The URL can be used to link to this page

1996 06 11 PC0e, Q•�9 ' A � /S a ` ► A yOFTN� PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California June 11, 1996 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING Beginning Resolution 96-022 Beginning Minute Motion 96-023 CALL TO ORDER - FLAG SALUTE - ROLL CALL PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Item .................... TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25691, AMENDMENT #1 (EXTENSION #3) Applicant ............. Mr. Richard L. Deman Location .............. On the north side of Miles Avenue, 660 feet east of Dune Palms Road Request ............... Approval of a one year time extension (Extension #3) for the subdivision of 9.3 acres into 39 single family and other street/common lots. Action ................ Resolution 96- 2. Item ................... TENTATIVE TRACT 28335-R (REVERSION TO ACREAGE) Applicant ............ William Murray & Associates Location ............. Northwest of the intersection of Via Sierra and Loma Vista Request .............. Approval of a reversion to acreage to reconsolidate Tract 26251-1, Lots 1 and 2, and Lot "A" and Parcel Merger 93-298, Lots 1 and "A" into a single 3.3 acre parcel Action ............... Resolution 96- PC/AGENDA BUSINESS ITEMS - None CONSENT CALENDAR Approval of the Minutes of the Planning Commission meeting of May 28, 1996. COMMISSIONER ITEMS 1. Commissioner report of the City Council meeting of June 4, 1996 2. Department update ADJOURNMENT STUDY SESSION CANCELLED PC/AGENDA PH #1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JUNE 11, 1996 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 25691 (AMENDMENT #1) REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION (EXTENSION # 3) FOR THE SUBDIVISION OF 9.3-ACRES INTO 39 SINGLE FAMILY AND OTHER STREET/COMMON LOTS LOCATION: ON THE NORTH SIDE OF MILES AVENUE, 660-FEET EAST OF DUNE PALMS ROAD (ATTACHMENT 1) PROPERTY OWNER: MR. RICHARD L. DEMAN ENGINEER: MR. DANIEL FERGUSON (FERGUSON ENGINEERING) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT (E.A. 90-156) WAS ADOPTED FOR THIS PROJECT IN 1990. 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: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLINGS/ACRE) ZONING: R-1(ONE FAMILY DWELLING) BACKGROUND: Site Background The proposed tract is on the north side of Miles Avenue between Jefferson Street and Dune Palms Road. The 9.3-acre parcel is vacant. Overhead utility lines exist along Miles Avenue. STAFFRPT.90a In 1990, the property owner filed the original Tentative Tract Map request to subdivide approximately 9-acres into 39 single family lots (i.e., 4.24 units/acre). A copy of the original tentative map exhibit is attached (Attachment 2). This tract has received two Council approved time extensions plus an automatic two-year extension in 1993 under Senate Bill 428. The map's expiration was therefore extended to April 17, 1996. Last year, the owner processed an amendment request modifying the design of the tract improvements and allowing direct access to the tract from Miles Avenue (Attachment 3). The original map required access to the tract from the north through the Cactus Flower development or from the east through Tentative Tract Map 24179. Since Tentative Tract Map 24179 expired, the City Council permitted access to Miles Avenue in 1995 under Resolution 95-11. The applicant's third and last one year time extension request is attached (Attachment 4). Surrounding Zoning/Land Use The properties on the east side of this tract are vacant and zoned for single family houses. The property to the north is developed with existing single family houses (i.e., Cactus Flower development). To the west is a vacant nine -acre parcel. To the south (across Miles Avenue) are vacant parcels in the City of Indio. OriginaMap Approval The approved tentative tract map allows single family lots that range in size from 7,200 to +9,000 square feet with access on public streets. Access to the development will be from Lot "D" Street that intersects with Miles Avenue approximately 663-feet east of Dune Palms Road. Lot "D" Street transitions north and connects to other public streets (i.e., Lots B, C, and E) in the tract. This tract, as Conditioned, permits full access turn movements from the site because a traffic signal will be installed on Miles Avenue at the site entrance. Lot 39, an on -site retention basin lot, is more than 15,000 sq.ft. and located at the northeast corner of Miles Avenue and Lot "D" Street. Public Notice The case was advertised in the DesertSun newspaper on May 29, 1996. All property owners within 500 feet of the 9.3-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 April 5, 1996. We have received no negative comments. All other comments have been incorporated into the attached draft Conditions of Approval. STAFFRPT.90a Environmental Assessment Environmental Assessment 90-156 was prepared for this case during its original review and approval in 1990. 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. The General Plan designates this site as Low Density Residential (2-4 dwellings/acre) which limits the density to four dwelling units per acre. The net land area of this project after dedications is 9.25 which permits only 37 lots. Condition 56 requires the applicant to comply with the General Plan density limits by revising the map to reduce the number of residential lots from 39 to 37. (Two less than shown on the attached map exhibit.) In 1990, 39 single family lots were approved. Lot 39 is proposed for on -site stormwater control, but permitted to be used for a future home site if a regional stormwater facility is installed. Chapter 13.24.110 (Drainage) of the Subdivision Ordinance states that the". . . minimum design for facilities which control drainage water generated within the subdivision or floodwater flowing into or crossing a land division shall be based on a storm having a frequency of occurrence of once every 100 years." Further, under Item I, "stormwater drainage improvements shall be reflective of the needs of each development project." The applicant's hydrology study shall determine the size of the required retention basin. Issue 2 - Tract Design/improvements One access point is planned on Miles Avenue, a primary arterial street (100 to 110' r-o-w). All interior public streets will be 50 to 60-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. 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 meet all requirements of the local service agencies (gas, electric, water, etc.). STAFFRPT.90a CONCLUSION: Staff has revised and/or added Conditions to this request to comply with the existing provisuons of the General Plan, Municipal Zoning Code and Subdivision Ordinance. 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. This map will expire on April 17, 1997, unless the property owner records the final map (Condition 3). RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96- , recommending to the City Council approval of the third one year time extension for Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment #1), subject to the revised Conditions of Approval as attached. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Original Exhibit (Reduced) 3. Revised Map Exhibit (Reduced) 4. A letter from Property Owner 5. Large Map Exhibit (PC only) Prepared by: � 1 Greg dell Submitted by: r 1 Christine di lorio, Planning Manager STAFFRPT.90a 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 25691 (AMENDMENT #1, EXTENSION #3) TO ALLOW A 39-LOT SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LAND SALES SUBDIVISION ON APPROXIMATELY 9.3 ACRES CASE NO.: TTM 25691 (AMENDMENT #1, EXTENSION #3) APPLICANT: RICHARD L. DEMAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 11th day of June, 1996, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing at the request of Richard L. Deman for a third one year extension, for a 9.3-acre site with 39-single family lots, generally on the north side of Miles Avenue, 1/4 mile west of Jefferson Street, more particularly described as: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF THE NORTH HALF OF SECTION 20, TSS, R7E, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN (APN: 604-072-005) 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 90-156) approved in 1990, 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 a recommendation for extension of said Tentative Tract Map 25691, Amendment #1 (3rd 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 Low Density Residential (LDR) District per the provisions of the 1992 General Plan Update; therefore, all provisions of Land Use Element (Chapter 2) shall be met. Tentative Tract 25691 is consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan provided conditions, specifically reducing the number of lots to 37, and mitigation of environmental consequences pursuant to Environmental Assessment 90-156. The site is zoned R-1 (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 Circulation and Land Use Elements of the General Plan (Chapter 2). All public streets and improvements in the project shall conform to City standards of the General Plan and Subdivision Ordinance as designed. RESOPc.2o1P/conaprv1.455a Resolution 96- 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 1990. 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 90-156. 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. Fringe -Toed Lizard mitigation fee ($600/ac.) shall also be paid prior to any site work. 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 Miles Avenue 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 public 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: 1. 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 90-156 as approved in 1990; REsoK.2olP/conaprv1.455a Resolution 96- 3. That it does recommend approval of Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment #1, Time Extension #3) to the City Council 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 11th day of June, 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 REsoPc.zo iP/conaprv1.455a PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 25691 (AMENDMENT #1), EXTENSION #3 JUNE 11, 1996 CONDITIONS: GENERAL 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., APN: 604-072-005). 2. Tentative Tract Map 25691, 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 17, 1997, unless recorded. 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 ♦ Desert Sands Unified School District ♦ Imperial Irrigation District ♦ California Regional Water Quality Board (NPDES Permit) conaprA.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11, 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 Complexes. C. On -site advertising/construction signs. 8. Before 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. 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 reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains, until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Before 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 conaprvl.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11,1996 Preservation Commission for completeness and acceptability. Acceptance of the final report by the Commission signifies completion of the archaeological mitigation program. A list of qualified archaeological monitors, 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. 9. Street name proposals (three 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 13.48, 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 Miles Avenue, 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. 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. conaprvl.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11,1996 If improvements are phased with multiple final maps or other administrative approvals, off -site improvements and 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 1,000 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. Prior to the final building inspection of the first unit, Street Lot "B" shall be connected to a publicly maintained road. 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: conaprv1.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691(Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11,1996 OFF -SITE STREETS A. Miles Avenue - Primary Arterial, 55 foot half width right-of-way with a raised median and six-foot wide sidewalk. If this development precedes development on the south side of Miles, the applicant shall construct half - width street pavement plus one 14-foot eastbound lane separated by a temporary striped median. Additional improvement width may be necessary for bus turnouts, acceleration/deceleration lanes and/or other features contained in the approved construction plans. ON -SITE STREETS B. Public Residential Streets - 36 or 40-feet wide. If a full -turn access is allowed at Miles Avenue, Lot D (the main entry street) shall be 40-feet wide. If the City Engineer determines that public access rights to the 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. The applicant shall pay cash or provide security in guarantee of cash payment for required improvements with are deferred for future construction by others. Deferred improvements for this tract include: A. Miles Avenue - Applicants's share of an 18-foot wide raised median. B. Traffic signal at Miles Avenue and Dune Palms Road - 6.31 % of the cost to design and construct. C. Traffic signal at Miles and entry drive - 25% of the cost of design and construction. D. Abandonment of sanitary sewer pump station and restoration of the site. The applicant's obligations for all or part 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. 20. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured before constructing or joining any street improvements. 21. The property owner shall vacate vehicle access rights to Miles Avenue from all abutting lots. Access to Miles Avenue shall be restricted to Lot "D" Street only. conaprvl.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11,1996 22. The applicant shall dedicate a 20'-wide common area lot along Miles Avenue for landscaping purposes and meandering sidewalk. 23. Improvement plans for all on- and off -site streets 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. 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 conaprvl.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691(Amendment #1), Ext. #3 June 11, 1996 transitions that extend beyond tract boundaries and join the widened and existing street sections. 25. 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. 26. 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. 27. 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. 28. 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 conaprv1.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11, 1996 intent to promote and ensure community acceptance and buyer satisfaction with the proposed development. 29. 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. 30. 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 maximum depth of the retention basin shall be six -feet. 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. 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 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. 31. 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 22 gallons per day per 1,000 sq. ft. of drainage area. 32. 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 conaprv1.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11,1996 variable factors to help the homeowner's association in planning the routine and long tem maintenance. 33. 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 prior to building permit issuance. 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. 34. 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. 35. 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. 36. Prior to final map approval, applicant shall post securities to ensure construction of a six-foot wide meandering sidewalk between the Miles Avenue 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. 37. All existing and proposed utilities within or adjacent to the proposed development shall be installed underground. High -voltage power lines which the power authority will not accept underground are exempt from this requirement. 38. 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. conaprv1.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691(Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11,1996 39. 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. 40. 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. 41. 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-Buiit" 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. Before 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 data shall be organized by lot number and shall be listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. BUILDING AND SITE DESIGN 42. The development of single-family homes shall be governed by the following: A. The applicant shall establish a Design Review Committee to review and approve all development with the tract. The main objectives of this Committee shall be to assure that building architecture, building materials, and colors, building height and setbacks, and landscape design following appropriate design themes throughout the tract. Procedures and operation of the Committee shall be set forth in the Tract's CC & R's. conaprvl.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11, 1996 B. 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 shall have clay or concrete tile roofs excluding flat roofed buildings. 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. C. Perimeter walls for all residential units shall be located at the top of the graded slope for each parcel. D. All roof -mounted equipment shall be screened from view at all sides by design elements of the house (i.e., parapets, etc.). E. Seventy-five percent of all single family homes within 150-feet of the ultimate right of way of Miles Avenue shall be single -story and no higher than 20 feet as measured from building pad elevation as noted on the approved grading plan. One story houses (i.e., 17-feet in height) shall be built along the northern tract boundary adjacent to the existing single level Cactus Flower houses. F. The minimum dwelling unit size shall be 1,400 sq. ft. excluding garage or other non -livable areas. G. All dwelling units shall have two -car garages measuring 20-feet by 20-feet (inside) in overall size. H. All houses shall have illuminated building address numbers which shall be hardwired to the main electrical system with battery backup. 1. The minimum lot size shall be 7,200 square feet. J. The provisions of the Municipal Zoning Code in effect at the time building permits are applied for shall be met unless superseded by the Conditions conaprvl.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691(Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11,1996 herein. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements as determined by the Building and Safety Director. K. All homes shall be required to install front yard landscaping prior to final occupancy. 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. 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. 43. The mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 90-156 shall be met. MISCELLANEOUS 44. 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 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. conaprvl.455a Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), Ext. #3 June 11,1996 45. 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. 46. 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. 47. 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. 48. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 49. 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. 50. 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. 51. 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. 52. 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. conaprvl.4551L Planning Commisisonl Resolution 96-_ Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract Map 25691 (Amendment # 1), East. #3 June 11,1996 If the development is not subject to a major thoroughfare improvement program, the applicant shall be responsible for all street/traffic improvements required herein. 53. The applicant shall employ construction quality -assurance measures which meet the approval of the City Engineer. 54. Before site grading or building permit issuance whichever occurs first, the applicant shall pay the required fees to remove land from the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat conservation area, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600.00 per acre. 55. The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District as required in their letter of February 21, 1990, on file with the Community Development Department. SPECIAL 56. Before a final map is submitted, the maximum number of single family lots for this subdivision shall be reduced to 37 based on Chapter 2.0 (Land Use Element) of the General Plan. conaprvl.455a JUNE 11, 1996 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ATTACHMENTS FOR TTM 25691 RICHARD Ls DLMAN ATTFORM7-A LOCATION MAP — TTM 25691 ATTACHMENT 1 lU 2 SEC 2 ® T. 5 S. R. 7 E. 60 36 i�E — — �d Tarr• -/rsW IN •! //M 09 O 072 / 25 �j \ �a. I MILES -^ AVE - tilt l J .DV4-/ 0 4 H Z O Q J 4. O Y r u W 2 r z 2 � 7 � ��tt 1 t ��t T' FE'RGUSDN me-miriPP IING 46-414 ROUDEL LANE LA QUINTA, CA 92253 (619) 775-1930 April 1, 1996 City of La Quinta Attn; Mr. Jerry Herman, Community Development Director 79-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253 ATTACHMENT 4 Subject: Request for third extension of 25691, Amendment No. I., located side of Miles Avenue, 1/4 mile Jefferson Street. Tentative Tract on the north east of Dear Mr. Herman, At the time of the initial approval of the above referenced development, there were successful coordinated planning efforts to obtain sewer discharge facilities via the parcel to the east. Subsequently, however, the tentative map for that parcel expired, and there has been no substantive planning for it since. Currently, a proposed temporary sewer pumping station is proposed to replace the original scheme, until a gravity main becomes available for direct connection. This could occur either within the said easterly parcel or within Miles Avenue. Although there has been continued inquiries, the cost of the temporary sewer pumping station has been a factor in slowing normal progress on the development in an extremely competitive market. However, I am optimistic that the development climate along the Miles Avenue corridor is favorable to success of the project. Sincerely, Richard L. Deman PH #2 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JUNE 11, 1996 CASE NUMBER: TENTATIVE TRACT 28335 -R (REVERSION TO ACREAGE) REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A REVERSION TO ACREAGE TO RECONSOLIDATE TRACT 26251, LOTS 1 AND 2, AND LOT "A", AND PARCEL MERGER 93-298, LOTS 1 AND A INTO A SINGLE 3.3 ACRE PARCEL LOCATION: NORTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION OF VIA SIERRA AND LOMA VISTA APPLICANT: WILLIAM MURRAY & ASSOCIATES, INC. PROPERTY OWNER: ROBERT R. TAYLOR AND MARY KAY TAYLOR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: IN 1990, THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTED A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 90-1, PREPARED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 26251. THE PROPOSED REVERSION TO ACREAGE WILL NOT RESULT OF THOSE IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT, THUS NO ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS NECESSARY. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: OPEN SPACE ZONING: HILLSIDE CONSERVATION (H-C) The property included in the request for reversion to acreage is the entire area of Tract 26251 (Attachments 1). The tract was originally approved by the City Council in 1990, under Resolution No. 90-74. In 1993, the parcels created by the tract map were merged, under Parcel Merger 93-298, to create one large numbered lot and one lettered lot (the driveway). The property owner now desires the release of improvement bonds placed on the property as no construction is planned for the property. In order to be able to release the bonds, the tentative tract must "disappear". The process in which this is done is a reversion to acreage with a new tract number being issued. The property included in the reversion is a part of the Santa Rosa Specific Plan that was approved in 1981, by Riverside County. The property is zoned Hillside Conservation (H-C) and consists of a 3.3 acre, steep knoll located at the toe of the Santa Rosa Mountains, about 1 /4 mile northwest of the Avenida Fernando and Avenida Obregon intersection. The request was transmitted to all responsible agencies and City departments for review and comment. Comments were received from IID, CVWD, and Desert Sands Unified School District. There were no significant concerns or comments expressed by these agencies (Attachment 3). The existing easements will remain in place. All other comments have been incorporated into the attached draft conditions of approval. The proposed conditions of approval for the reversion to acreage include the dedication of drainage easements to the homeowners' association for the adjacent Tract 25237, wind and water erosion control, the restoration of the natural hillsides if and when permanent buildings are constructed on the property, and the construction of an barrier wall on the downhill side of the driveway to reduce accidents. The request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on May 29, 1996. All property owners within a 500-foot radius of the tentative tract were mailed a copy of the public hearing notice as required. No negative comments have been received. Staff's review of the request for reversion to acreage did not result in a recommendation for denial. Findings for approval are included in the attached draft resolution. _0'uMOO_ e Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96 recommending to the City Council approval of the reversion to acreage for Tentative Tract 28335-R, subject to the revised Conditions of Approval as attached. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Large Map Exhibit (Planning Commission only) Prepared by: LESLIE J. MOURIQUAND, Associate Planner Submitted by: CHRISTINE DI IORIO, Planning Manager PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT 28335-R REVERSION TO ACREAGE TO RECONSOLIDATE TRACT 26251 AND PARCEL MERGER 93-298 IN A SINGLE PARCEL CASE NO. TT 28335-R WM. MURRAY & ASSOCIATES, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 11th day of June, 1996, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of William Murray & Associates, Inc., representing Robert R. and Mary Kay Taylor, to revert the land within Tract 26251 and Parcel Merger 93-298 to acreage through Tentative Tract 28335-R, generally located approximately 1 /4 mile northwest of the Avenida Fernando/Avenida Obregon intersection, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF SECTION 36, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 6 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta did adopt Specific Plan 121-E, Revised, as set forth in City Council Resolution 82-54, on October 5, 1981, and; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 20th day of September, 1988, adopt City Council Resolution 88-112, approving Amendment #1 to Specific Plan 121-E, Revised, and; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 21 st day of November, 1989, adopt City Council Resolution 89-129, approving Amendment #2 to Specific Plan 121-E, Revised, and; WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 2nd day of October, 1990, adopt City Council Resolution 90-74, approving Tentative Tract 26251, a subdivision within Specific Plan 121-E, Revised, and; WHEREAS, Parcel Merger 93-298 was approved by the Community Development Director, to merge the two numbered lots within Tract 26251 into one lot, and; WHEREAS, Tract 26251 had previously complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970", as amended (County of Riverside, Resolution 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance 5), in that the Community Development Director conducted an initial study, as required by the approval conditions for Specific Plan 121-E, Revised, as amended, and did determine that the tentative tract would not have a significant adverse impact on the environment identified in the environmental assessment, thus no additional environmental review is necessary for Tentative Tract 28335-R; 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 in accordance with Section 13.40.60 of the Subdivision Ordinance to justify recommendation for approval of said reversion to acreage request: 1. Dedications or offers of dedications to be vacated or abandoned by the reversion to acreage are unnecessary because the Tract configuration is no longer in existence. 2. There is only one owner of the property included in the reversion to acreage. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and current and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case. 2. That is does hereby confirm the conclusion of the Environmental Assessment 90-167 indicating that the proposed reversion to acreage will not result in any significant environmental impacts, and that a Negative Declaration was previously adopted; 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above described Tentative Tract Map 28335-R, 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 this 11 th day of June, 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 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 96- CONTDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 28335-R - REVISION TO ACREAGE JUNE 11, 1996 GENERAL 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. 2. Tentative Tract Map 28335-R shall comply with the requirements and standards of §§ 66410- 66499.58 of the California Government Code (the Subdivision Map Act) and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC) unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. PROPERTY RIGHTS 3. The applicant shall dedicate drainage easements Delta-1 and Delta-2, as depicted on Parcel Map 26251, to the homeowners' association for the adjacent Tract 25237. When the property mapped by any final map filed pursuant to Tentative Tract 28335-R is improved, the property owner(s) shall participate, on a per -lot basis, in the cost of maintenance of the drainage ditch that separates this property from Tract 25237. IMPROVEMENTS 4. Graded, undeveloped land shall be maintained to prevent dust and blowsand nuisances. The land shall be planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures approved by the Community Development and Public Works Departments. Prior to final inspection or occupancy of any permanent buildings on this property, the applicant shall: Treat vertical faces of disturbed areas of hillside cut and fill to produce a natural appearance or screen disturbed areas to mask the man-made grades, and Construct an improved driveway meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. A 28-inch high protective wall or barrier shall be constructed on the southerly or downhill side of the driveway to reduce run -off -the -road accidents. The southerly or downhill side of the wall shall be treated or screened to blend in with the surrounding, natural terrain. The treating and/or screening of vertical faces and the barrier wall shall meet the approval of the Community Development Department. CONAPRVI-001 ATTACHMENT 11 TT 28335-R VICINI T Y MA P SITS CASE MAP cA,w ?4mTT28335-R 'I (REVERSION TO ACREAGE SCALE : &.7 S, Formeriv Tract 26251 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA May 28, 1996 I. CALL TO ORDER 7:00 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:03 P.M. by Chairman Abels who asked Commissioner Gardner to lead the flag salute. II. ROLL CALL A. Chairman Abels requested the roll call: Present: Commissioners Anderson, Barrows, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. B. Commissioners Barrows/Gardner moved and seconded a motion to excuse Commissioner Butler. Unanimously approved. C. Staff present: Community Development Director Jerry Herman, City Attorney Dawn Honeywell, Planning Manager Christine di Iorio, Senior Engineer Steve Speer, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer. III. PUBLIC COMMENT: None IV. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. Specific Plan 89-014 (Amendment #2); a request of Washington Plaza Associates for certification of a Negative Declaration of an environmental impact and approval of an amendment to the specific plan to allow two additional businesses with drive-thru lanes at the One Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center. 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 stated they would like to modify two conditions. Condition #8 be changed to read "all trees shall be a minimum 24-inch box size or and 2Y inches in caliper", and Condition #2 be changed to read "the Design Review Board/Planning Commission". PC5-28 I Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels opened the public hearing. Mr. Rick Doolittle, Hall & Foreman Engineers, stated they had no objections to the Conditions as recommended. 3. There being no questions of the applicant and no further public comment, the public hearing was closed. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Anderson to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96-017 certifying a Negative Declaration of environmental impact. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Anderson, Barrows, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. 4. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Tyler/Anderson to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96-018 recommending to the City Council approval of a Negative Declaration of environmental impact and amendment of Specific Plan 89-014 (Amendment # 2) to allow two additional drive-thrus for a total of five, subject to Conditions. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Anderson, Barrows, Gardner, Newkirk, Tyler and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Butler. ABSTAIN: None. B. Conditional Use Permit 96-024 and Environmental Assessment 96-313; a request of KSL Recreation Corporation for certification of a Mitigated Negative Declaration of environmental impact, approval to expand the existing La Quinta Resort and Club Golf Course Maintenance Facility, and approval of an adjustment to deviate from the development standards of the SR Zone District to allow a six foot masonry wall along Avenida Carranza instead of a four -foot high wall. 1. Commissioners Anderson and Gardner excused themselves due to a possible conflict of interest and withdrew from the Council Chamber. 2. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. Staff asked that Conditions #19-24 be added to the Conditions of Approval, based on the discussions made by the Commissioners during the study session. 3. Commissioner Barrows asked if the conditions for landscaping on Calle Tampico were to provide landscaping all the way to Eisenhower Drive. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell explained the requirement was clarified in the conditions for the plot plan application. The new landscaping would not go all the way to Eisenhower Drive. PCs-28 2 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Abels opened the public hearing. Mr. Scott Dalecio, representing KSL Resort and Club, reviewed the purpose of their application. He questioned Condition #3, regarding the timing for the installation of improvements in association with parking; Condition #8 verification as to a definition of what heavy equipment is; they would like staff to explain Condition #15 regarding the acoustical device; Condition #17 needs to have the size of the gate clarified; Condition #18 clarification needs to be made as to whether the approval will be made by the Planning Commission or staff, and Condition #21 is already accomplished by their design. The plan they are proposing provides the immediate residents a more aesthetic view. They do not want to install planter pockets in the wall as the pockets will become a collector for trash and more of a maintenance problem. 5. Commissioner Tyler asked about the hours of operation and if they would be open every day. Mr. Dalecio stated they would have workers on all seven days. Commissioner Tyler suggested the motorized gate be kept open to allow the traffic to continue to move during the morning hours. Mr. Forrest Haag, landscape architect for the project, clarified the gate was not motorized, but a swinging gate. Commissioner Tyler asked if the piles of loose gravel would be relocated, and if so, where. Mr. Dalecio stated the Conditions of Approval designates the area where loose material is stored and defines how that will be accomplished. Mr. Virgil Robinson, Supervisor for the Maintenance Facility, answered questions regarding the operation of the facility. 6. Mr. Jack Hochanadel, 51-120 Carranza, stated most of his questions had been answered by the applicant. He was however, concerned about the large trucks, such as gravel, cement, etc., that continually travel down the street all day long. In addition, the retaining wall shown on the elevations, is two feet higher than their existing property. He suggested the wall be eight feet in height on the inside of the project and six feet on Avenida Carranza with a 20-foot setback from the Bike Path and landscaped. This would hide their equipment, dump trucks, gravel piles, and create another sound barrier. 7. Ms. Louise Miller, 51-040 Avenida Carranza, directly across the street from the subject wall, stated her concern that the six foot wall would be installed too close to the Bike Path. She stated the Path was eight feet wide and installing the wall at the edge of the path would cause safety problem. In addition, the large piles of sand and gravel at the north side of the maintenance yard are allowed to blow loose sand over the bike path causing an unsafe condition. The wall needs to extend to the north end of the PC5-28 3 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 maintenance yard. The gravel piles are a nuisance as neighborhood children are continually having rock -throwing contests. Additionally, the workers arriving in the morning are playing their music as loud as possible when arriving, plus the noise from starting up their equipment awakens them every morning. Could a condition be placed on the project to not allow noise before 6:00 A.M. 8. There being no further public discussion, Chairman Abels closed the public hearing. Commissioner Tyler stated that after seeing the site, he agreed that installing a wall around it would improve the site. He agreed that when the workers arrive they tend to usually play their music as loud as possible. He felt the Commission needed to clarify the size of the setback from the wall to the Bike Path. The Bike Path is eight feet wide of concrete with another 3-4 feet of dirt for a running path. This makes 12-feet from the curb. The setback from this point needs to be specifically spelled out. 9. Commissioner Newkirk stated he agreed with Commissioner Tyler. The proposal will improve the neighborhood. 10. Commissioner Barrows stated she concurred with the statements already made and her concern was with the setback from the Bike Path as this is one of the heaviest traveled areas of the path. If the applicant does not want to put the notches in the wall, would they consider setting the wall back? She also questioned the hours of use to accommodate the neighbors. 11. Chairman Abels stated he too agreed with the statements already made and asked staff to clarify the questions raised by the applicant regarding Conditions #3, #8, #15, #17, and #18 . Associate Planner Greg Trousdell briefly discussed why each of these conditions had been recommended. 12. Commissioner Barrows asked what the distance was between the Bike Path and the wall, and what were the problems with the alarm system. Staff stated we were unaware of the alarm system problem until they received the letter from the resident. 13. Chairman Abels stated his concern about the gravel piles and his concern that this be fixed, and why following the approval in 1985 had the conditions never been met. Staff should see that they are met now. 14. Commissioner Newkirk stated he agreed the wall should be straight but setback further from the Bike Path. Commissioner Tyler suggested a curvilinear wall would add dimension and additional space for the landscaping if the wall was straight. Commissioner Barrows suggested a PC5-28 4 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 minimum of a five foot setback, but would be better at 10 feet. Staff stated the setback would only affect the storage area. Discussion followed regarding the setback distances. 15. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated the Public Works Department would provide additional information regarding the distance of the wall to the front property line. 16. Commissioner Tyler asked if the City had any control over the hours of operation of the facility. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the City has no ordinance regarding the hours of operation, but this was a conditional use permit and the Planning Commission could place any conditions on the project it deemed necessary. 17. Chairman Abels recessed the hearing at 8:56 P.M. to give staff time to find the plans regarding the Bike Path. The hearing reconvened at 9:01 P.M. and Senior Engineer Steve Speer presented information stating the dimensions of the Bike Path. The wall would be eight feet from the Bike Path. 18. Mr. Scott Dalecio, KSL La Quinta Resort and Golf Club, stated they did not know what a parabolic device was as mentioned in Condition #15. They were sensitive to the concerns of the residents and their purpose was to contain all the nuisances within their perimeter wall. In reference to the wall and the setback to the Bike Path, their plans were to set the wall back 8 feet from the Bike Path. Regarding the truck traffic traveling over the streets, it would be easier if they could straighten out Calle Tampico to have direct access to the facility. The hours of operation had been addressed by the City Council when they were reviewing a potential noise ordinance for golf courses. Council, at that time, denied the ordinance as there was no consensus of opinion regarding the hours to regulate noise. The later the start time for maintenance workers meant the later the start time for the golfers, and this costs money and creates an inconvenience to the members. However, KSL in an effort to be cohesive with the neighbors, would continue to discipline their employees regarding the noise from their vehicles. 19. Commissioner Barrows asked Mr. Dalecio how he felt about having a curved wall. Mr. Dalecio stated they preferred a straight wall. 20. Commissioner Newkirk stated he felt a clarification should be made as to what a parabolic device was. Senior Engineer Steve Speer stated it was a sound deflecting mechanism, parabolic in shape. PC5-28 5 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 21. Commissioner Tyler stated his concern about requiring a device that appears to be of minimal assistance. 22. Chairman Abels suggested the applicant contact staff to determine what the device was and if it was need. 23. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Newkirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96-019 approving a Mitigated Declaration of environmental impact according to the findings contained in the resolution. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Newkirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Anderson, Butler, and Gardner. ABSTAIN: None. 24. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Newkirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96-020 approving Conditional Use Permit 96-024 to allow the expansion of an existing golf maintenance facility and to allow a six foot high wall which is higher than permitted by Chapter 9.42 of the Municipal Code, subject to the recommended conditions as amended: Condition #6 would include a wall with an 8-foot setback between the edge of the entire Bike Path and the wall, but elimination of the wording referring to the four foot deep and five foot wide insets on the wall along the outdoor equipment storage portion; adding to Condition #15, the applicant would work with staff to resolve concerns regarding noise which may include the installation of an acoustical device. Staff asked for clarification on Condition #5 regarding the landscaping. Commissioner Barrows stated the size requirement for the trees would be required without the insets. Condition # 16, add the additional wording, "if landscaping products and surface materials...". Finally, the addition of Conditions #19-24 as recommended by staff. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Newkirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Anderson, Butler, and Gardner. ABSTAIN: None. C. Tentative Tract 28340; a request of KSL Recreation Corporation for approval of the subdivision of 37.98 acres into 117 single family and ten common amenity lots. Commissioners Anderson and Gardner excused themselves due to a possible conflict of interest and withdrew from the Council Chamber. PC5-28 6 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 2. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 3. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels opened the public hearing. Mr. Chevis Hosea, Director of Real Estate for KSL Recreation Corporation, explained the application before the Commission. He requested modification of Conditions #7.a., that they not be required to change the reserve lots to dedicated easements; Condition #50, be amended allow them to pull building permits without complying with the specific plan; and Condition #52, apply only to the appllicable phase. 4. Commissioner Tyler asked if Mr. Hosea had a suggestion as to the wording of Condition #50. City Attorney Dawn Honeywell stated the Planning Commission cannot approve a Tentative Tract Map without meeting the specific plan requirements. The purpose of writing the condition this way was to give the applicant additional time. The Planning Commission does not have the authority to approve building permits that are not consistent with the specific plan. Mr. Hosea stated he hoped they would not be held up in their construction by requiring compliance with the specific plan. Community Development Director Jerry Herman stated they had been working with KSL regarding this problem and the proposed changes to the specific plan would be to the Planning Commission by the middle of July and to the City Council by August. Staff plans to continue working with KSL to solve this problem as rapidly as possible. 5. There being no further public comment, Chairman Abels closed the public hearing. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Newkirk to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96-021, recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 28340, with changes to Condition #52 that the applicant shall submit the recreational amenities for the applicable phase to be provided prior to issuance of a building permit; Condition #7.a., allows a reservation easement in lieu of a street dedication. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Newkirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Anderson, Butler, and Gardner. ABSTAIN: None. D. Tentative Tract 28341; a request of KSL Recreation Corporation for approval of a subdivision of 16.4 acres into 56 single family and four common lots. PC5-28 7 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 1. Commissioners Anderson and Gardner excused themselves due to a possible conflict of interest and withdrew from the Council Chamber. 2. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 3. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels opened the public hearing. Commissioner Tyler asked Mr. Hosea what they intended to build regarding the amenities. Mr. Hosea stated they were intending to build only one pool and spa. Discussion followed regarding the number of pools in the area and the issue of maintaining the pools. 4. There being no further discussion, Chairman Abels closed the public hearing. It was moved and seconded to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 96- 022 recommending to City Council approval of Tentative Tract 28341, subject to conditions as amended: Condition #52, only one pool and spa would be required. Staff clarified that the wording on the tract map exhibit referring to a "Vesting" tract was an error and should be deleted. ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Newkirk, Tyler, and Chairman Abels. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Anderson, Butler, and Gardner. ABSTAIN: None. Commissioners Anderson and Gardner rejoined the meeting. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS A. Continued - Sign Application 96-341; a request of Mr. Gerald Bogan for approval of a master sign program for the newly constructed Bogan Villas Commercial building. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. 2. There being no questions of staff, Chairman Abels asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. Gerry Bogan, 54-368 Inverness, stated he was still not in agreement with staff s recommendations. In particular, the size of the sign recommended would not be adequate. He was still concerned that no second story signs would be allowed on Calle Estado. He felt the tenants need to have a sign to identify their business. Each business has its own entrance and therefore needs its own sign. He felt strongly that signage was needed on the south side for the second floor businesses. Mr. Bogan stated that if he was unable to rent his building because signs would not be allowed on the south side, then he has a problem. PC5-28 8 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 Chairman Abels asked if Mr. Bogan had received the sign program example presented by one of the Commissioners. Mr. Bogan stated he appreciated the efforts that were made, but he would like to own and run his own building. 4. There being no questions of Mr. Bogan, Chairman Abels opened the matter to Commission discussion. 5. Commissioner Anderson stated he felt the same as he did at the prior meeting. He appreciated the importance of identifying the tenants in this building, and he felt the signs could be done on this building that are in keeping with the Village Specific Plan. He commended Mr. Bogan for developing the building and would like to see the tenants be successful, but he does not believe signs will bring them in. 6. Commissioner Barrows stated she agreed with Commissioner Anderson and did not want to set any precedent for the Village area. Commissioner Anderson stated he did not want to dictate signs or say that he had a better design for the buildings, but only wished to give an example of what could be done. 7. Commissioners Gardner and Newkirk stated they agreed with Commissioner Anderson. 8. Commissioner Tyler stated he understood that the first tenants of the building would be pedestrian traffic and the lower level signs would be visible to the walking public. The upstairs would be more professional tenants and would need building identification and directory sign stating the space identification number. He did agree with staff s recommendation and would agree with directional signage, and a building identification sign. 9. Community Development Director Jerry Herman clarified the developer has the option of having a directional signage; Community Development Director Jerry Herman questioned whether the Commission was requiring the directory sign to be mandatory? Commissioner Tyler stated he did not want it to be mandatory. 10. Chairman Abels stated he agreed with the header signage and directional signage. He did not agree that signs are needed on the south side for the upstairs tenants. If the application was denied, would they have to come back with a new plan. Staff clarified they have the option of coming back with a new plan or appealing to the City Council. Staff pointed out that they did not include all of Commissioner Anderson's recommendations in the Conditions of Approval. PC5-28 9 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 11. Commissioner Barrows stated that Antique business requested additional signage and asked if this was included in staff s recommmendation. Associate Planner Greg Trousdel stated yes and this was Condition #3.d. Planning Manager Christine di Iorio stated the condition would have to be clarified with the wording, "the description of the use instead of just the business identification would be allowed when an tenant has leased two or more spaces". Two signs would be allowed with a total square footage of 20. 12. Chairman Abels stated they did not want to appear as being anti -business, but the Commission had to follow what they felt was right for the City. 13.. Following lengthy discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Tyler to adopt Minute Motion 96-020 approving Sign Application 96-341, as conditioned and with the modification to Condition #3.0 to add "The business identification sign shall not exceed 18-inches in height and 10- feet in overall length. A maximum of 12 full size signs or the equivalent of 12 full size signs shall be allowed. For shared lease spaces, full size signs can be divided into two equally sized signs or tenant sign graphics can be shared on one full size sign." Condition #3.D. would be changed to read, "One business identification sign shall be permitted for each tenant space. Tenants with more than one lease space may have one building sign per lease space which may include a description of the use. Accessory under canopy signs along the Calle Estado arcade are also permitted per Subitem `F"'. The motion carried on a 5-1 vote with Commissioner Anderson voting no. 14. Mr. Bogan asked for clarification as to whether or not the Commission was dictating how many suites he would be allowed to have in the building. Commissioner Anderson clarified that the Commission was uncomfortable with giving a unlimited number of tenant signs, so they were trying to base the signs on the number of suites, according to the plans. Chairman Abels stated the Commission was not dictating how many suites the applicant could have: B. Street Vacation 96-029 ; a request of T.D. Desert Development for a determination of consistency with the General Plan to allow a street vacation. Senior Engineer Steve Speer presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Community Development Department. PC5-28 10 Planning Commission Meeting May 28, 1996 2. Commissioner Tyler asked about the emergency access at the northeast corner as it appeared to go through existing houses. Staff explained they were vacant lots. 3. There being no further questions, it was moved and seconded by Commissioner Tyler/Anderson to adopt Minute Motion 96-021 adopting the findings that Street Vacation 96-029 for the street right-of-way easements, are in compliance with the adopted Circulation Element of the La Quinta General Plan and that the City Council consider for inclusion in the vacation, those conditions outlined within Exhibit "A". Unanimously approved VI. CONSENT CALENDAR A. Chairman Abels asked if there were any corrections to the Minutes of May 14, 1996. Commissioner Anderson asked that Page 10, Item #14, the fourth sentence, be changed to read, "....ground floor tenants on the wood header on the south elevation." Commissioner Tyler asked that Page 3, Item 6 be changed to note that Mrs. Tyler spoke on her own behalf and in the second sentence, "that currently in the northern portion of La Quinta there are 46 Code violations of the current City codes of various natures. We have a total of 34 assorted Rvs, utility trailers, pop-up trailers, boats, camping trailers in front yards, driveways, and at our curbs." There being no further corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Tyler to approve the Minutes as amended. Unanimously approved. VII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS A. Commissioner Tyler reported on the City Council meeting of May 21, 1996. B. Chairman Abels opened discussion regarding the meeting dates of the Commission for August. Following discussion it was determined that the Planning Commission would go dark on August 27, 1996 and September 10, 1996. C. Department update - no report VIII. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Anderson to adjourn this meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting on June 11, 1996. This regular meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:55 P.M. Unanimously approved. PC5-28 11 r GUR.ALNICK & ASSOCIATES ATTORNEYS AT LAW WAYNE S. OURALNICKO ROSEAT J. GILLILAND, JR. PEGGY REDMON MICHAEL. 3. ROVER UNNOTE6 PROFHSSIONAL LAW CORPORATION 74.399 HIGHWAY 111. SUITE M PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 02200 TELEPHONE: (019) 040.1515 FACSIMILE: (610) 5611.30$3 June 11, 1996 IS,fW VIA PACSIMIL,E AND FIRK CLASS MAIL Dols. Christine Di lodo, CITY OF LA QUINTA P.O. Box 1504 La Qulnta, CA 92253 Planning Manager INLAND EMPIRE OFFICE 3536 Inland Empire Blvd. suite IT Ontarlo, CA 01764 (208) $41-2546 OF COUNSEL; SILLDORF, BURDMAN, DUIGNAN & EISENBERG Aitorn*y• at Law Re: AGENDA PUBLIC HEARING ITEM NO. 2 / -TENTATIVE TRACT 26251-R. REQUEST TO !REVERT FROM TRACT WITH TWO NUMBERED LOTS AND ONE LETTERED LOT TO ACREAGE Dear Ms. Di lorio: This office is general counsel for The Enclave Mountain Estates Association, the managing homeowners association for the subdivision in which the above -referenced property Is situated. I apologize for this late correspondence, but I was just given a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing and the Clty's Staff Report today, Since the Association's Board members have been out of the area and have not had sufficient time to review this matter, The Enclave Mountain Estates Association specifically requests a short continuance to 'the next Planning Commission meeting to evaluate the Impact of -this reversion at issue upon the subdivision, the release of improvement bonds, and the specific conditions of approval. We will work diligently with City Staff to address concerns of both the applicant and the Association, such as drainage, wind and water erosion, restoration of natural hillsides. We thank you in advance for yoUr consideration of the Association's concerns. Respectfully submitted, Wayn G ick Attorney he Enclave Mountain Estates Assoc:Won WQ/vi cc: Mr. Tom Hill 04-11y"I'l