments were due to street vacation and irregular shape triangular lots. 5. Commissioner Anderson stated most of the examples of the sites were homes constructed before City incorporation and the City had no control over what was constructed. Therefore, a lot of homes were built with minimum zoning restrictions. For homes built after incorporation, one is located on a new cul- de-sac created by the City, which created the deviation. A 7,500 square foot lot is not difficult to build or design a home on. In reviewing the proposed house plan, some changes could be made to allow the house to exist on the lot. The problem appears to be that the plans were drawn before the lot was selected and this is not grounds to grant a variance. 6. Commissioner Barrows stated she did not believe that the conditions stated by the applicant warranted the setback adjustment. The lot configuration does not warrant a variance. 7. Commissioner Butler stated he concurred with Commissioners Anderson and Barrows in that the house is too large for the property. The applicant should reconfigure the house to bring it into compliance with the setback requirements. Commissioner Gardner stated the house does take up a great deal of the lot and detracts from the property. If this variance were approved it would create a problem of others asking for variances. PC4-23 10 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 9. Commissioner Newkirk stated he concurred with what had been said. It would set a precedent for future problems. 10. Commissioner Tyler asked Mr. Phillips to clarify why the appellant's appeal letter stated that the determination of the setbacks, stated in the City's letter was mis-read. Mr. Phillips stated that based on the basis of the applicant's position, a variance would be proper. They have no problem with staff s interpretation, however La Quinta did inherit the small lots from the County with houses already built. This is why so many of the setbacks for the older homes were granted. Now, the applicant has a vacant lot and is asking the City to apply the same standards and give flexibility to this property owner. 11. Commissioner Anderson stated he understood the point, but should one of these homes be destroyed, he would have to build in accordance with the new Code requirements. In this instance the City has existing nonconforming uses but, they are not the grounds to grant a variance Mr. Phillips asked if there was anything else this owner could do to solve this problem. Is there a suggestion by the Commissioners to solve this problem. 12. Commissioner Anderson stated it was a matter of reconfiguring the house; reconfigure the circulation plan of the house. Commissioner Anderson stated he could not specifically make a suggestion, but would relay some ideas to staff. 13. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Tyler to adopt Minute Motion 96-015, denying the appeal of the appellant, and upholding the decision of the Community Development Director. Unanimously approved. B. Street Vacation 96-030 and 96-031 ; a request of the City for determination of General Plan Consistency findings with proposed street vacations for portions of Avenida Cortez, Avenida Herrera, Avenida Juarez, Avenida Madero, Avenida Martinez, Avenida Mendoza, Avenida Montezuma, Avenida Velasco, Avenida Villa, Calle Chillon, Calle Portero, Calle Temecula, and Eisenhower Drive. 1. Senior Engineer Steve Speer presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioner Butler asked staff if the property owners adjacent to the area were informed of this action. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated they are notified and went on to explained the process by which the Public Works Department is required to follow for a street vacation. PC4-23 11 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 3. Chairman Abels asked if the notification mailed out went to everyone within five hundred feet. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated the notification was only for the properties immediately adjacent to the street vacations. 4. Commissioner Anderson commended staff on the quality of work. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Gardner to adopt Minute Motion 96-016, approving the findings for Street Vacations 96-030 and 96-031 for the vacation of right- of-way as being in compliance with the adopted Circulation Element of the La Quinta General Plan. Unanimously approved. C. Senior Center Parking Lot Expansion - Capital Improvement Program Project No. 96-03; a request of the City for approval of a concept plan to allow the expansion of the Senior Center parking lot. Senior Engineer John Freeland presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. Commissioner Tyler stated he thought the exit at Avenida Buena Ventura would be awkward and the turning radius would need to be enlarged. Senior Engineer John Freeland explained the exit site was determined during the planning and building of the site and at that time it became apparent that there would not be enough space to locate the exit at the end of the parking lot. Their only option would be to increase the turning radius. Commissioner Tyler asked why the curb stops were only provided under the covered area of the parking lot. Senior Engineer John Freeland stated they were not needed in any other area of the parking lot and to place them everywhere would add to the cost. Discussion followed regarding the economics of the project. 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Butler/Barrows to adopt Minute Motion 96-017, recommending to the City Council approval of the concept plan for the expansion of the Senior Center parking lot. Unanimously approved. D. Various City-wide Landscaping Improvements - Project No. 96-04; a request of the City for approval of a conceptual design of various City-wide landscaping medians. Senior Engineer John Freeland presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. PC4-23 12 Planning Commission Meeting April23, 1996 2. Chairman Abels asked when staff anticipated the project being completed. Senior Engineer John Freeland stated that due to the heat, staff will put off advertising until after summer. 3. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Gardner to adopt Minute Motion 96-018, recommending to the City Council approval of the concept plan for various City-wide Landscape Improvements -Project No. 96-04. Unanimously approved. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of April 9, 1996. 1. There being no further corrections to the Minutes of April 9, 1996, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Anderson/Butler to approve the Minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commissioner Newkirk reported on the City Council meeting of March 19, 1996. B. Chairman Abels asked Commissioner Anderson to report on the Human Resources meeting. C. Department update - Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the owners of the metropolitan theaters had informed him that they were negotiating the construction loan. D. Chairman Abels asked if Commissioner Tyler would be willing to officially be the Planning Commission's representative at all the City Council meetings. Staff stated the selection of the Planning Commission representative was at the Planning Commission's discretion. Chairman Abels asked that this item be discussed at a later date. VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Gardner/Anderson to adjourn this meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting on May 14, 1996. This meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:36 P.M. Unanimously approved. PC4-23 13