Loading...
1991 07 09 PCWe"Ity, d/ ya 2"Oni(a 61fill''ITING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California July 9, 1991 7:00 P.M. CALL TO O R]C7E J;k — Flag Salute ELECTION OF OFFICERS DOLL CAL.ICA � � NOTE ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING Beginning Resolution No. 91-018 Beginning Minute Motion No. 91-018 PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Item ................ CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90-031, CHANGE OF ZONE 90-056, SPECIFIC PLAN 90-016 Applicant ........... Landmark Land Company Location ............ Generally bounded by 52nd Avenue on the south, Jefferson Street on the west, 50th Avenue on the north and the All American Canal on the east. Request ............. Request for approval of a 327 acres project, including golf course, residential and commercial uses, incorporating a 21 acre commercial site and 1208 residential units. Action .............. To be continued AGENDAI.8PC 1 2. Item ................ CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - SPECIFIC PLAN 90- 020, PARCEL MAP 26471, TENTATIVE TRACT 26472, TENTATIVE TRACT 26473 (EA 90-183) (VISTA SANTA ROSA) Applicant ........... Stuart Enterprises Limited (Craig Bryant) Location ............ West side of Madison Street between 52nd and 53rd Avenues and at the southeast corner of Madison Street and 52nd Avenue. Request ............. Approval of a Specific Plan to allow 925 total residential units in 7 master plan villages (or tracts) on 271+ acres, a Parcel Map creating 6 residential parcels (or villages) on 235+ acres, a Tentative Tract Map (#26472) creating 130 single family lots on 36+ acres, and a Tentative Tract Map (#26473) creating 116 single family lots on 35 acres. Action .............. Resolutions 91- , 91- , 91- , 91- 3 . Item ................ CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - TENTATIVE TRACT 26181 Applicant ........... Ray Troll Location ............ South side of Westward Ho Drive alignment +1400 feet west of Dune Palms Road Request ............. To subdivide 14 gross acres into 52 single family lots Action .............. To be continued 4. Item ................ PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-009 Applicant ........... Desert Baptist Church Location ............ Northeast corner of Adams Street and Miles Avenue Request ............. Proposed church with associated parking on a 4.21 acre site in the R-1-12,000/PD zone. Action .............. Resolution 91- 5. Item ................ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90-029, CHANGE OF ZONE 90-054, & SPECIFIC PLAN 90-015 Applicant ........... Landmark Land Company Location ............ Generally bounded by Airport Boulevard on the south, Madison Street on the west, 55th Avenue on the north, and Monroe Street on the east. Request ............. Request for approval of a 265 acre project, including golf course, and residential uses, incorporating 1060 residential units. Action .............. To be continued 6. Item ................ PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-010 Applicant ........... Michael & Glenda Bangerter Location ............ South side of Sagebrush Avenue extension east side of Date Palm Drive Request ............. Proposed Preschool/Day-Care Center Action .............. To be continued AGENDAI.8PC 2 PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for citizens to address the Planning Commission on matters relating to City planning and zoning which are not Agenda items. Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission should use the form provided. Please complete a form and submit the form to the Recording Secretary prior to the beginning of the meeting. Your name will be called at the appropriate time. When addressing the Planning Commission, please state your name and address. The proceedings of the Planning Commission meeting are recorded on tape and comments of each person shall be limited to three minutes. BUSINESS SESSION 1. Item ................ Applicant ........... Location ............ Request ............. Action .............. 2. Item ................ Applicant ........... Location ............ Request............. Action .............. CONSENT CALENDAR TRACT 23269 Williams Development Company La Quinta Highlands, Lots 31-72, 165 and 149, southwest corner of Adams Street and Fred Waring Drive. These lots are located on Sonesta Way, Villeta Drive, Arosa Way and La Palma Drive Review of architectural elevations for units to be constructed on 44 lots. Minute Motion 91- NEW CART STORAGE SCREEN WALL Von's Market Plaza La Quinta, southwest corner of Washington Street & Highway 111 Approval of construction of a cart storage screen wall Minute Motion 91- Approval Minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting held June 25, 1991. OTHER - None ADJOURNMENT AGENDAI.8PC 3 STUDY SESSION MONDAY, JULY 8, 1991 City Council Chambers DISCUSSION ONLY 4:00 P.M. 1. All Agenda items. ITEMS IDENTIFIED FOR FUTURE AGENDAS a. Height limits along Washington Street - Specific Plan Amendment b . Downtown Parking District - develop time line c . PGA West Specific Plan - review d . Commercial Noise Study - General Plan inclusion e. Guest houses, - draft regulations f . Satellite Dishes - Commercial & Residential zones AGENDAI.8PC 4 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: JULY 9, 1991 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90-031, CHANGE OF ZONE 90-056 & SPECIFIC PLAN 90-016 - LANDMARK LAND COMPANY The subject project and related applications were continued on June 25 to a public hearing at this evening's meeting. Staff is requesting that this project be continued to your next scheduled meeting of July 23, 1991. We have not yet received the Final EIR as of the date of this memo. The consultant may have this document available in time for distribution at your Monday study session or at the meeting. Staff will also be recommending a continuance of these items from the July 16, 1991, City Council meeting as well. MEMOWN.026/CS STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JULY 9, 1991 PROJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 90-020, PARCEL MAP 26471, TENTATIVE TRACT 26472, TENTATIVE TRACT 26473 (EA 90-183) (VISTA SANTA ROSA) APPLICANT: STUART ENTERPRISES LIMITED (CRAIG BRYANT) PLANNER / ENGINEER: THE KEITH COMPANIES REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW 925 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN 7 MASTER PLAN VILLAGES (OR TRACTS) ON 271+ ACRES, A PARCEL MAP CREATING 6 RESIDENTIAL PARCELS (OR VILLAGES) ON 235+ ACRES, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (#26472) CREATING 130 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 36+ ACRES, AND A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (#26473) CREATING 116 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 35 ACRES. LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF MADISON STREET BETWEEN 52ND AND 53RD AVENUES AND AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MADISON STREET AND 52ND AVENUE. PREVIOUS PLANNING COMMISSION REQUEST: This request was originally considered as a public hearing item at the meeting of June 25, 1991. The Planning Commission continued the hearing in order to allow the Applicant to review the Engineering Department conditions which were made available just prior to the hearing. The Applicant has reviewed the Engineering Department conditions. Those conditions are now attached to the applicable Planning Commission Resolutions. Staff has made minor changes to the conditions since the last meeting. Attached is the Planning Commission Staff report for June 25, 1991 which describes the proposal in detail. That description is still valid for this continued hearing. The Resolutions have been updated as needed. Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Staff report dated June 25, 1991. 2. Planning Commission Resolutions &CST. 004 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JUNE 25, 1991 PROJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 90-020, PARCEL MAP 26471, TENTATIVE TRACT 26472, TENTATIVE TRACT 26473 (EA 90-183) (VISTA SANTA ROSA) APPLICANT: STUART ENTERPRISES LIMITED (CRAIG BRYANT) PLANNER/ ENGINEER: THE KEITH COMPANIES REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A SPECIFIC PLAN TO ALLOW 925 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN 7 MASTER PLAN VILLAGES (OR TRACTS) ON 271+ ACRES, A PARCEL MAP CREATING 6 RESIDENTIAL PARCELS (OR VILLAGES) ON 235+ ACRES, A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP (#26472) CREATING 130 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 36+ ACRES, AND A TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 026473) CREATING 116 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS ON 35 ACRES. LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF MADISON STREET BETWEEN 52ND AND 53RD AVENUES AND AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MADISON STREET AND 52ND AVENUE. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 UNITS/ACRE) WEST OF MADISON STREET AND VERY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (0-2 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE) EAST OF MADISON STREET EXISTING ZONING: R-1 WEST OF MADISON STREET R-1-20,000 EAST OF MADISON STREET ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 90-183 HAS BEEN PREPARED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THESE APPLICATIONS PER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS. INITIAL STUDY INDICATED THAT NO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WILL OCCUR THAT CANNOT BE MITIGATED BY IMPOSITION OF MITIGATION MEASURES. THESE HAVE BEEN RECOMMENDED AS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL IN THE DRAFT RESOLUTIONS. THEREFORE, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT. PCST.002 1 SURROUNDING LAND USES & ZONING: NORTH: W-11 R-1 20,000/AGRICULTURAL LAND, VACANT LAND, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, & POLO FIELDS SOUTH: R-1 /AGRICULTURAL EAST: R-1 20,000 AND RIVERSIDE COUNTY/AGRICULTURAL WEST: R-1 / VACANT DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The property consists of approximately 283 gross acres of land which is essentially flat with some small dunes. The site generally slopes from north to south with a maximum change of approximately five feet in elevation. The C.V.W.D. Channel traverses the northwest corner of the site in a northeast to southwest direction. The site has in the past been utilized for agricultural uses but has been vacant for a number of years. Along the alignment of Madison Street near the eastern side of the property is a row of mature tamarisk trees. These trees will need to be removed in order to install Madison Street. Presently no power poles are located on or adjacent to the property. Presently 52nd and 53rd Avenues are installed as two lane roadways. Madison Street along the easterly part of the property is unimproved as noted above. The C . V . W . D . Channel along the northwest portion of the property is fully improved and chainlink fenced off. APPLICATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION: 1. Specific Plan 90-020: The application is to permit the development of the entire project site. The Ulan provides for the construction of up to 925 single family detached homes, developed around recreational and landscaping amenities situated around seven villages or tracts. As described by the applicant, the amenities includes a pedestrian and bicycle path system incorporated in the vehicular circulation system of the site as well as a centrally landscaped feature area. Each of the seven villages according to the applicant, is designed to be developed individually and to function as an individual neighborhood and would share the projects common architectural and landscaping themes. 2. Parcel Map 26471: The proposed parcel map would create six parcels on the property located west of Madison Street. Each of the parcels would become a village or tract as specified in the specific plan. These parcels would vary in size from 33.4 acres to 39.6 acres and contain between 116 and 147 lots. Presently the parcel map area consists of five parcels. The 36.4 acre village located at the southeast corner of 52nd Avenue and Madison Street is not a part of this parcel map as it is already existing as a separate parcel. PCST.002 2 3. Tentative Tract Map 26472: This tentative tract map is located at the southeast corner of 52nd Avenue and Madison Street and is designated Village #7 by the Applicant. This tract map consists of 130 single family lots on 36.4 net acres. 4. Tentative Tract Map 26473: This tentative tract map is located on the south side of 52nd Avenue in approximately the middle of the site. The subdivision is called Village #2 by the Applicant and consists of 116 single family lots on 35 acres. DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC PLAN 90-020: The Vista Santa Rose Specific Plan proposes seven villages with a maximum 925 residential dwelling units. Six of the villages would be located west of Madison Street and south of 52nd Avenue. These villages would contain a maximum 795 single family lots on 234.9 acres, resulting in a maximum overall density of 3.4 dwelling units per acre. These villages would have a mixture of lot sizes with the minimum lot size being 8,000 square feet. To the east of Madison Street and south of 52nd Avenue would be the last village which proposes 130 single family lots on 36.4 acres for a net density of 3.6 dwelling units per acre. Minimum lot size in this tract is 7,200 square feet. General Plan Consideration: Based on the existing General Plan the area west of Madison Street allows 2-4 units per acre while the area east of Madison Street allows 0-2 units per acre. Averaging this out at the maximum density the property which consists of 271.3 acres, would allow a maximum 1,013 units for an average overall density of 3.7 dwelling units per acre. The Applicant is proposing as part of the specific plan an averaging of the densities. Proposed east of Madison Street on 36.4 acres is 130 units while west of Madison on 234.9 acres 795 units are proposed. For the 271.3 acres and 925 dwelling units, an average density of 3.4 units per acre is proposed by the Applicant. This is 88 units less than the maximum permitted under the existing General Plan. This type of averaging of densities has been permitted for other specific plans of this nature. Landscaping and Open_ Space: The Applicant indicates that the landscaping and open space concept will provide a strong identifiable landscape theme which will act as a unifying force throughout the Vista Santa Rosa specific plan area. This will include the City required landscape setbacks adjacent to 52nd Avenue, 53rd Avenue, and Madison Street. Additionally, the two main parkway collector streets which run through the site west of Madison and provide access to the individual villages will be provided with a landscaped setback to provide this landscape theme. At each of the intersections of the main public streets with the project collectors west of Madison Street, there will be a landscaped project entry or theme area. Within each village area there will be a separate recreational and landscaping amenity area created. The Applicant does indicate that he would like to utilize the retention basins for private recreation as well. The common areas and landscaping within each village is anticipated to be maintained by individual homeowner associations. The landscaping adjacent to the main arterial roads and parkway collectors is proposed to be maintained by the City Lighting and Landscaping District. PCST.002 3 The Applicant indicates that the landscape concept for the specific plan will use native and drought tolerant plants with minimum turf areas. Architectural Character and Guidelines: The specific plan proposes that all of the villages of the specific plan will be architecturally compatible. The project wide architectural character as described by the Applicant is "desert" architecture and will contain features of traditional styles such as Territorial, Mission, Pueblo, and Southwest. Included in the specific plan text are examples of these proposed architectural styles. The development standards for the lots as proposed by the specific plan are equivalent or stricter than those required by the R-1 zoning standards. Circulation Plan: 52nd Avenue, Madison Street, and 53rd Avenue will be dedicated and improved as required by Municipal Code requirements. For the area west of Madison Street the Applicant proposes two parkway collector streets which will be public streets. One collector will curve from Madison Street to 53rd Avenue while the second would intersect the first collector and take access to 52nd Avenue. Villages 1. 6 will primarily utilize these collectors for access. Within each village :here will be a local private street system provided. As required by the Fire Marshal, there will be two or three vehicular access points to each village. Proposed Stormwater and Retention: The Applicant Intends to provide retention iJasins within each village area. The The indicates that these retention basins lavill also be utilized for recreational facilities for each individual village. Phasing and Implementation Plan: As previously noted, the Applicant has also submitted a tentative parcel map to create 6 village pads and two tract maps which would create two of the seven villages. The Applicant indicates that the construction of the public roads and landscaping improvements including Madison Street, 53rd and 54th Avenues, .and the parkway collectors, and all public water and sewer facility improvements would be constructed as part of a Mello -Roos District which would be phased and complement project buildout. If this Mello -Roos District is not implemented, it will be the responsibility of the developer to provide these improvements and facilities. The Applicant indicates that the villages are anticipated to be sold to merchant builders who will submit individual tentative tract maps for each village. These tract maps will conform to the standards of the specific plan. The Applicant indicates that buildout is anticipated to occur by 1996. The specific plan text is attached as part of this Staff report and describes in detail the proposed development of the property. DESCRIPTION OF PARCEL MAP 26471: As previously indicated this parcel map would create six parcels on the west side of Madison south of 52nd Avenue. These parcels would coincide with villages 1-6 as described in the Land Use Plan of the specific plan. The parcel sizes and unit numbers are as follows: PCST.002 4 Village #1 33.4 acres 128 units Village #2 35 acres 116 units Village #3 34.8 acres 133 units Village #4 34.2 acres 131 units Village #5 39.6 acres 147 units Village #6 36.5 acres 140 units Total 213.5 acres 795 units The last village which is village #7 is located on the east side of Madison Street and a separate parcel and is not included as part of this parcel map. Village #7 will consist of 36.4 acres and 130 units. This 130 units brings the total for the project to 925 units. As previously noted, the parkway collector streets which run through the parcel map will be public streets and dedicated to the City. The Applicant has indicated four parcels on the parcel map which would be dedicated as well sites to C . V . W . D . The location and number of these sites will be subject to C . V . W . D . approval. }DESCRIPTION OF TENTATIVE TRACT 26472 (Village 71: This tentative tract map at the southeast corner of Madison Street and 52nd Avenue, proposes 130 single family lots on 36.4 acres (3.6 units per acre) . Access to this property is indicated through an entry at the southerly point of the property along Madison Street and at the easterly point along 52nd Avenue. Both of these access points which are indicated as 60-feet wide and will be gated. It should be noted that each of these access points is designed so that 30-feet of it is off -site on the adjacent property. This appears to be so that the Madison Street access aligns across from the parkway collector road which runs through villages 1-6. Lot sizes are as follows: Minimum lot size - 7,200 square feet Maximum lot size - 14,143 square feet Average lot size - 8,641 square feet DESCRIPTION OF TENTATIVE TRACT 26473 (Village #2) : This tract consists of 116 units on 35 acres (3.3 dwelling units per acre) . This village which is adjacent to the south side of 52nd Avenue west of Madison Street will takes its primary access from the new parkway collector road along the westerly side of the property. Immediately to the south of this entry is a retention basin which is proposed to also function for recreational uses. The second access for this tract is proposed to be an emergency access located on the east side of this retention basis area. The tract is designed with a ma:�n loop around the perimeter and intersecting streets and cul-de-sacs within the center loop road. These interior streets are proposed to be private with the entry gated. Because of the private nature of the village, no vehicular access is proposed to village #3 to the east. PCST.002 5 The lot sizes for this tract are as follows: Minimum lot size - Maximum lot size - Average lot size - ANALYSIS: Specific Plan 90-020: 9,000 square feet 13,465 square feet 10,343 square feet 1. Linder the existing General Plan for the project area, a total of 1,013 dwelling units at an average density of 3.7 dwelling units per acre would be permitted. Under the proposed specific plan, 925 units at a average density of 3.4 dwelling units per acre is proposed. 2. For the six villages west of Madison Street, the proposed minimum lot size is 8,000 square feet. 3. Village #7 on the east side of Madison Street is proposed to have lot sizes of a minimum of 7,200 square feet. These lots would be located near the middle of the tract with larger 8,000 square foot (minimum) lots surrounding along the east and south sides rf the tract. 4. 52nd Avenue and Madison Street are designated as Primary Arterials in the General Plan. As such, they are considered secondary street image corridors. Along streets of this nature, the requirement has been to require that 75% of the dwelling units be single story in height with the remaining 25% allowed to be two story. 5. It should be noted that if the Mello -Roos District is not formed, it will be the responsibility of the Applicant( Developer to provide all required public improvements and landscaping. 6. The specific plans architectural guidelines indicates one of the themes being Southwest Traditional. This style shows a metal roof with standing seams. This may or may not be appropriate for the desert and City. 7. The Fire Department requires a number of access points dependent upon the number of units in the subdivision. In most of these subdivisions this requires two public access points. However, there may be some situations where three points of access are required. The Fire Department has indicated that these access points should not be emergency only. 8. Due to the length of frontage along 52nd Avenue, Madison Street, and 53rd Avenue, Staff feels that a perimeter wall along these streets should be identical regardless of who builds the tract. Therefore, the first wall constructed along these street will determine the design, color, and material for all of the walls. PCST.002 6 9. The Applicant indicates that the retention areas will be used for recreational activities. Staff feels that this is acceptable provided the depth is not excessive and slopes not too deep. The Applicant will still be required to provide in -lieu park fees as required by City Ordinance. Parcel Map 26471: 1. The proposed parcel map creates six of the seven villages described in the specific plan. Due to t'J1e number of units in the villages, two or three vehicular access points will be required. To the extent possible, it is desirable to provide vehicular access points on the interior parkway collector roads, rather than the perimeter streets surrounding the site. 2. The parcel maps indicates locations for future CVWD well sites. The location and configuration of these well sites will be subject to CVWD approval. 3. Except for parcel 2 which has a tentative tract map (TT 26473) proposed on it, the remaining parcels will need to have subdivision maps submitted and approved. Tentative Tract 26742 (southeast corner of Madison Street and 52nd Avenue): 1. This tract has been designed so that larger 8, 000 square foot minimum lots are placed along the south and easterly boundary buffering the smaller lots (minimum 7,200 square feet). 2. The vehicular entries off Madison Street and 52nd Avenue are shown partially on the adjacent properties. In order to do this, the owner will have to obtain an easement or purchase the property. If this cannot be done it may be necessary to relocate these entries on the subject properties. With regards to the Madison Street entry, as it is designed, it aligns with the main parkway road leading into the six villages. It is desirable to maintain this alignment and therefore, it may be necessary to slightly realign the roadway on the west side of Madison Street if this easterly access must be relocated slightly to the north. Tentative Tract 26473 (south side of 52nd Avenue, west of Madison Street 1. As previously indicated, the Fire Marshal has requested that all accesses be regular access points. As such, the 24-foot wide emergency access to street "A" would have to be modified. The Fire Marshal has also indicated that he would prefer that access to be further from the main access than shown. A possible location for this second access would be to 52nd Avenue at the northeast corner of the site. This driveway could align with the existing on the north side of 52nd Avenue to Tract 24507 which is a custom single family subdivision. If a median break is not permitted alignment would not be necessary. 2. Due to the private nature of the streets within the subdivision, Staff believes it is not necessary to provide the cross access between the subdivision and land to the east in Village #3. PCST.002 7 3. In this subdivision, the Applicant is again indicating that the retention basin at the southerly end of the subdivision would also be used for recreational uses. The use of this property for recreational purposes will be subject to City approval. The in -lieu park fees will need to be paid since these recreational areas do not function exclusively for that purpose. 4. In order to provide compatibility, safety, and privacy, a six foot perimeter block wall should be provided around the project boundaries. The General Plan requires a noise study which in turn would require the block wall along Madison Street and 52nd Avenue. FINDINGS: Findings necessary to recommend approval of these applications can be made and are contained in the attached Planning Commission Resolutions. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission adopt Resolutions 91 --- approving Parcel Map 26471 subject to the attached conditions, Resolutions 91-__, 91- , 91- , recommending to the City Council concurrence with the approval of a Negative Declaration of an Environmental Impact and approval of Specific Plan 90- 020, Tentative Tract 26472, and Tentative Tract 26473 respectively, subject to the attached conditions. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Specific Plan text and maps 3. Initial Study 4. Comments from Ci ty Departments and other agencies 5. Plan exhibits for Parcel Map 26471, TT 26472, and TT 26473 6. Draft Planning Commission Resolutions PCST.002 8 LOCATION MAP CASE MAP CASE Nm SP 90-020 PM 26471 TT 26472 TT 26473 SCALE: NTS r�oncr kF ••° -0 2 4 �Qa WW� V pc � Nilb, ~ Y J a � u � a w t � i ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 90-183 VISTA SANTA ROSA SPECIFIC PLAN 90-020 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 26471 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 26472 TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 26473 III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION 1. Earth: la. The project site is relatively flat, and therefore the amount of grading would be minimal with the only substantial grading expected to be the necessary over excavation for project roadways. lb. The project would include development of the site with roads and single family homes resulting in overcovering and compaction of the soils on - site. However, this compaction and overcovering represents only a portion of land withn the project and an insignificant amount of land within the site vicinity. lc. Grading of the site would require slight changes in the site topography to accommodate positive drainage and water retention on -site. ld. The project as proposed would not affect any unique geologic or physical feature. le. A short term increase in the erodibility of the soil onsite could occur during construction activities. Planting of ground cover and vegetation following construction of residences could reduce soil erosion onsite to levels below that of existing conditions. lf. The project would not effect siltation, deposition or erosion of any water body due to its limited scale and the retention of all on site water. Ig. Site is presently vacant and is within area known for seismic activity. Construction of residences could result in an increase in some hazards to people or property. A Geotechnical Engineering Report prepared by Buena Engineering, Inc . , November 21, 1990, investigated the geologic and seismic hazards of the site and is submitted with this environmental checklist. According to the report, the primary seismic hazard would be severe ground shaking from earthquakes originating on faults located a minimum of 7 miles from the site. Liquefaction hazards were analyzed and were determined to be negligible due to the depth of groundwater. Further information regarding this topic and recommended mitigation measures can be obtained by reviewing the accompanying Geotechnical Engineering Report. ENVASS.004 2. AIR The Air Quality Technical Study prepared for this project by Endo Engineering on November, 1990, accompanies this document. The Technical Study should be consulted for further details in the area of Air Quality. 2a. The Air Quality Technical Study indicated that short term impacts to ambient air quality could result from on -site construction activities, as well as from fugitive dust emissions and suggests mitigation which would reduce these impacts. The potential for long term impacts which could result from implementation of the project were also studied and mitigation to reduce these recommended. The report concludes (pg. 5-9) that although the proposed project could have an incremental adverse impact on ambient air quality in the region, it would be on the order of an increase of less than one one -hundredth (.01) of a percent of the basin -wide daily emissions of CO, ROG and NOX, and particles. Furthermore, the report indicated (pg. 5-10) that the State and Federal 1-hour and 8- hour Carbon Monoxide Standards will not be exceeded following project completion. And finally, the report concludes (pg. 5-12) that the project is consistent with the AQMP. 2b. Proposed project would contain residential land uses only, which are not normally associated with objectionable odors. 2c. Scale of proposed project, 282 acres and proposed uses would make it unlikely the project would effect local or regional climate, moisture, or air movement. 3. WATER: 3a. It is unlikely that the project would have any significant impacts on marine or fresh water due to the distances between these waters and the project site as well as the size of the project. 3.b. The project proposal, if approved, would include the development of the site with residential uses and associated roadways which would affect absorption rates by creating impervious surfaces, and could affect drainage patterns and the amount of surface runoff. However, all incrementally increased storm water will be retained on -site, and the project design calls for a series of retention areas to allow percolation of this on -site water. Additionally, only a maximum of 40% of any residential lot will be permitted to be used for the residence. Furthermore, the site design includes landscaping along all roadways which would provide additional areas for percolation of on -site waters. 3c. The project site is not within any known floodplain and would therefore not affect the flow of flood waters. ENVASS.004 2 3d . The project would not have a substantial effect on the amount of surface water in any water body, although water from the Coachella Canal would be used for irrigation purposes, landscaping will be of a low water type and large areas of turf will be discouraged. 3e. The project as proposed would retain all incrementally increased storm water on -site and would not discharge such water into surface waters off -site. 3f. Incremental increase in storm water (surface) runoff will not have a net difference in storm waters. This surface water will not increase the rate of flow of groundwater. This project, on the contrary, shall add to the regional consumption use of groundwaters as well as groundwater overdraft. 3g. The project, when constructed, would contain up to 925 dwelling units with a water peak demand of approximately 3,774 gallons per day per unit (2.8 persons per unit) . Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) has indicated that insufficient water facilities exist to serve this project. The developer will be required to provide four well sites, two of which shall be fully operational wells. These well site locations shall be approved by CVWD prior to construction. The project design includes provisions for the use of nonpotable water for irrigation of common landscaping areas, low water use landscaping materials, minimizing turf areas and installation of water conservation appliances in all dwelling units. 3h. CVWD is the local agency responsible for water delivery. According to CVWD studies, there is available water resources for this project. The local aquifer is in a state of overdraft, however, due to the immense size of this aquifer and groundwater recharge practices, adequate water supplies should last well into the future. Water distribution facilities for this project shall be constructed at the developers expense. 31. Proposed project would not result in exposure of people or property to water related physical hazards. 4. PLANT LIFE: 4a. Project site supports sparse scrub vegetation and a tamarisk wind break. Development of the site could increase local plant diversity by introducing native ornamental plants as part of the site landscaping. 4b . No rare, unique or endangered plant areas known to occur in the project area. 4c. Development of the site could be expected to introduce common landscaping species and ornamental plants. However, landscaping would focus on use of native and drought tolerant species. SMASS.004 3 5. 6. 4d . The project site is not presently in agricultural production and has not been in agricultural production for a number of years. The site was recently annexed to the City and zoned R-1 and R-1 20,000. Residential land uses are also designated by the sites General Plan designations of LD and VLD respectively. In addition, portions of the site were removed from Agricultural Preserve status as of August 1990. ANIMAL LIFE: 5a. Development of project site could change the diversity of species due to the change in vegetation on -site with the introduction of landscape materials. However, this change may not reduce the diversity, as new types of habitat would be created. 5b . No threatened or endangered species of animals are known to occur in the site vicinity, nor would any be expected to occur on the site. However, the site may be the habitat for the Flat -Tailed Horned Lizard, a species which we understand will soon be designated as threatened. 5c. No new species other than household pets would be introduced as a result of the proposed project. 5d. As noted in 5b. above, if the Flat -Tailed Horned Lizard exists on the site, its habitat will be eliminated with the construction. NOISE: 6a. A Noise Analysis for the proposed project was conducted in November of 1990, by Endo Engineering which examines potential noise impacts. The analysis accompanies this document and should be consulted for additional information. The report concluded that short term impacts from construction noise would be negligible and can be satisfactorily mitigated. Potential long term noise impacts to site residents could result from vehicular traffic on 52nd and 53rd Avenues and Madison Street, when these roadways are fully constructed to their ultimate widths and are carrying their design capacity of vehicles. The report recommends a number of mitigation measures, including a noise wall or berm and barrier combination which would provide adequate noise attenuation along 52nd Avenue and Madison Street. 6b. The Noise Analysis examined the potential impacts and recommended mitigation measures which would provide adequate noise attenuation within the site. LIGHT AND GLARE: The project is presently vacant so development as proposed would introduce new light and glare. This impact would be insignificant if appropriate lighting is utilized. ENVASS.004 4 8. LAND USE: The proposed project is consistent with the City General Plan for the site and would therefore not result in a substantial alteration of the planned or present use of the site. The site is presently vacant and is not presently under agricultural cultivation and has been removed from Agricultural Preserve status. The site was recently annexed to the City General Plan designations of LD and VLD, both residential designations. Also, the site was zoned R-1 and R-1 20,000. 9. NATURAL RESOURCES: 9a. Residential development of the site could result in an increase in the rate of use of fossil fuels for electrical production, water heating, air conditioning and automobiles. 9b. The scale of the project would preclude substantial impacts to renewable resources. 10. RISK OF UPSET: Residential development is generally not considered to result in an increase in the risk of upset. 11. POPULATION: The proposed project, upon full development, would result in a population of approximately 2,590 persons (2.8 du/925 units) in a portion of the City which is presently undeveloped. However, the project is consistent with the General Plan density for the site and the number of units proposed for the site is less than the maximum permitted by the General Plan designations. Project - 925 dwelling units, General Plan - 1,013 dwelling units. 12. HOUSING: The proposed project would result in additional housing units added to the stock of the City of La Quinta. The project concept provides for a mix of housing types and lot sites which could provide for a mix of price ranges. 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION: A Traffic Analysis was conducted by Endo Engineering in November, 1990, and accompanies this document and should be consulted for additional information and recommended mitigation measures in these categories. 13a. The Traffic Analysis indicated that the project could result in up to 880 peak p . m. trip hours and 8,270 ADTS . However, these additional trips were not considered to be significant because all intersections analyzed in the traffic study will continue to provide "acceptable levels of service" when the project is complete (pg 3-9) and "traffic signal warrants" for six intersections will be met with or without the project in 1995 (pg. 3-14) . Furthermore, the report concluded that two of the ENVASS.004 intersections analyzed will require mitigation to operate at acceptable levels of service in the year 2010 as a result of the project traffic (pg. 3-14) . The recommended mitigation includes improvements to 52nd and 53rd Avenues and Madison Street adjacent to the project site. 13b . The proposed project may result in a need for additional parking in some commercial locations within the City. 13c. The traffic study conducted for the project indicated that no substantial impacts would be associated with the project. 13d. The project could result in the addition of up to 8,270 ADTs (following buildout) to the area circulation system. These trips would be initiated and terminated at the presently vacant project site and would result in a change in the pattern of circulation. However, the traffic study indicated this result would be insignificant. 13e. No impacts in this category are associated with this residential development. 13f . The proposed project includes provisions for bicycle lanes within the right-of-way of the project parkway and provisions for pedestrian paths throughout the site. Pedestrian circulation is separated from vehicular traffic by landscaping and sidewalks. 14. PUBLIC SERVICES: 14a. The City of La Quinta contracts for fire protection services with Riverside County. The introduction of residential structures on this existing vacant land would increase the number response demands of the fire agency. All construction will be required to meet applicable fire safety codes including fire hydrant locations, and sufficient water pressures will be available at the site. The density of the proposed project is consistent with the City General Plan and the resulting increase in response requests will necessitate need for additional fire equipment, personnel and/or a fire station. 14b. The City of La Quinta contracts for police protection services with Riverside County Sheriff Department. The introduction of a residential population could result in an increase in the demand for police services. However, because the density of the proposed project is consistent with the City General Plan for this area, the potential increase in service demand is accounted for in the City plan for police services discussed in the General Plan. 14c. The site is within the boundaries of the Coachella Valley School District which has been determined to be in an over -crowding situation. In response and as mitigation of this situation, the School District has adopted a $1.58 per square foot fee which will be paid to the School District at the time of construction of the units. ENVASS.004 6 14d. The proposed project includes provisions for on -site recreational amenities which would accommodate the recreational needs of the project residents. Additionally, the developer will pay an in -lieu park fee for recreational facilities. 14e. The proposed project would result in the half width (plus) construction of 52nd and 53rd Avenues and Madison Street adjacent to the site in accordance with the City General Plan Circulation Element, and these streets will be maintained by the City. The project loop parkway will be offered for dedication to the City and would be maintained as a City Street. Local streets within the project are proposed to be private streets maintained by homeowners associations). 14f . The proposed project is consistent with the City General Plan and would not result in significant impacts to other City services. Further, revenues generated by the construction of these residences, increased property taxes, and increased sales taxes generated by the residents in the City, could be used by the City to reduce the potential impacts. 15. ENERGY: 15a. Project as proposed would not result in use of substantial amounts of energy or fuel. 15b . Project as proposed would not result in a substantial increase in demand for energy. 16. UTILITIES: 16a. Backbone gas facilities exist in the project vicinity and are adequate to serve the site, but service lines would need to be installed as part of project. 16b . Backbone telephone systems existing in the project vicinity would be adequate to serve the site. 16c . Water mains exist in proximity to the project site and would need to be extended to the site as well as through the site. These will be provided by the developer at no cost to the CVWD. At this time, the water purveyor, CVWD, has indicated that water supplies are available to serve the site. 'These supplies however, must be tapped into and distributed with a system of wells and pipelines. These wells and pipelines will be constructed at the developers expense and to CVWD specifications. 16d. There are existing irrigation distribution and agricultural tile drainage collection systems in this area. It is important that these facilities be identified and reviewed for their compatibility with the proposed development. Relocation or abandonment of such facilities and relinquishment of any right-of-way shall be considered by the CVWD on a case by case basis. ENVASS.004 16e . City policy requires that incremental increases in storm water to be retained on -site, and this would be accomplished as part of project design. 16f . Development of project site could result in additional solid waste volume; however, project residents would be required to participate in any curbside recycling programs initiated by the City to reduce solid waste. 17. HUMAN HEALTH: 17a. Residential development would not typically result in human health problems. 17b . Residential development would generally not be considered to expose people to health hazards. 18. AESTHETICS: Project site is on the Valley floor and would not create an offensive site obstruct a scenic view or vista. 52nd and Madison Street are designated as Secondary Street Image Corridors. 19. RECREATION: Project as proposed would provide recreational opportunities for residents on - site and would not increase demands for City facilities. 20. ARCHAEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL: An Archaeological Report was prepared for the project site by Macko Archaeological during November, 1990, and accompanies this document. The report indicates that no significant cultural resources were found within the pi oject area as a result of the surface survey, although four isolated archaeological occurrences of a minor nature were recorded. The report recommends that a qualified archaeological monitor be present during rough grading to ensure that no resources are impacted during excavation. 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANTS: 21a. Due to proposed mitigation measures, the project will not have a significant adverse impact on fish or wildlife species, plant species, or major periods of California pre -history. 21b. The project as proposed will not have a short term disadvantage over long term environmental goals. 21c. The project will not have cumulative adverse impacts on the environment which would be considered adverse. ENVASS.004 8 21d. The project as proposed will not have adverse environmental impacts on human being. MITIGATION MEASURES For mitigation measures, see Resolutions of Approval for Specific Plan 90-020, Parcel Map 26471, Tentative Tract 26472, and Tentative Tract 26473. ENVAss.004 9 PaImerC&W'I*sion --—,' Date: - J -� Cat c•�.r,,�., GA- � :� Attention: —14tal1,A-,l Regarding: _ -L ,ar12 C11Y OF to (� NTA 9LAxS1NG & DV4M Palmer has existing plant at this location to LAserve this project. Palmer will serve this project, but a line LA extension will be needed, the extent of which will be determined at the time we receive plans. Existing plant is � � �/..�%�'•, � away. A major RIline extension will be necessary to serve this project. EJOut of our area, will be unable to serve project. Sincerely, Clara Salisbury Account Executive CLS:blt Ctyrsp 41-725 Cook Street, Sox 368 Telephone: (619) 340-1312 Palmer CableVision Channel 10 Palm Desert, CA 92261 Telecopier: (619) 340.2384 Services of Palmer Commu1 nication, li MEMBER AGENCIES Cathedral City Coachella Desert Hot Springs Indian Wells Indio La Quinta Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Riverside County Mr. Star. Sawa Principle Planner City of La Quinta 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Specific Plan 90-020 TT 26473 Dear Mr. Sawa: IAA! 1 8 1991 t.,11Y ur uA t UINTA 'I ANNINC R DEVELGN NT DEPT. December 28, 1990 Thank you for allowing SunLine to review the above referenced plans. SunLine Transit Agency does not currently operate service in this area. However, prcjects of this size and nature generate a need for increased transit services. Therefore, we ask the City's assistance in requesting that the developer include in these plans, transit amenities. We suggest that the developer work with SunLine to design a mutually acceptable stop. SunLine Transit Agency has suggested standards for passenger shelters and for bus turnouts. I hope you will assist SunLine considerations are included in assistance, please feel free to Yoyrs very truly, Debra Astin Director of Planning SunLine Transit Agency DA/dc in insuring that transit this project. If we can be of give us a call. 32.505 Harry Oliver Trail . Thousand Palms, CA 92276 • (619) 343-3456 • FAX (619) 343-3845 A Public Agency gAT ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PURL C AGENCY COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (619) 398,2651 DIRECTORS OFFICERS DIRECT CODEKAS, PRESIDENT THOMAS E LEVY. GENERAL MANAGER CH EF ENGINEER RAYMOND R RUMMONDS, VICE PRIES DENT HERNARDINE SU�Gh SECRETARY OWEN M JOHN W MtFADDEN May 22, 1991 REDWINSE AND SH RR ATTORNEYS DOROTHY M NICHOLS THEODORE J FISH File: 0126.1 Stan Sawa, Principle Planner City of La quinta MAY 2 8 19, Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 CITY Ur LA c4UINTA N ANNING R 0EVELO CRC I)EPT Dear Mr. Sawa: Subject: Vista Santa Rosa, Specific Plan 90-020, Parcel Mav 26471, Tentative Tracts 26472 and 26473 This letter is in response to `Jista Santa Rosa, specific plan 90-020, which we received on April 29. The district appreciates the opportunity to comment on this document. Our comments are addressed in .Attachment A, enclosed. ]if you have any questions or require additional information please contact Joe Cook, planning engineer, extention 292. JEC:lg/e5 Enclosure Was Yours very truly, (}.t i�� �J( � 14., Tom Levy General Manager -Chief Engineer TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY ATTACHMENT A 1. Page 5, Land Use Plan. Well site locations will be verified with the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) to ensure proper well field placement. Well site locations on this plan should only be regarded as preliminary until confirmed with CVWD. 2. Page 15, water and sewer facilities, first paragraph to read: "This 18-inch line will be extended to Avenue 52 in Madison Street, west along Avenue 52 to the Coachella Canal and west along the site frontage in Avenue 53. Two fully operational wells shall also be constructed at developer's expense. This water will be used primarily for domestic purposes. Additionally, it is the intent of the specific plan that landscaping be of native and low water use varieties and that water consuming appliances (washers, toilets, sinks, etc.) be selected according to current codes and regulations addressing water conservation." 3. Page 16, Proposed Water and Sewer Systems, plan to be modified as follows: The 18-inch water pipeline east of Madison Street shall be identified as existing. A proposed 18-inch water pipeline shall be shown in Avenue 53 along the southern frontage of the property. 4. Page 3, Discussion of Env:'�ronmental Assessment, item 3f to be revised according to the following statement: "Incremental increase in stormwater (surface) runoff will not have a net difference in stormwaters. This surface water will not increase the rate of flow of groundwater. This project, on the contrary, shall add to the regional consumptive use of groundwaters as well as groundwater overdraft." 5. Page 3, Discussion of Environmental Assessment, item 3g to read: "The project, when constructed, would contain up to 925 dwelling units with a water peak demand of approximately 3,774 gallons per day per unit (2.8 persons per unit). CVWD has indicated that insufficient water facilities exist to serve this project. The developer will be required to provide four well sites, two of which shall be fully operational wells. These well site locations shall be approved by CVWD prior to construction. The project design includes provisions for the use of nonpotable water for irrigation of common landscaping areas, low water use landscaping materials, minimizing turf areas and installation of water conservation appliances in all dwelling units." 6. Page 3, Discussion of Environmental Assessment, item 3h to read: "CVWD is the local agency responsible for water delivery. According to CVWD studies, there is available water resources for this project. The local aquifer is in a state of overdraft, however, due to the immense size of this aquifer and groundwater recharge practices, adequate water supplies should last well into the future. Water distribution facilities for this project shall be constructed at the developer's expense." 7. Page 8, Discussion of Environmental Assessment, item 16c to read: "Water mains exist in proximity to the project site and would need to be extended to the site as well as through the site. 'These will be provided by the developer at no cost to the CVWD. At this time, the water purveyor, CVWD, has indicated that water supplies are available to serve the site. These supplies however, must be tapped into and distributed with a system of wells and pipelines. These wells and pipelines will be constructed at the developers expense and to CI'WD specifications. There are existing irrigation distribution and agricultural tile drainage collection systems in this area. it is important that these facilities be identified and reviewed for their compatibility with the proposed development. Relocation or abandonment of such facilities and relinquishment of any right-of-way shall be considered by the CVWD on a case by case basis." 6 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA gaS COMPANY 1981 LUGONIA AVENUE • REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA MAILING ADDRESS. BOX 3003 REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373 9982 January 8, 1991 City of La Quinta - Development Review Committee 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, Ca 92253 ATTENTION: Stan Sawa RE: Specific Plan#90-020,PM*26471,TTM*26472,TTM*26473 Thank you for inquiring about the availability of natural gas service for you project. We are pleased to inform you that Southern California Cas Company ha facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service t the project could be provided from a 6" main in Jefferson Blvd. at Ave. 52 withou any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordanc with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Publi Utilities Commission at the time contractural arrangements are made. You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a contractura commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an informational service The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is base upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a publi utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of th California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions o federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action which affect gas supply or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will b provided in accordance with revised conditions. Typical demand use for: a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Yearly Single Family 799 therms/year dwelling unit Multi -Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit Multi -Family 5 or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units served Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any particul home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of energy. b. Commercial Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and equipment used, a typical demand figure i.s not available for this type of construction. Calculations would need SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GAS COMPANY To insure the existing facilities are adequate to accommodate the new development, an engineering study will be required. Detailed information including tract maps and plot plans must be submitted to the Gas Company Builder Services Representa- tive, 1-800-624-2497, six months prior to the actual construction of the natural gas pipeline. We have developed several programs which are available, upon request, to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. If you desire further information on any of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Builder Services Department, p.0. Box 3003, Redlands, CA 92373-0306. Sincerely, /,�_ � Z_ Kevin B. Flum Technical Supervisor KBF:blh cc: Environ Affairs - ML209B PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND .APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 90-020 CASE NO. SP 90-020 - STUART ENTERPRISES, LTD. (CRAIG BRYANT) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta did on the 25th day of June, 1991, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and continued Public Hearing on the 9th of July, 1991, to consider the request of Stuart Enterprises, Ltd. (Craig Bryant), for approval of a Specific Plan to allow 925 total residential units in 7 master planned villages (or tracts) on 271+acres in the R-1 and R-1 20,000 zones; a Parcel Map creating 6 residential parcels (or villages) on 235+ acres; a Tentative Tract (26472) creating 130 single family lots on 36+ acres; a Tentative Tract (26473) creating 116 single family lots on 35 acres on the west side of Madison Street between 52nd and 53rd Avenues and at the southeast corner of Madison Street and 52nd Avenue, more particularly described as: PORTIONS OF 1. SECTION 10, T6S, R7E, S . B . B . M. 2. SECTION 9, T6S, R7E, S . B . B . M. WHEREAS, said Specific Plan request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resolution 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5) , in that the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has determined that, although the project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment, the mitigation measures incorporated into the Conditions of Approval will mitigate those project impacts to levels of insignificance; 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 to justify recommendation for approval of said Specific Plan: 1. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The Specific Plan is compatible with the existing and anticipated area development. 3. The project will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; R2ESOPC. 023 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 90- 183, indicating that the proposed Specific Plan will not result in any significant environmental impacts that cannot be mitigated by the recommended Conditions cf Approval, and therefore a Negative Declaration is recommended; 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above described Specific Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the Conditions of Approval labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 9th day of July, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.023 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SPECIFIC PLAN 90-020 JULY 9, 1991 * Mitigation measures for Environmental Assessment 90-183 PLANNING DEPARTMENT: 1. The development shall comply with Exhibit 1, the Specific Plan document for Specific Plan 90-020 and the following conditions, which shall take precedence in the event of any conflict with the provisions of the Specific Plan. 2. Public improvements shall be provided as required by the Engineering Department, Parcel Map 26471, Tentative Tract 26472, and Tentative Tract 26473. 3. Development of Tentative Tract 26472 and Tentative Tract 26473 and parcels of Parcel Map 26471 shall comply with standards and guidelines in the Specific Plan. *4. 75 0 of the dwelling units within 150 feet of the Madison Street and 52nd Avenue right-of-way shall be limited to one story in height. All one story units in project shall be a. maximum 24 feet in height with two story units in project a maximum 30 feet in height. *5 . A master landscaping plan for all perimeter street parkways shall be submitted and approved by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to issuance of a building permit for the first village. Landscaping materials to be native and drought tolerant. Irrigation system to utilize emitter irrigation system where possible. Within 5 feet of curb, no spray irrigation heads nor lawn shall be used. Within this area only emitters and spreading shrubs and groundcover may be used. 6. Six foot high masonry walls shall be provided around each village. Walls adjacent to public streets shall match for all villages and be approved by the Design Review Board. 7. Landscaping and architectural plans for individual lots and dwellings shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board. 8. Use of metal roofs shall be subject to approval of the Design Review Board. 9. Lighting of permanent subdivision identification signs shall be permitted. *10. Pages 15 and 16 of Specific Plan 90-020 text shall be revised as recommended by the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) in their letter dated May 22, 1991, or as agreed upon. OONAPRVL.021 Conditions of Approval sP 90-020 July 9, 1991 11. Specific Plan 90-020 text shall be revised as approved within a minimum two sets of text being submitted to the Planning and Development Department for approval prior to issuance of first recordation of first tract map in project area. *12. That all Conditions of Approval for the following shall be met: a. CVWD - letter dated May 22, 1991 b. Sunline Transit - letter dated December 28, 1990 C. Palmer Cablevision - letter dated January 23, 1991 *13. A biological assessment to determine if the Flat -Tailed Horned Lizard is present on the project site shall be conducted prior to recordation of the Parcel Map. Mitigation measures as recommended shall be implemented. 14. A common landscape maintenance storage area and restroom facility for use by gardeners and maintenance workers for all seven villages shall be provided within a common area; cost of maintenance of facility to be funded by master landscaping maintenance association of seven (7) villages. Location and design of facility to be approved by Planning and Development Director prior to approval of first final parcel or tract map for project. 15. The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC & R's) for each tract or subdivision shall disclose that there are legally boarded horses in the surrounded areas. CC & R's to be reviewed by the Planning and Development Director prior to their recordation. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 1.6. Applicant 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. Avenue 52 - Primary Arterial, 55-foot half width; b. Madison Street - Primary Arterial, 55-foot half width; C. Avenue 53 - Collector Street, 32-foot half width; d. A and ]B streets -- Local Street, 60-foot full width, plus intersection widening to accommodate left turn lane and transitions as required by City Engineer; e. Right of way geometry for corner cut -backs at intersections shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawing #805 unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 17. Applicant shall provide a landscaped setback lots of noted width adjacent to the following street right of way(s) : a. Avenue 52, 20-feet wide; b . Madison Street, 20-feet wide; c. Avenue 53, 10-feet wide. CONAPRVL.021 Conditions of Approval SP 90-020 July 9, 1991 *18. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Avenue 52 and 53 and Madison Street from all abutting lots. Access to these streets from this land division shall be restricted to A and B street intersections only. 19. Applicant shall provide a blanket easement that covers the entire landscaped setback lots for the purpose of a meandering public sidewalk. 20. 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. 21. 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. *22. Applicant shall have street improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements shall be designed and constructed for all streets within the proposed subdivision and for off -site streets as required by these conditions of approval. All street improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC and adopted Standard Drawings,and City Engineer and shall include all appurtenant components required by same, except mid -block street lighting, such as but not limited to traffic signs and channelization markings, street name signs, sidewalks, and raised medians where required by city General Plan. Street design shall take into account the soil strength, anticipated traffic loading, and design life. The minimum structural section for residential streets shall be 3" AC over 4" Class 2 Base. 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 appropriately 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. The following specific street widths shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted therewith: a. ON -SITE STREETS 1. A and B streets - full width Local Street, 40 feet wide, refer to Std Dwg #105, plus widening and transition at intersections to accommodate a left turn lane; CONAPRVL.021 Conditions of Approval SP 90-020 July 9, 1991 b. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Avenue 52 (portion contiguous to tract) Install three-quarter width Primary Arterial (3 of 4 travel lanes for 86' width improvement option) , improvement includes full width raised median and 16-foot wide west bound travel lane, refer to Std Dwg #100; 2. Madison Street (portion contiguous to tract) Install three-quarter width Primary Arterial (3 of 4 travel lanes for 86' width improvement option) , improvement includes full width raised median and 16-foot wide north bound travel lane, refer to Std Dwg #100; 3. Avenue 53 (portion contiguous to tract) Install three-quarter width Collector Arterial (40-foot option three of four lanes), improvement includes standard half width plus one 14-foot wide east bound travel lane, refer to La Quinta General Plan Figure VII-2. 23. Applicant shall construct, or enter into agreement to construct, the site grading, off --site public improvements and utilities, and on -site common area improvements before the final map is recorded. Applicant shall pay cash, in lieu of and equivalent to the respective fair -share construction cost, for those improvements that the Applicant has partial cost responsibility and construction must be deferred until the full complement of funding is available. Payment of cash may be deferred to a future date mutually agreed by Applicant and City, provided security for said future payment is posted by Applicant. *24. Applicant shall construct an six-foot wide meandering sidewalk in the southerly and westerly parkways and landscaped setback lots along Avenue 52 and Madison Street. *25. Turning movements of traffic accessing the subject land division from adjoining public: streets shall be as follows: Avenue 52 a. Street B : left and right turns in and out are allowed; Madison Street a. Street A: left and right turns in and out are allowed. *26. Applicant is responsible for a fair share of the following street improvements: a. 56% of all improvements on the east half of Jefferson Street from Avenue 52 to Avenue 53; CONAPRVL.021 4 Conditions of Approval SP 90-020 July 9, 1991 27. b . 50% of all improvements on the south half of Avenue 52 from the Coachella Valley Canal to 1000 feet westerly of the canal; Applicant is responsible for the cost to design and construct traffic signals at the following locations. a. Avenue 52; 1. Jefferson Street: 12.5% fair share responsibility; 2. Madison Street: 25% fair share responsibility; 3. Street B : 50% fair share responsibility; b. Avenue 53; 1. Jefferson Street: 12.5% fair share responsibility; 2. Madison Street: 25% fair share responsibility; C. Madison Street; 1. Street A: 50% fair share responsibility. The signals will be installed by the City when warranted by traffic conditions. Regardless of the fair share responsibility, Applicant shall fund up to two times the fair share of the signal installation if other developer paid fair share funds for the subject signal are not available. The Applicant may be reimbursed for costs in excess of the standard fair share responsibility from other developer paid fair share funds received for the subject signal. Applicant may seek reimbursement for those costs that exceed the Applicant's fair share responsibility from fair share funds paid by another developer for the specific improvement for which reimbursement is sought. Eligibility for reimbursement requests shall be subject to City Council approval and the availability of funds. 28. Applicant shall establish a master landscaping maintenance association that is funded by the future homeowner's associations of the seven villages as noted in Specific Plan 90-020. The master association shall be responsible for all perimeter landscaping and sound walls contiguous to this tract along 52nd and 53rd Avenues, Madison Street, and A and B streets. ]WIRE MARSHAL: 29. All water mains and fire hydrants providing the required flows shall be constructed in accordance with the City Fire Code in effect at the time of development. 30. Each village shall be provided with two access points (minimum of one to be full turn access, second may be emergency) to satisfaction of Fire Marshal. CONAPRVL.021 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 26471 TO ALLOW THE CREATION OF SIX PARCELS ON A 235+ ACRE SITE. CASE NO. TPM 26471 - STUART ENTERPRISES, LTD. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 25th day of June, 1991, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and continued Public Hearing on the 9th of July, 1991, to consider the request of Stuart Enterprises, Ltd. to subdivide 235+ acres into six parcels in the R-1 zone located on the west side of Madison Street between 52nd and 53rd Avenues, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF SECTION 10, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, 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" ( County of Riverside, Resolution 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5) , in that the Planning Director conducted an initial study, and has determined that the proposed Tentative Parcel Map will not have an adverse impact on the environment; 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 to justify the approval of said Tentative Parcel Map: 1. That Tentative Parcel 26471, as conditionally approved, is generally consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use density, unit type, circulation requirements, R-1 Zoning District development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. The proposed circulation design as conditioned, are suitable for the proposed land division. 3. That the design of Tentative Parcel Map 26471 will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to the wildlife habitat of the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard. 4. That the design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will be developed with public sewers and water, and therefore, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 5. That the design of Tentative Parcel Map 26471 will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through the project, since alternate easements for access and for use have been provided that are substantially RESOPC.021 equivalent to those previously acquired by the public. 6. That the proposed Tentative Parcel Map 26471, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape common areas. 7. That the proposed Tentative Tract 26471, as conditioned, provides storm water retention, park facilities, and noise mitigation as the parcels are developed. 8. That general impacts from the proposed Parcel Map were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan. WHEREAS , in the review of this Tentative Parcel Map, 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 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 confirm the conclusion of EA 90-183 relative to the environmental concerns of the Parcel Map; 3. That it does hereby approve the subject Tentative Parcel Map 26471 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 9th day of July, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.021 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 26471 JULY 9, 1991 * Mitigation Measures for Environmental Assessment 90-183 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Parcel Map 26471, labeled Exhibit "A" on file in the Planning and Development Department 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 Parcel Map approval shall expire two years after the original date of approval by the La Quinta City Council unless approved for extension pursuant to the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance. 3. Approval of Parcel Map shall be subject to approval of Specific Plan 90-020. 4. Development of parcels shall not occur unless a Tentative Tract, Parcel Map, or Plot Plan, as applicable is approved on the property. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS: *5. Applicant 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. Avenue 52 - Primary Arterial, 55-foot half width; b. Madison Street - Primary Arterial, 55-foot half width; C. Avenue 53 - Collector Street, 32-foot half width; d . A and B streets - Local Street, 60-foot full width, plus intersection widening to accommodate left turn lane and transitions as required by City Engineer; e. Right of way geometry for corner cut -backs at intersections shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawing #805 unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 6. Applicant shall provide a landscaped setback lots of noted width adjacent to the following street right of way(s) : a. Avenue 52, 20-feet wide; b. Madison Street, 20-feet wide; c. Avenue 53, 10-feet wide. *7. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Avenue 52 and 53 and Madison Street from all abutting lots. Access to these streets from this land division shall be restricted to A and B street intersections only. CONAPRVL.016 Conditions of Approval TPM 26471 July 9, 1991 8. Applicant shall provide a "blanket easement that covers the entire landscaped setback lots for the purpose of a meandering public sidewalk. 9. 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. 10. 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. *11. Applicant shall have street improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements shall be designed and constructed for all streets within the proposed subdivision and for off -site streets as required by these conditions of approval. All street improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC and adopted Standard Drawings,and City Engineer and shall include all appurtenant components required by same, except mid -block street lighting, such as but not limited to traffic signs and channelization markings, street name signs, sidewalks, and raised medians where required by city General Plan. Street design shall take into account the soil strength, anticipated traffic loading, and design life . The minimum structural section for residential streets shall be 3" AC over 4" Class 2 Base. 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 appropriately 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. The following specific street widths shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted therewith: a. ON -SITE STREETS 1. A and B streets - full width Local Street, 40 feet wide, refer to Std Dwg #105, plus widening and transition at intersections to accommodate a left turn lane; b. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Avenue 52 (portion contiguous to tract) Install three-quarter width Primary Arterial (3 of 4 travel lanes for 86' width improvement option) , improvement includes full width raised median and 16-foot wide west bound travel lane, refer to Std Dwg #100; CONAPRVL.016 Conditions of Approval TPM 26471 July 9, 1991 2. Madison Street (portion contiguous to tract) Install three-quarter width Primary Arterial (3 of 4 travel lanes for 86' width improvement option) , improvement includes full width raised median and 16-foot wide north bound travel lane, refer to Std Dwg #100; 3. Avenue 53 (portion contiguous to tract) Install three-quarter width Collector Arterial (40-foot option three of four lanes), improvement includes standard half width plus one 14-foot wide east bound travel lane, refer to La Quinta General Plan Figure VII-2. 12. Applicant shall construct, or enter into agreement to construct, the site grading, off -•site public improvements and utilities, and on -site common area improvements before the final map is recorded. Applicant shall pay cash, in lieu of and equivalent to the respective fair -share construction cost, for those improvements that the Applicant has partial cost responsibility and construction must be deferred until the full complement of funding is available. Payment of cash may be deferred to a future date mutually agreed by Applicant and City, provided security for said future payment is posted by Applicant. *13. Applicant shall construct an six-foot wide meandering sidewalk in the southerly and westerly parkways and landscaped setback lots along Avenue 52 and Madison Street. *14. Turning movements of traffic accessing the subject land division from adjoining public streets shall be as follows: Avenue 52 a. Street B : left and right turns in and out are allowed; Madison Street a. Street A: left and right turns in and out are allowed. 3X15. Applicant is responsible for a fair share of the following street improvements: a. 56 0 of all improvements on the east half of Jefferson Street from Avenue 52 to Avenue 53; b. 50% of all improvements on the south half of Avenue 52 from the Coachella Valley Canal to 1000 feet westerly of the canal; *16. Applicant is responsible for the cost to design and construct traffic signals at the following locations. CONAPRVL.016 3 Conditions of Approval TPM 26471 a. Avenue 52; 1. Jefferson Street: 12.5 o fair share responsibility; 2. Madison Street: 25% fair share responsibility; 3. Street B : 50% fair share responsibility; b. Avenue 53; 1. Jefferson Street: 12.5% fair share responsibility; 2. Madison Street: 25 o fair share responsibility; C. Madison Street; 1. Street A: 50% fair share responsibility. July 9, 1991 The signals will be installed by the City when warranted by traffic conditions. Regardless of the fair share responsibility, Applicant shall fund up to two times the fair share of the signal installation if other developer paid fair share funds :for the subject signal are not available. The Applicant may be reimbursed for costs in excess of the standard fair share responsibility from other developer paid fair share funds received for the subject signal. 17. Applicant may seek reimbursement for those costs that exceed the Applicant's fair share responsibility from fair share funds paid by another developer for the specific improvement for which reimbursement is sought. Eligibility for reimbursement requests shall be subject to City Council approval and the availability of funds. 18. Applicant shall establish a master landscaping maintenance association that is funded by the future homeowner's associations of the six (6) parcels created by this parcel map. The master association shall be responsible for all perimeter landscaping and sound walls contiguous to this tract along 52nd and 53rd Avenues, Madison Street, and A and B streets. FIRE MARSHAL: 19. 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 2 hours duration at 20 psi. 20. Prior to recordation of the final map, Applicant/Developer shall furnish one bluelline 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. CONAPRVL.016 4 Conditions of Approval TPM 26471 July 9, 1991 21. 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. 22. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a Fire Department override system. Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation. CONAPRVL.016 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT TO ALLOW A 130 LOT SUBDIVISION ON A 36+ ACRE SITE CASE NO. TT 26472 - STUART ENTERPRISES, LTD. (CRAIG BRYANT) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 25th day of June, 1991, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued Public Hearing on the 9th of July, 1991, to consider the request of Stuart Enterprises, Ltd. to subdivide 36+ acres into 130 single-family lots, and other miscellaneous lots, generally located at the southeast corner of 52nd Avenue and Madison Street, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF SECTION 10, T6S, R7E, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said tentative map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" ( County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5) , in that the Planning Director conducted an initial study, and has determined that the proposed tentative tract will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and will be incorporated into the approval conditions for Tentative Tract 266472 in conjunction with this tentative tract, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; 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 to justify the approval of said tentative tract map: 1.. That Tentative tract 26472, as conditionally approved, is generally consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use density, unit type, circulation requirements, R-1 zoning district development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. That the subject site will have a flat topography. The proposed circulation design and single-family lot layouts as conditioned are, therefore, suitable for the proposed land division. 3. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 26472 will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to the wildlife. RESOPC.022 1 4. That the design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will be developed with public sewers and water, and, therefore, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 5. That the design of Tentative Tract Map 26472 will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through the project, since alternate easements for access and for use have been provided that are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public. 6. That the proposed Tentative Tract 26472, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape buffer areas. 7. That the proposed Tentative Tract 26472, as conditioned, provides storm water retention, park in -lieu fees, and noise mitigation. 8. That general impacts from the proposed tract were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, 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 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 correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 90- 183 relative to the environmental concerns of this tentative tract; 3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of the subject Tentative Tract Map 26472 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 9th day of July, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RESOPC.022 Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California REsopc.022 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 26472 JULY 9, 1991 * Mitigation measures for Environmental Assessment 90-183 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Tract Map 26472, marked Exhibit "A", 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 two years after the approval by the La Quinta City Council unless approved for extension pursuant to the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance. 3. A minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be provided on 52nd Avenue and on Madison Street. Design of the setback shall be approved by the Design Review Board. Setback shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way line. *4. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and 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. 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 Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. *5. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. *6. Owner shall execute and record a "Declaration of Dedication" in a form acceptable to the City and offering the dedication of drainage retention basin(s) and landscape buffer areas to the City for future acceptance and maintenance. In the interim, the owners shall maintain the basin (s) and perimeter landscaping and provide bond assurance accordingly prior to final map approval. CONAPRVL.017 1 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 7. Development of property shall comply with Specific Plan 90-020 as approved. *8. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. Traffic volumes shall be based on information obtained from the Engineering Department. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, 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 so as to avoid the isolated appearance even by walled developments. 9. If the tract is phased, tract phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department and the Planning and Development Department prior to final map approval. 10. Applicant shall submit proposed street names with alternatives to the Planning and Development Department for approval prior to final map approval. *11. Prior to final map approval, the Applicant shall submit to the Design Review Board 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 and emitter irrigation system shall be used in the landscape plan. b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required walls. 12. Prior to final map approval, the subdivider shall submit general criteria to be used for landscaping of all individual lot front yards. At a minimum, the criteria shall provide for two trees (five trees on a corner) shrubs, groundcover, and an irrigation system plan. Trees to be shown on the plot plan of the entire tract separate from shrubs / groundcover plans. 4113. The Applicant shall install a six -foot -high block sound wall with necessary berming per the Noise Study requirements along the entire length of tract boundary that adjoins 52nd Avenue and Madison Street. The wall design shall have an aesthetically pleasing appearance and match existing or approved walls of any tract in Specific Plan 90-020. A 6-foot high block wall shall be provided for lot sides facing retention basin and all common areas or entry streets into tract. A six foot high masonry wall shall be provided along the east and south perimeters of the tract. 14. Prior to 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: CONAPRVL.017 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 o City Fire Marshal o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o Planning & Development Department o Coachella Valley Water District o Coachella Valley Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above -mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. *15. 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. 16. 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. *17. The Developer shall install landscaping (trees and lawn/groundcover) and irrigation systems within drainage retention basin (s) and perimeter areas. *18. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Tentative Tract 26472 and Environmental Assessment 90-183, 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 Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 90-183 and Tentative Tract 26472, 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 Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 90-183 and Tentative Tract 26472. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 19. Sidewalk on 52nd Avenue and Madison Street shall meander within right-of- way and 20-foot landscape lot. Design of sidewalk to be approved by Planning and Development Department prior to beginning of preparation of landscaping plans. *20. Within 5-feet of 52nd Avenue and Madison Street curb, no spray irrigation heads, nor lawn, shall be used. Within this area only emitters and spreading shrubs and groundcover may be used. CONAPRVL.017 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 *21. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify the means for digging test pits; and (2) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant material are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. 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 assistant (s) / representative (s) , shall be submitted to the Planning and 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 Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily diver, 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 area 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 analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. *22. 75 0 of the dwelling units within 150 feet of the Madison Street and 52nd Avenue right-of-way line shall be limited to one story in height. All one story units shall be maximum 24 feet in height with two story units a maximum 30 feet in height. 23. Architectural plans, including floor plans, elevations, and colors and materials, shall be approved by the Design Review Board and prior to issuance of building permits. Consideration shall be given to providing architectural treatment to all sides of the buildings and shading of glass areas from sun. *24. Prior to recordation of final map, Applicant shall pay in -lieu park fees per City requirements . *25 . All exterior lighting including that for signage & landscaping shall comply with the "Dark Sky" ordinance. CONAPRVL.017 4 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 26. That this Tentative Tract shall be subject to approval of Parcel Map 26471. 27. The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC & R's) for each tract or subdivision shall disclose that there are legally boarded horses in the surrounded areas. CC & R's to be reviewed by the Planning and Development Director prior to their recordation. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTIL1 "IES 28. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District per their letter dated May 22, 1991, or as agreed upon. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: *29. Applicant 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 requ�':red by the City Engineer, as follows: a. 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. b. 52nd Avenue - Primary Arterial, 55-foot half width; C. Madison Street - Primary Arterial, 55-foot half width; d. Lots Q and R - Local Street, Applicant shall provide minimum 44-foot width (up to 14 feet of the required 44-foot width may be provided by dedication from the adjacent landowners) . 30. Applicant shall dedicate common area lot(s) for the purpose of on -site private roads to the homeowner's association of the subdivision. The width of the lots shall be as follows or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer: a. All streets, unless otherwised noted, 37-foot full width; b. F and G street, 37-foot full width, or approved equivalent. 31. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback lot of noted width adjacent to the following street right of way (s) : a. 52nd Avenue, 20-feet wide; b . Madison Street, 20--feet wide. *32. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to 52nd Avenue and Madison Street from all abutting lots. Access to these streets from this land division shall be restricted to street intersections at lots Q and R only. *33. Turning movements of traffic accessing the subject subdivision from adjoining public streets shall be as follows: CONAPRVL.017 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 52nd Avenue a. Lot R : left and right turns in and out are allowed; Madison Street a. Lot Q: left and right turns in and out are allowed; *34. Applicant shall have street improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements shall be designed and constructed for all streets within the proposed subdivision and for off -site streets as required by these conditions of approval. All street improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC and adopted Standard Drawings,and City Engineer and shall include all appurtenant components required by same, except mid -block street lighting, such as but not limited to traffic signs and channelization markings, street name signs, sidewalks, and raised medians where required by city General Plan. Street design shall take into account the soil strength, anticipated traffic loading, and design life. The minimum structural section for residential streets shall be 3" AC over 4" Class 2 Base. 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 appropriately 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. The following specific street widths shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted therewith: a. ON -SITE STREETS 1' . All streets, except as otherwise noted - full width Local Street, 36 feet wide, refer to Std Dwg #105, unless otherwise approved; 2. All cul-de-sacs bulbs, 45-foot curb radius, refer to Std Dwg #800; 3. Lots Q and R, 60-foot full width (Applicant shall construct minimum 44-foot partial width) , refer to Std Dwy #104 . b. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Madison Street (portion contiguous to tract) Install half width Primary Arterial (86' width improvement option), bond for half of raised median, refer to Std Dwg #100. CONAPRVL.017 6 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 2. 52nd Avenue (portion contiguous to tract) Install half width Primary Arterial (86' width improvement option), bond for half of raised median, refer to Std Dwg #100. 35. Applicant shall construct, or enter into agreement to construct, the site grading, off -site public improvements and utilities, and on -site common area improvements before the final map is recorded. Applicant shall pay cash, in lieu of and equivalent to the respective fair -share construction cost, for those improvements that the Applicant has partial cost responsibility and construction must be deferred until the full complement of funding is available. Payment of cash may be deferred to a future date mutually agreed by Applicant and City, provided security for said future payment is posted by Applicant. 36. A thorough preliminary 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. 37. The tract grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. *38. 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 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. *39. The tract shall be graded in a manner that permits storm flow in excess of the retention basin capacity 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 has historically received flow. *40. Storm water run-off produced in 24 hours by a 100-year storm shall be retained on site in landscaped retention basin(s) 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 Applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. Other CONAPRVL.017 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 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. The tributary drainage area for which the Applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of any public street contiguous to the site. *41. 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. 42. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped lots. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 43. 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. 44. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the subdivision such as the landscaped setback lots along 52nd Avenue and Madison Street contiguous to the tract and retention basins until accepted by the City Engineer for maintenance by the homeowner's association of the subdivision. 45. In the tract C . C . & R's, the Applicant shall assign maintenance cost responsibility for the perimeter landscape lots and contiguous right of way to the homeowner's association for those lots contiguous to the tract on 52 Avenue and Streets "A" and "B" . The maintenance shall be administered via a master landscaping maintenance association. 46. All existing and proposed electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, and are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 47. All underground utilities shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to construction of any street improvements. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 48. 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.017 8 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 49. 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. 50. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on Applicant's staff, to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. The engineer retained or designated by the Applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: a. the engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all ( grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer".. b . prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each lot in the tract, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and 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. c. provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproducible drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the Applicant. 51. Applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet (not to exceed 10 pages of text) for the street, landscape irrigation, perimeter wall, and drainage facilities that will be maintained by the homeowner's association. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the homeowner's association in planning for routine and long term maintenance. 52. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured prior to constructing or joining improvements. 53. Applicant shall provide a detailed layout drawing of the access gate and turn around area in lots F and G and revise the geometries as required by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.017 9 Conditions of Approval - TT 26472 - July 9, 1991 54. Applicant is responsible for the cost to design and construct traffic signals at the following locations. a. 52nd Avenue at Madison Street - 25% fair share responsibility. *55 . In the tract C . C . & R's, the Applicant shall require the homeowner's association to pay for 25% of the cost to design and construct traffic signals at 52nd Avenue and Lot R and 25% of the traffic signal at Madison Street and Lot Q when traffic warrants are met. FIRE MARSHAL: 56. 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 2 hours duration at 20 psi. 57. 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. 58. 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. 59. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a Fire Department override system. Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation. CONAPRVL.017 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91-_ A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE TRACT TO ALLOW A 116 LOT SUBDIVISION ON A 35+ ACRE SITE CASE NO. TT 26473 - STUART ENTERPRISES, LTD. (CRAIG BRYANT) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 9th day of July, 1991, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing and continued Public Hearing on the 9th of July, 1991, to consider the request of Stuart Enterprises, Ltd. to subdivide 35+ acres into 116 single-family lots, and other miscellaneous lots, generally located on the south side of 52nd Avenue approximately 1400 feet west. of Madison Street, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF SECTION 9, T6S, R7E, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said tentative map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" ( County of Riverside, Resolution No. 32-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5) , in that the Planning Director conducted an initial study, and has determined that the proposed tentative tract will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and will be incorporated into the approval conditions for Tentative Tract 26473 in conjunction with this tentative tract, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; 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 to justify the recommendation for approval of said tentative tract map: 1. That Tentative tract 26473, as conditionally approved, is generally consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use density, unit type, circulation requirements, R-1 zoning district development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. That the subject site will have a flat topography. The proposed circulation design and single-family lot layouts as conditioned are, therefore, suitable for the proposed land division. 3. That the design of Tentative Tract Map 26473 will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to the wildlife. RESOPC.026 1 4. That the design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will be developed with public sewers and water, and, therefore, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 5. That the design of Tentative Tract Map 26473 will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through the project, since alternate easements for access and for use have been provided that are substantially equivalent to those previcusly acquired by the public. 6. That the proposed Tentative Tract 26473, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape buffer areas. 7. That the proposed Tentative Tract 26473, as conditioned, provides storm water retention, park in -lieu fees, and noise mitigation. 8. That general impacts from the proposed tract were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, 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 available fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quanta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 90- 183 relative to the environmental concerns of this tentative tract; 3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of the subject Tentative Tract Map 26473 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 9th day of July, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: RESOPC.026 Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.026 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED TENTATIVE TRACT 26473 JULY 9, 1991 * Mitigation measures for Environmental Assessment 90-183 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Tract Map 26473, marked Exhibit "A", 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 two years after the approval by the La Quinta City Council unless approved for extension pursuant to the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance. 3. A minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be provided on 52nd Avenue. Design of the setback shall be approved by the Design Review Board. Setback shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way line. *4. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and 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. 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 Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. *5. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. *6. Owner shall execute and record a "Declaration of Dedication" in a form acceptable to the City and offering the dedication of drainage retention basin(s) and landscape buffer areas to the City for future acceptance and maintenance. In the interim, the owners shall maintain the basin(s) and perimeter landscaping and provide bond assurance accordingly prior to final map approval. CONAPRVL.020 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 7. Development of property shall comply with Specific Plan 90-020 as approved. *S . A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. Traffic volumes shall be based on information obtained from the Engineering Department. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, 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 so as to avoid the isolated appearance given by walled developments. 9. If the tract is phased, tract phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department and the Planning and Development Department prior to final map approval. 10. Applicant shall submit proposed street names with alternatives to the Planning and Development Department for approval prior to final map approval. *11. Prior to final map approval, the Applicant shall submit to the Design Review Board 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 used in the landscape plan. b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required walls. 12. Prior to final map approval, the subdivider shall submit general criteria to be used for landscaping of all individual lot front yards. At a minimum, the criteria shall provide for two trees (five trees on a corner) shrubs, groundcover, and an irrigation system plan. Trees to be shown on the plot plan of the entire tract separate from shrubs / groundcover plans. *13. The Applicant shall install a six -foot -high block sound wall with necessary berming per the Noise Study requirements along the entire length of tract boundary that adjoins 52nd Avenue. The wall design shall have an aesthetically pleasing appearance and match existing or approved walls of any tract in Specific Plan 90-020. A 6-foot high block wall shall be provided for lot sides facing retention basin and all common areas or entry streets into tract. A six foot high masonry wall shall be provided along the east and south perimeters of the tract. 14. Prior to 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: CONAPRVL.020 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 o City Fire Marshal o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o Planning & Development Department o Coachella Valley Water District o Coachella Valley Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above -mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. *15. 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. 16. 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. *17. The Developer shall install landscaping (trees and lawn/ ground cover) and irrigation systems within drainage retention basin (s) and perimeter areas. *18. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Tentative Tract 26473 and Environmental Assessment 90-183, 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 Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 90-183 and Tentative Tract 26473, 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 Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 90-183 and Tentative Tract 26473. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 19. Sidewalk on 52nd Avenue shall meander within right-of-way and 20-foot landscape lot. Design of sidewalk to be approved by Planning and Development Department prior to beginning of preparation of landscaping plans. *20. Within 5-feet of 52nd Avenue curb, no spray irrigation heads, nor lawn, shall be used. Within this area only emitters and spreading shrubs and groundcover may be used. CONAPRVL.020 3 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 21. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify the means for digging test pits; and (2) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant material are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. 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 assistant(s) /representative (s), shall be submitted to the Planning and 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 Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily diver, 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 area 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 analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. *22. 75s of the dwelling units within 150 feet of the 52nd Avenue right-of-way line shall be limited to one story in height. All one story units shall be maximum 24 feet in height with two story units a maximum 30 feet in height. 23. Architectural plans, including floor plans, elevations, and colors and materials, shall be approved by the Design Review Board and prior to issuance of building permits. Consideration shall be given to providing architectural treatment to all sides of the buildings and shading of glass areas from sun. *24. Prior to recordation of final map, Applicant shall pay in -lieu park fees per City requirements. *25 . All exterior lighting including that for signage & landscaping shall comply with the "Dark Sky" ordinance. CONAPRVL.020 4 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 26. Approval of Tentative Tract shall be subject to approval of recordation of Parcel Map 26471. 27. The Conditions, Covenants and Restrictions (CC & R's) for each tract or subdivision shall disclose that there are legally boarded horses in the surrounded areas. CC & R's to be reviewed by the Planning and Development Director prior to their recordation. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES *28. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District. per their letter dated May 22, 1991, or as agreed upon. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 29. Applicant 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. 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. 30. Applicant shall dedicate common area lot (s) to the homeowner's association of the subdivision for the purpose of on -site private roads. The width of the lots shall be as follows or as otherwise approved by the City Engineer: a. All street lots, except as otherwised noted - 37-foot full width; b . B street - 40-foot fall width, or approved equivalent. 31. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to 52nd Avenue from all abutting lots. Access to 52nd Avenue from this land division shall be restricted to the street intersection at Street "B" only. Any additional accesses required by the Fire Marshal shall be subject to approval of the City Engineer. 32. Applicant shall have street improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements shall be designed and constructed for all streets within the proposed subdivision and for off -site streets as required by these conditions of approval. All street improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with the LQMC and adopted Standard Drawings,and City Engineer and shall include all appurtenant components required by same, except mid -block street lighting, such as but not limited to traffic signs and channelization markings, street name signs, sidewalks, and raised medians where required by city General Plan. Street design shall take into account the soil strength, anticipated traffic loading, and design life. The minimum structural section for residential streets shall be 3" AC over 4" Class 2 Base. CONAPRVL.020 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 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 appropriately 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. The following specific street widths shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted therewith: a. ON -SITE STREETS 1. All streets, except as otherwise noted - full width Local Street, 36 feet wide, refer to Std Dwg #105; 2. All cul-de-sacs bulbs - 45-foot curb radiuse, refer to Std Dwg #800 3. Lots B - 40-foot full width, or approved equivalent. 33. Applicant shall construct, or enter into agreement to construct, the site grading, off -site public improvements and utilities, and on -site common area improvements before the final map is recorded. Applicant shall pay cash, in lieu of and equivalent to the respective fair -share construction cost, for those improvements that the Applicant has partial cost responsibility and construction must be deferred until the full complement of funding is available. Payment of cash may be deferred to a future date mutually agreed by Applicant and City, provided security for said future payment is posted by Applicant. 34. A thorough preliminary 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. 35. The tract grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. *36. 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. CONAPRVL.020 6 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 If 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. *37. The tract shall be graded ::n a manner that permits storm flow in excess of the retention basin capacity 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 has historically received flow. *38. Storm water run-off produced in 24 hours by a 100-year storm shall be retained on site in landscaped retention basin(s) 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 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. The triburary drainage area for which the Applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of any public street contiguous to the site. *39. 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. 40. Applicant shall install landscape and irrigation improvements in the landscape setback lots along 52nd Avenue and streets "A" and "B" that are contiguous to this tract. The landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 41. 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. 42. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the subdivision such as the landscaped setback lots along 52nd Avenue and Madison Street contiguous to the tract and retention basins until accepted by the City Engineer for maintenance by the homeowner's association of the subdivision. 43. In the tract C . C . & R's, the Applicant shall assign maintenance responsibilities of the perimeter landscape lots to the homeowner's association for those lots contiguous to the tract on 52nd Avenue and Streets "A" and "B" . CONAPRVL.020 7 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 44. All existing and proposed electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, and are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 45. All underground utilities shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to construction of any street improvements. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 46. 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. 47. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the city as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount(s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the city. 48. Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer, or designate one who is on Applicant's staff, to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the tract grading and improvements to certify compliance with the plans; specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. The engineer retained or designated by the Applicant to implement this responsibility shall provide the following certifications and documents upon completion of construction: a. the engineer shall sign and seal a statement placed on the "as built" plans that says "all (grading and grades) (improvements) on these plans were properly monitored by qualified personnel under my supervision during construction for compliance with the plans and specifications and the work shown hereon was constructed as approved, except where otherwise noted hereon and specifically acknowledged by the City Engineer". b . Prior to issuance of any building permit, the engineer shall provide a separate document, signed and sealed, to the City Engineer that documents the building pad elevations. The document shall, for each lot in the tract, state the pad elevation approved on the grading plan, the as built elevation, and clearly identify the difference, if any. The data shall be organized by tract phase and lot number and shall be cummulative if the data is submitted at different times. c. provide to the City Engineer a signed set of "as built" reproduceable drawings of the site grading and all improvements installed by the Applicant. 49. Applicant shall provide a detailed layout drawing of the access gate and turn around area in lot B and revise the geometries as required by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.020 8 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 *50 . In the tract C . C . & R's, the Applicant shall require the homeowner's association to pay for fair share costs to design and construct traffic signals at the following locations: a. 52nd Avenue at Street B : 8.33 o fair share responsibility; b . Madison Street at Street A: 8.33% fair share responsibility. 51. In the tract CC & R's, the Applicant shall assign maintenance cost responsibility for the perimeter landscape lots and contiguous right-of-way to the homeowner's association for those lots contiguous to the tract on 52nd Avenue and Streets "A" and "B" . The maintenance shall be administered via a master landscaping maintenance association. 52. Applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet (not to exceed 10 pages of text) for the street, landscape irrigation, perimeter wall, and drainage facilities that will be maintained by the homeowner's association. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed and variable factors to assist the homeowner's association in planning for routine and long term maintenance. FIRE MARSHAL: 53. 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 2 hours duration at 20 psi. 54. 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. 55. 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. CONAPRVL.020 9 Conditions of Approval - TT 26473 July 9, 1991 56. Gates installed to restrict access shall be power operated and equipped with a Fire Department override system. Improvement plans for the entry street and gates shall be submitted to the Fire Department for review/approval prior to installation. CONAPRVL.020 10 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JULY 9, 1991 ITEM: TENTATIVE TRACT 26281 OWNER/ APPLICANT: RAY TROLL ENGINEER: MAINIERO, SMITH & ASSOCIATES LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF WESTWARD HO DRIVE ALIGNMENT +1400 FEET WEST OF DUNE PALMS ROAD REQUEST: TO SUBDIVIDE 14 GROSS ACRES INTO 52 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS EXISTING GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITY EXISTING ZONING: R-1 BACKGROUND: 1. The applicant has made the following requests for time extensions to this project since the initial hearing date of November 27, 1990. o for sixty days until January 22, 1991 o for thirty days until February 26, 1991 o for sixty days until April 23, 1991 o for thirty days until May 28, 1991 o for thirty days until July 9, 1991 which is the date of this current meeting. 2. On April 16, 1991, City Council approved a City initiated General Plan Amendment to change the General Plan Land Use of this and sites to the east and west from "Low Density Residential" to "Major Community Facility" Land Use designation. This was in response to the identification of this area as a proposed High School site by the Desert Sands Unified School District. STAFFRPT.029/CS -1- ANALYSIS: The La Quinta Subdivision Regulations state the following: '113.16.180 General Provisions. A tentative subdivision map shall be denied by the City Council and a tentative parcel map shall be denied by the advisory agency if the map does not meet all of the requirements of this title, or if the City Council or advisory agency makes any of the following findings: A. That zhe proposed land division is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans. B. That the design or improvement of the proposed land division is not consistent with applicable general and specific plans...." The proposed residential subdivision is not consistent with the existing General Plan Land Use designation "Major Community Facility" for this site. Staff has prepared and attached a resolution with findings for recommending denial of the Tentative Tract Map. LETTER RECEIVED FROM APPLICANT: A letter was received July 2, 1991, from Ray Troll requesting a continuation of the processing of TT 26281 for another 30 days. RECOMMENDATION• That the Planning Commission continue the hearing for Tentative Tract 26281 for 30 days to August 13, 1991. Attachments: 1. Locality Plan 2. Letter requesting continuance 3. Draft Resolution STAFFRPT.029/CS -2- ATTACHMENT No. RIVERSIDE COUNTY FRED WARM DRIll►E ?fie;--� _ LA QUINTA 0 0 0 QW a J � s 0 MLES AVENUE Iltidllllllllll!lllit1201111 r141, Jt�`� S�VIIdDt111T1i/1// 0 q i i/.�/// 8T r/r/ir/rrrrr ///i/In%,, 4 yE%t'J/J/ si Jh 1/JJ/JI LLB 3 LOCATION MAP. CASE No. TENTATIVE TRACT 26281 INDIO r WESTWARD NO DRVE ORTH JUL- 2-91 TUE t5:26 Raj-rro!iDeve1owment 5547+451 P.02 • 13911 ENTERPRISE DFIVE GARDEN GROVE, CALIF. 92643 TEL. (714) 554-7311 FAX (714) 554-0 135 jut1 2, 1991 Cit,,d o § La QLi.tnta. iwL HW Aman 78 7,05 C7-tke E., tado La htint,a, CA 92253 ATTACHMENT No. 2 THE EQUITY BUILDERS Rea La Quir^eta Hannbng Commi6.5-4-'on Pubfic Heo ing Juty Q, 1491 i Ac.quLLt that you continue .the picocusincg o f ouft Tentative T,fLact Map 16281 Joy. 30 dayb. I am keque.bting th" a.& Z am .6tttlP wo,%ki- cg with thc, ac.6ekt Sa.ndl Ur,i,iied Schoot -Viztu.c t 4egatL ng this p4ope4.ty and we a.te cupvicer y .in the vAocu,$ o j opening e6aow for the A puAch Ae o� my Pkopv%ty. Thank yc,u, F.AV TROLL DEVELOPMENT CO. Ra.ymor T. TAoft Ow✓J.eAt TRACT HOUSING a, APARTMENTS • MOBILE PARKS • INDUSTRIAL • COMMERCIAL PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT 26281 WHICH WOULD ALLOW THE CREATION OF A LAND SALES SUBDIVISION ON A 14 ACRE SITE. CASE NO. TENTATIVE TRACT 26281 - RAY TROLL WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 28th day of May, 1991, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and continued Public Hearings on January 22, February 26, April 23, May 28 and July 9, 1991, to consider the request of Ray Troll to subdivide 14 acres into single family development lots for sale, generally located on the south side of Westward Ho alignment +1400 feet west of Dune Palms Road, more particularly described as: PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE & MERIDIAN. 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 fact to justify the recommendation of denial of said Tentative Tract Map: That Tentative Tract 26281 is not consistent with the La Quinta General Plan. This constitutes sufficient reason for denial in accordance with Article IV Section 13.16.180 of the La Quinta Subdivision Ordinance. 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 recommend denial to the City Council of the subject Tentative Tract 26281 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 9th day of July, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: RESOPC.014/CS -1- AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CHAIRPERSON City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.014/CS -2- PH-4 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 9, 1991 PROJECT: PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-009; PROPOSED CHURCH WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING ON A 4.21 ACRES SITE IN THE R-1.-12,000/PD ZONE APPLICANT: DESERT BAPTIST CHURCH, PASTOR KOROLUK ARCHITECT: JACK CULVER LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND MILES AVENUE ZONING: R-1-12,000/PD NET ACREAGE: 4.21 GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DWELLING UNITS/ACRE) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 91-196 HAS BEEN PREPARED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THIS APPLICATION. THE INITIAL STUDY INDICATED THAT NO SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS WILL OCCUR THAT CANNOT BE MITIGATED BY IMPOSITION OF MITIGATION MEASURES. THEREFORE, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THIS PROJECT. SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USES: NORTHEAST: R-1/APPROVED RESIDENTIAL TRACT, TT 23913, UNITS UNDER CONSTRUCTION WEST: R-1/EXISTING CHURCH SOUTH R-1/APPROVED TT 23519. PRESENTLY VACANT LAND. DESCRIPTION OF SITE: VACANT LAND WITH DESERT VEGETATION GENTLY SLOPING TOWARDS THE EAST. DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: A RETENTION BASIN IS PROPOSED ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE. STAFFRPT.030/CS -1- BACKGROUND: 1. Single family residential subdivision projects have been approved to the north, south, and east of this site. An existing church is located opposite the subject site, across Adams Street to the west. 2. A Public Use Permit (PUP) allows a church to be located in a residential area. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: 1. The proposed church complex comprises two phases. Phase one includes a 11,654 square foot building containing an assembly room (3,117.7 square feet), corridors (2,444 square feet) and classrooms, offices and rest rooms (6,092.3 square feet). The second phase will be 1,700 square feet in size and functions as an assembly room. Once the second phase is build the original assembly room will function as a multipurpose room. 2. Phase I assembly building will hold 368 seats. Two people will be employed at the church complex. The classrooms will be used on Sundays as part of Sunday School activities. 3. The overall height of the church building without steeple in Phase I will be 32 feet. The steeple will be 46 feet above the ground. The R-1 zoning regulations allow buildings to be a maximum of 35 feet high. The General Use Regulations in the Zoning Ordinance allow structures such as the steeple, (which does not provide additional floor space) to exceed the prescribed height limit of 35 feet. 4. Phase I church building is hexagonal in shape and comprises a central assembly room with surrounding offices and classrooms. The central area of the church roof has been elevated to allow for windows to light the central assembly are. The metal rod (steeple) extending above the roof located in a central elevated position provides a visual focus to the building. 5. The contemporary style building will have a dusty pink/peach concrete tile roof, pale dusty pink accent features and cream colored stucco on the main body of the structure. 6. The preliminary landscape plan shows a number of trees suitable for desert climate located around the parking area and alongside Miles Avenue and Adams Street. Shrubs, ground cover and areas of annual color have also been used. Lawn covers the balance of the open area on the site. STAFFRPT.030/CS -2- 7. A monument sign has been proposed on the corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street. The sign will consist of "stand off" letters applied to the face of a stuccoed section of the wall (see Attachment #8). ANALYSIS: 1. ACCESS The project takes access off Adams Street at two points. The access closest to Miles Avenue is off set from the access to the Family Heritage Church across the road. Engineering Department does not have a problem with this off set access. If traffic problems do occur, a right turn only sign will be posted at the Baptist Church (PUP 91-009) access point. 2. STORMWATER RETENTION 3. All stormwater will be retained in the stormwater retention basins located on the eastern side of the site. ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASPECTS A Condition of Approval will be attached to this public use permit requiring an archaeological study of the site and the approval and implementation of that study. 4. ACOUSTICAL STUDY The Applicant will be required to do a noise study in accordance with the requirements of the La Quinta General Plan addressing the following issues: a) Noise from this project affecting the surrounding area. b) Noise from the surrounding major streets affecting this project. 5. LIGHTING PROPOSALS This project will have to comply with the Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and will be conditioned to use low, shielded lighting in the parking area. 6. SIGN APPLICATION The sign application complies with the La Quinta Sign Regulations. STAFFRPT.030/CS -3- 7. TRASH ENCLOSURE The Applicant will be required to provide enclosed sufficient space for two bins, one for trash and the other for a recycling bin. The location of the trash enclosure shown on the site plan is acceptable to Waste Management of the Desert. 8. COMMENTS FROM SUNLINE TRANSIT (See Attachment #10) Sunline Transit states that a bus route in the vicinity of Miles Avenue and Adams Street is presently not justified but it might be needed in the future. Developers in the area should contribute funds towards the cost of certain transit amenities for the bus service. Presently, there are no provisions to impose such a fee, 9. COMMENTS FROM CVWD (See Attachment #11) Attached is the letter from CVWD with comments regarding this project. 10. COMMENTS FROM FIFE DEPARTMENT (See Attachment #12) Attached are comments from the County Fire Department. It should. be noted that the Fire Department requires a Building fire sprinkler system to be installed. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING The Design Review Board reviewed this project at their meeting of June 5, 1991. Comments from the Board were as follows: Applicant should ensure that the irrigation system planned takes into cognizance the phasing of the area. The possibility of turn around areas at the end of each parking lane should be investigated. The amount of lawn area utilized should be reduced. A wildflower mix should be used in the area where the expansion building is proposed. Please note, the above changes will be reflected in the detailed landscaping plans to be submitted to the Planning Department at a later date. STAFFRPT.030/CS -4- FINDINGS Findings necessary to recommend approval of this Public Use Permit can be made and are contained in the attached Planning Commission Resolution. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission concur with the Environmental Analysis and adopt Resolution 91- , approving Public Use Permit 91-009, subject to the attached conditions. Attachments: 1. Locality Plan 7. 2. Plot Plan 8• 3. Grading Plan 9• 4. Landscape Plan 10. 5. Floor Plan 11. 6. Elevations 12. 13. Sections Proposed Sign Surrounding Area Sunline Transit Comments CVWD Comments Fire Department Comments Draft Resolution & Conditions of Approval STAFFRPT.030/CS -5- ,w I (I 1 s :cvnlr�lri"i I�SIo•- O4iL � ATTACH; ENT No. 3cb �. w S311w - - • • 4 c 20 ,:. �► UJ o rg c� s ATTACHMENT No. 4 a Zm w 'wal . D � � � raw .a a w us „�laaw .d mi y H M _ Q;q,/a �Z � s' � Z � r U _N z inn i ?•1 Z0. c w ?' av v`ew L— uu Q a O� ice n ATTACHMENT J J� • • j V 2E. No. 5 I Q be W w VI � w I S "M • it .W G si In 64 96N ri!�r4rmm R ..iA ll��nw r/vP�w tL ATTACHMENT No. 6 d w ulj +U vu er 1 I . ATTACHMENT No. 7 ruj � o C9 Z s C� t ATTACHMENT No. 8 w N 1 ATTACHMENT No. 9 �L.��� ita� Ti -I �rjr-7� S'urt�.,i�rte Transit MEMBER AGENCIES Cathedral City Coachella Desert Hot Springs Indian Wells Indio La Quinta Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Riverside County Ms. Glenda Lainis Assistant Planner Planning and Development Division City of La Quinta 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 ATTACHMENT No. 10 RE: Public Use Permit 91-009; EA 91-196 Dear Ms. Lainis: June 6, 1991 JUN 10 194 �1T�t O� LA gUINTA ) ANNING & DEVEMMENT DEPI- Thank you for the opportunity for the proposal for the church facility to be located on the northeast corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street. SunLine Transit Agency is concerned in that Miles Avenue and Adams Street continue to develop, increased transit needs are being generated. At this time, however, SunLine 'Transit Agency can not justify the creation of a route the vicinity of Miles and Adams. In time, a route will be justified. At that time, SunLine Transit Agency will need the support of certain transit amenities which we feel is the responsibility of the developers to provide. This includes bus turnouts and a passenger waiting shelter. as in In a separate letter, I have contacted Wallace Nesbitt on a similar subject. I would appreciate meeting with the planners of the City of La Quinta in order to work out a program where by developments being created today can be conditioned to pay for future transit amenities that will be needed. I am hoping that this meeting can take place later this month. 32-505 Harry Oliver Trail • Thousand Palms, CA 92276 . (619) 343-3456 • FAX (619) 343-3845 A Public Agency In the meantime, I am uncertain as to how to condition this particular project. I would suggest that we condition the developer to bond for the cost of a passenger waiting shelter and a bus turnout. However, if you feel there is another option which be better, please let me know. I look forward to discussing the issue with the City of La Quinta and hope that we can come to some resolution as to how we can handle these types of projects in the future. Yours Very Truly, SUNLINE TRANSIT AGENCY Debra Astin Director of Planning DA/dc ATTACHMENT No. 11 zCT ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY ti6- dL.. y ' * Ld 1 M COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DILA qU6NTA POST OFFICE BOX to5e • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELE f""1Rg)&*MtGpM0ff DEFT. DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLIS CODEKAS, PRESIDENT THOMAS E. LEVY, GENERAL MANAGER -CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R RUMMONDS, VICE PRESIDENT May 28, 1991 BERNARDINE SUTTON, SECRETARY JOHN W. McFADDEN OWEN McCOOK ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER DOROTHY M NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL, ATTORNEYS THEODORE J. FISH File: 0163.1 Planning Commission City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 Gentlemen: Subject: Public Use Permit 91-009, Environmental Assessment 91-196, Portion of Northwest Quarter, Section 20, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Meridian This area is protected from stormwater flows by the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone C on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. The district will furnish domeszic water and sanitation service to this area in accordance with the current regulations of this district. These regulations provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said fees and charges are subject to change. This area shall be annexed to Improvement District No. 55 of Coachella Valley Water District for sanitation service. Plans for grading, landscaping, and irrigation systems shall be submitted to Coachella Valley Water District for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. If you have any questions please call Bob Meleg, stormwater engineer, extension 264. Yours very truly, PIC 6' m Levy General Manager -Chief Engineer RF:kb/e5a cc: Don Park Riverside County Department of Public Health, Bermudel. 6MNSERVATION USE WATER WISELY � CbUNTY RIVERSM GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF ATTACHMENT No. 12 RIVERSIDE COUNTY *Ylt#*JFIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE • PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 92370 (714) 657-3183 To: City of La Quinta Planning Division Attention: Glenda Lainis RE: Public Use Permit 91-009 Desert Baptist Church MAY 2 4 199, 0-1 Y Ur Lm yuINTA I ANNINP & nEVELOPURT nEP1 May 24, 1991 With respect to the condition of approval regarding the above referenced CUP, the Fire Department requires the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code and/or recognized fire protection standards: I. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 1750 gpm for a 2 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon building being equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. 2. The required fire flow shall be available from a Super hydrant(s) (6" x 4" x 2}" x 2}") located not less than 25' nor more than 165' from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. 3. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and fire department connection shall be located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. 4. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building Code. 5. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2AlOBC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 6. Comply with Title 19 of the California Administrative Code. 7. Install Panic Hardware and Exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. PLANNING DIVISION INDIO OFFICE ❑ TEMECULA OFFICE i9-733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, Indio, CA 92201 41002 County Center Drive, Suite 225, Tmnecula, CA 92390 (619) 342MM • FAX (619) 775-2072 ❑ RIVERSIDE OFFICE (714) 694.5070 0 FAX (714) 694.5076 3760 12th Street, Riverside, CA 92501 (714) 275-4777 • FAX (714) 369-7451 prin red on recycled papew City of La Quinta 5/24/91 Re: CUP 91-009 Page 2. 8. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 9. Install a Fire Alarm System per NFPA 72. 10. Approved building address shall be placed in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. 11. The circular planter in the entrance way shall be reduced to a 10 foot radius. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Depar--'ment at the time building plans are submitted. All questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the Fire Department Planning & Engineering Staff at (619) 342-8886. Sincerely, RAY REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner By Tom Hutchison Fire Safety Specialist to cc: B7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTIC�N OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CIF PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-009 TO ALLOW THE CREATION OF A CHURCH ON A 4.21 ACRE SITE CASE NO. PUP 91-009 - DESERT BAPTIST CHURCH WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, did, on the 9th day of July, 1991, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Desert Baptist Church to build a church complex generally located on the northeast corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street, more particularly described as: THE WESTERLY 330 FEET OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 20, T5S R7E, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said Public Use Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that the Planning Director has determined after initial study that the church complex will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Public Use Permit 91-009, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, WHEREAS, at said public hearing and upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find that the following facts exist to justify this approval of said Public Use Permit: 1. That Public Use Permit 91-009, as conditionally approved, is generally consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use density, unit type, circulation requirements, R-1 Zoning District development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. That the subject site is fairly level with the east being the lowest part of the site. The proposed circulation design and building layout, as conditioned, are, therefore, suitable for development. RESOPC.022/CS -1- 3. That the proposed buildings, as conditionally approved, will be developed with public sewers and water, and therefore, are not likely to cause serious public health problems. 4. That the site layout of Public Use Permit 91-009 will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through the project, since alternate easements for access and for use have been provided that are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public. 5. That the proposed Public Use Permit 91-009, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape common areas. 6. That the proposed Public Use Permit 91-009, as conditioned, provides storm water retention, and noise mitigation. 7. That the development of Public Use Permit 91-009, as conditioned, will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. 8. That general impacts from the proposed church were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment 91-196, relative to the environmental concerns of this Public Use Permit; 3. That the Planning Commission does hereby approve the subject Public Use Permit 91-009 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 9th day of July, 1991 by the following vote, to wit: RESOPC.022/CS -2- AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CHAIRPERSON City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.022/CS -3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91-_ CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-009 JULY 9, 1991 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Development of the site shall comply with approved Exhibits as contained in the Planning Department's file for Public use Permit No. 91-009 and the following conditions which shall take precedence in the event of any conflict with these exhibits. 2. Public Use Permit 91-009 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division and Zoning Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 3. This approval shall be used within two (2) years after final approval. Otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. The term "use" shall mean the beginning of substantial construction of permanent buildings (not including grading) authorized by this permit, which construction shall thereafter be pursued diligently to completion. Prior to expiration of the permit, the Applicant may apply to the Planning & Development Department for an extension of time in which to use the permit, with the total time of approval not to exceed a period of three (3) years. 4. Construction of the future buildings and facilities authorized under this permit shall begin within five years after the final approval by the La Quinta City Council, which construction shall thereafter be pursued diligently to completion; otherwise, approval of those unobstructed or uncompleted portions of the development authorized under Public Use Permit 91-009 shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. 5. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist, with the Developer to pay costs, to prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. At a minimum, the plan shall: (1) identify the means for digging test pits; and (2) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant material are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. CONAPRVL.016/CS -1- 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 assistant s)/representative(s), shall be submitted to the Planning and Deve-opment 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 Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily diver, 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 area 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 analyses to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 6. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning & Development Department for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts from this project on surrounding areas and on this project from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the project layout. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming, walls, and landscaping, etc.), and other noise retention techniques. 7. Prior to grading permit issuance, 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. CONAPRVL.016/CS -2- 8. A minimum 20-foot and 10-foot landscaped setback shall be provided on Miles Avenue and Adams Street respectively. Design of the setback shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. Setback shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way line. a. The minimum setbacks may be modified to an "average" if a meandering or curvilinear wall design is used. 9. Prior to 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: o City Fire Marshall o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o Planning & Development Department o Coachella Valley Water District o Coachella Valley Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above -mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building and Safety Department at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 10. 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. 11. The appropriate Planning approval shall be secured prior to establishing any signs other that the sign approved as part of the Public Use Permit. 12. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91-196 and Public Use Permit 91-009 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 Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of Environmental Assessment 91-196 and Public Use Permit 91-009, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. CONAPRVL.016/CS -3- Prior to final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining conditions of approval and mitigating measures of Environmental Assess ment 91-196 and Public Use Permit 91-009. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring -to assure such compliance. BUILDING DESIGN 13. The proposed building complex shall comply with all the R-1 zoning requirements, including parking requirements and setback restrictions. 14. Prior to the submittal of any application for building permits for Phase 2 construction, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department, the following plans for review and approval: o Floor and elevation plans of the structures o Site plan delineating locations of the building(s), walkways, walls, etc. o Landscaping and irrigation plan delineating plant type, size, spacing and location. o Exterior lighting plan showing the type and location of all exterior lights. Based upon this review, additional parking may be required as a condition for issuance of a building permit. WALLS, FENCING, SCREENING, AND LANDSCAPING 15. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire parcel, 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 activity. b. Planting previously site. of irrigation during any construction of cover crop or vegetation upon graded but undeveloped portions of the CONAPRVL.016/CS -4- c. Provisions 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 Directors of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while begin used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 16. Prior to building permit issuance, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for review and approval final plan (or plans) showing the following: a. Landscaping, including plant types, sizes, spacing, location, and irrigation system for all retention basin, landscape buffer, and entry areas. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting material shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. Lawn use shall be minimized and not used adjacent to curb. No spray heads shall be used adjacent to curb. b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required wall and meandering sidewalk. C. Exterior lighting plan, emphasizing minimization of light glare impacts to surrounding properties. d. Location and design of walled enclosure for trash and recycling bins. 17. The approved landscaping and improvements shall be installed prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and viable condition for the life of the project. 18. Those portions of the site designated for future buildings shall be planted with a perrenial wildflower mix which shall be maintained in a viable condition until such time that construction occurs. 19. The Applicant shall comply with the La Quinta Outdoor Light Control Ordinance. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 20. The applicant shall comply with all the requirements of the City Fire Marshal as stated in the memo dated May 24, 1991, including the following: CONAPRVL.016/CS -5- a. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 1750 gpm for a 2 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. Fire flow is based upon building begin equipped with automatic fire sprinklers. b. The required fire flow shall be available from Super hydrant(s) (611 x 491 x 2 1/211 x 2 1/211) located not less than 251 nor more than 1651 from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. C. Install a complete fire sprinkler system per NFPA 13. The post indicator valve and fire Department connection shall be located to the front, within 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building(s). System plans must be submitted with a plan check/inspection fee to the Fire Department for review. A statement that the building(s) will be automatically fire sprinklered must be included on the title page of the building plans. d. Install a supervised waterflow fire alarm system as required by the Uniform Building code. e. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. f. Comply with Title 19 of the California Administrative Code. g. Install Panic Hardware and Exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. h. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained a fire lanes. i. Install a Fire Alarm System per NFPA 72. j. Approved building address shall be placed in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. k. The circular planter in the entrance way shall be reduced to a 10 foot radius. 1. Final conditions will be ,addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check fee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. CONAPRVL.016/CS -6- 21. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District. ENGINEERING CONDITIONS 22. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, applicant shall provide approved construction plans, prepared by a registered civil engineer, for the on -site grading and improvements required herein. 23. Applicant shall post an approved form of security in guarantee of grading and environmental control. 24. Applicant shall construct, if needed, or shall pay reimbursement for the actual construction cost incurred by others for the portions of Adams Street and Miles Street contiguous to the frontage of applicant's parcel, including sidewalks and 1/4 of the intersection. 25. For the portion of these improvements constructed by applicant, applicant shall post performance security in the amount of 100% of the approved estimated cost of the improvements and payment security in the amount of 50% of the approved estimated cost. 26. For the portion constructed by others, the amount of the reimbursement shall be the actual cost of construction as listed in the reimbursement agreement between city and the developer of Tract 23913. The payment shall be in cash but may be deferred until the time of initial occupancy of the first -phase building improvements proposed in this project provided applicant posts with the city an acceptable form of security in guarantee of the payment. 27. Applicant shall pay 3.125% of the estimated future cost to design and construct traffic signals at the Miles/Adams intersection. The payment shall be in cash but may be deferred to a future date mutually agreed to by applicant and City provided that applicant posts with City an acceptable form of security in guarantee of the payment. 28. The cash payments or security guarantees required above shall be made prior to issuance of the initial grading permit for the project. 29. Applicant shall dedicate any necessary public street rights of way as follows: a. Miles Avenue - Primary Arterial, 55-foot half width; b. Adams Street - Secondary Arterial, 44-foot half width; c. Corner cutback at Miles/Adams intersection. CONAPRVL.016/CS -7- 30. Applicant shall fully landscape and maintain all street right of way contiguous to the site. 31. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscape lots shall conform with the requirements of the Planning Director and the City Engineer and shall be approved prior to construction. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas such as setback lots and retention basins. 32. An engineering, geological, and soils engineering report shall be submitted for review along with the grading plan. Recommendations in the report shall be incorporated into the grading plan. The adequacy of the grading plan shall be certified by the soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist. 33. Applicant shall submit a copy of the grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and comment with respect to the District's Water Management Program. 34. The site shall be designed and graded so the difference in building pad elevations with those of adjoining lots in the adjacent tract does not exceed three feet. If compliance with the pad elevation differential requirements is not feasible, city will consider alternatives. 35. Storm water run-off produced in 24 hours by a 100-year storm shall be retained on site in landscaped retention basin(s) 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 two inches per hour unless applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. Basin requirements include, but are not limited to, a grassed ground surface with permanent irrigation improvements, and necessary drainage structures that meet the requirements of the City Engineer. 36. The site shall be graded in a manner that permits storm flow in excess of the retention basin capacity to flow out of the site through a designated emergency overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. Similarly, the site shall be graded in a manner that anticipates receiving storm flow from adjoining property in locations that have historically received flow. 37. The parking lot and drives shall be improved in accordance with the La Quinta Municipal Code. CONAPRVL.016/CS -8- 38. Applicant shall provide a California registered civil engineer to exercise sufficient supervision and quality control during construction of the grading and improvements to insure compliance with the plans, specifications, and applicable codes and ordinances. The engineer shall make the following certifications upon completion of construction: a. That grading improvements were properly monitored by qualified personnel during construction for compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances and thereby certify the grading to be in full compliance with those documents. b. That the finished building pad elevations conform with the approved grading plans. 39. Applicant shall pay all plan check and construction permit fees. The fee amounts shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken. 40. All existing and proposed electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, and are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 41. All underground utilities shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to construction of any street improvements. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. CONAPRVL.016/CS -9- TO: FROM: DATE: MEMORANDUM HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT JULY 9, 1991 SUBJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 90-029, CHANGE OF ZONE 90-054 & SPECIFIC PLAN 90-015 - LANDMARK LAND COMPANY The subject items were originally scheduled for public hearing at this evening's meeting. However, Staff is requesting that this project be continued to your next scheduled meeting of July 23, 1991, as the Final EIR has not yet been received. The Final EIR may be available for distribution in time for your July 9th meeting, so that you will have some time to review it prior to the continued public hearing on these cases on July 23rd, at which time we hope to have a Staff Report available. MEMOWN.027/CS PH-! STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 9, 1991 PROJECT: PUBLIC USE PERMIT 91-010 PROPOSED PRESCHOOL/DAY-CARE CENTER APPLICANT: GLENDA & MICHAEL BANGERTER ENGINEER: ADVANCED ENGINEERING GROUP ARCHITECT: MOSER ASSOCIATES LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF SAGEBRUSH AVENUE EXTENSION EAST SIDE OF DATE PALM DRIVE BACKGROUND• 1. The proposed preschool/day-care center will care for 230 children (200 children initially and 30 more after Phase Two) and 23 employees, and comprise three phases, the first (classroom & administration buildings) 8,851 square feet, the second (infant and toddler center) (1,056 square feet) and the third (multi -use facility) 2,000 square feet. 2. The facility is located on a triangular shaped lot along side the CVWD evacuation channel. 3. The proposed buildings are grouped around a central open play area located alongside the CVWD channel. STAFF ANALYSIS: Attached are a number of letters for and against this project. The major concern of the people against the day-care center is increased traffic. Staff has therefore, instructed the Applicant to engage an Engineering Company, approved by this Department, to do an in depth traffic study. This study is presently underway. The applicant has requested that the Planning Commission continue this matter until the traffic study is completed (see Attachment #3). Staff recommends that the Planning Commission continues the above hearing until the results of the study are available. The Planning Commission might choose to allow interested members of the public attending the hearing on this date, July 9, 1991, to speak on the understanding that the public hearing and Planning Commission decision on the project will be continued until July 23, 1991. STAFFRPT.031/CS -1- RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion, continue the hearing for Public Use Permit 91-010 until July 23, 1991. Attachments: 1. Locality plan 2. Architectural drawings 3. Letter from applicant requesting continuance of Public Hearing. 4. Letters received from members of the public. STAFFRPT.031/CS -2- ATTACHMENT No. 1 ORTH CASE Nm PUP 90--010 ATTACHMENT No. 2 SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS Im b � r� 8;$ ATTACHMENT No. 2, ill, NO .: _. _s : 0 Is€ W�lt ,€� � � 2 - of ON .1, m VA liozm I vlxLno VI dCl WWd aLVC WS-P IOOHOS WUM VIXMD V! - RAMCI DVV-LJ iorv) I vaxmO ni do "d atva Wf* "100}iOS nLIJ'I d,1.PUf1O VI 0 ilt Q~ v. .F C •" c IN r ul�nuil Uny:) 'vixz.IO vl b a MY4 Uva ass 1POH:)s allin vimn0 vI :u. CL �� I 4 c Q r z c T ,.:. ATTACHMENT No. 3 Glenda and Michael Bangerter 53-245 Avenida Martinez La Quinta, CA 92253 (619)564-1486 - 02 July 1991 Planning Commission City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Regarding: La Quinta Little School Preschool/Day Care Center #91-010 To whom it may concern: A special request was made of us by Mr. Jerry Herman of the La Quinta Planning Department on 25 June 1991 for a traffic study on our proposed project. The results will not be made available to us until after our scheduled hearing. For this reason we respectfully request a continuance in order to present all necessary information to the committee. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Sincerely, J 'Glenda L. Bangerter bg v uzrr 'vsxuio n ati . KN4 ZLVc ONO 1OOH3S 8'S1.U'I V1KnO V1 ATTACHMENT No. 4 LETTERS FROM MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC RCEIV JUL 0 2 1991 CITY OF LA WIHTA pIANNING & DEVELOPMENT IEPT. Please see UNASYV' amD: ' sCC,fr ,svxctam sotlmml DrescnDmg �r'cr^+ahon on as! cages rAX - 21991 July 1, 1991 City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 To whom it may concern: As a resident of the City of La Quinta, I would like to express my opinion regarding the proposed Pre-School/Day Care Center to be operated by Glenda Bangerter. I am very much in favor of her project and I hope the City of La Quinta will agree that this is a great necessity in our community. As our city grows with development, the more in demand Day Care Centers will be. If we deny this now, what will happen to the working family? Weigh all the options and the only reasonable conclusion could be is to approve plans for The La Quinta Cattle School. Sincerely, Pamela Jo Stull 54-545 Ave Ramirez la Quinta, CA 92253 RECEIVEU JUL 0 2 1991 CITY O� LA kjUIN'TA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEFT. c1e. c? e, Q M, s�—�( June 25, 1991 City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: 'the La Quinta Little School Dear City of La Quinta: 9F ✓1* F 40 I note with great interest that plans are being submitted to the City of La Quinta for a Pre-School/Day Care Center in La Quinta. As a full-time worker, I can assure you that this news is heaven sent. Certainly, any support given to this Little School will be appreciated by many distraught parents who must now rely on the ever -changing list of ba.bysitters and/or limited -enrollment home day care centers in the area. Not only would we parents benefit greatly from the stress relief of having a reliable, permanent and well -organized pre-school/day care center, but our employers would surely emit a sigh of relief to have us on the job all day and every day without the curse of canceled sitters, etc. Of particular interest is the fact that the center will have extended hours --a joy to any employer who on occasion needs a working parent to put in a little overtime without hearing the time -worn excuse that their "kids" have to be picked up because the day care center closes at 6:00. May I take this opportunity to adamantly support plans for The La Quinta Little School project. Sincerely, Verna M. Loeffler 53-445 Avenida Obregon P.O. Box 1004 La Quinta, CA 92253 !Ct�..ic� JUL O 2 1991 CIIV Or LA kjUiNTA TANNING & DEVELOPMENT OI ?1' June 2T,�1991 CITY OF LA pUINTA CITY MAXAGERR'S OPT I La Quinta City Council La Quinta, CA. 92253 Dear Council Members: It has come to my attention that there is a chance that Glenc Bangerter's planned day care may not come to fruition because of son unhappy home owners near the planned building site. I find it unbelievable that a day care facility would be protested. understand that the planned location is zoned for school buildings. A a home owner myself, I would much prefer a child day care business t most any other sort of business in my neighborhood. The operatir hours are during the day, when most people are most likely out of th house. The weekends and evenings would be noise free and traffic fre as the school would not be in operation at that time. I just don't se the problem. On the other hand, I have been a home owner in La Quinta for thre years now and am also a parent. I know from my own experience an frustration that one of the things that is sorely needed, and quit lacking in La Quinta is a quality day care. It is unfortunate that the citizens of La Quinta must drive into othe desert communities to find quality day care. Besides the inconvenience La Quinta is losing revenues to other cities. I believe that you should support Glenda Bangerter and her planned da care because so very many would benefit from it, perhaps even thos complaining the most loudly about it now. Sincerely, Diane Boulanger 52-580 Avenida Ramirez La Quinta, CA. 92253 (619) 564-2879 JUL 0 2 1991 C17 C� lH ttulNrA °tA"q"G & lv4lao PMFF4T nFP7. `-'s, to] k eto aM JUL Q 2 1991 CITY ur- LA VUINTA 'lANrrf;�c & Dn'' LGPAIFNT DEPT. DJL (q1 �_Z1� IU u�+ X. 0Q) o 61, (ter L.4,/Lz-s, LA6 RFC~IVED J 2 6 '^ 7—(-c 10 0'k i D .2� J�- ECt iu JUL 0 Z 19cil CIT' Lk Lei vUINTA - �}¢�Nidiid{i D:.L't W,N,ENT DEN ge.". a x/e ?I �t - JUG - uu 91 JUL 02 lggt< INTA C` 1 U / � LIB VUiNTA T_...----- PtANNI T DEv.:G'h�FPil'REP1. CA- av C CV rr,oV l r+ e, y(y, 0 5 $N, (L. ` c;�- \,axs v2.0 y Q�'l �•�-n�- f IN (n� o.�a-�U0.�\ ►� C_��\'1� - Ca`L. �'-r��T"Q..0 \r �-d. Qv���Q `�"�A� Aev��AQ-C <: 4-j 1 S��oo\e z C.r,.--�- �,� -Fa.�.•\\e..s o.� _ ice\ Q.��n��, - ��-�.cve.._ oo� Ce.o.s��,�.�,t �✓ �w�. Q\O.�t�� �� c� -�-o .-G�2,nc� _ � V�'vC�., L..DV �1G \ l- - cm\& Z, A Q�►.C����' �\r'� C'� Lo �f�'�i�o,tt. �Q.S\�Q-(\�. 1 �� � � t\Q�,c� \j� _ �Co� (;t1v C� JUl 0 2 19.4, �r cOh t A VUJIV EF/ OEP7 lJ 9` `ems 3 25 June 1991 City of La Quinta Development Department P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta CA 92253 To whom it may concern: RECP' C N 2 � j99 cry NN/NG & E £� V U'NrA The purpose of this letter is to express my full support for the proposed preschool/child care center to be located at 49-500 Date Palm Drive in La Quinta, California. Our society has chosen to ignore the dangers of not providing a nurturing environment for our children as more parents are forced to work outside of the home every day. It is in our best interest, as a community, to allow Mrs. Glenda Bangerter to provide this desperately needed service as she has lovingly and very effectively nurtured nine high achieving and self confident children of her own. Sincerely, Bettye W. George -Anderson La Quinta Resident Enclosures _;�)7✓$G Cti Z.4 &;G t'/7 f 5 tn tl� 1� C`O dc o rn W N m N S Q m z ?v 1-Z fJ� Y M4, :a4 E O 1: C y ga a� t > CN�'GE ?y'O -Ain d.2 dA$ m a npm3 T yy Y WE y V-4 m Fi E '.`7w.> o -01 v� V Eol�cEa FL-S2. m 9 E c E $b a c, m3x —°c, ca u ° d> N v v 3 m t ycy v m Y O C L^ et C N G TJ gJp _ y yy yCCCy V m O Jd mm O� 75c y Eg '�°D•v zl` b Om a y a m 'A°i o$« a C C Nn t0 a tt d a`o y C G>'O M C ~ ma°m' WN A s�Mmt mc�do V C. S. 7 C -j a -*iQ m o` m J v Mf- `�° rsu Ev°� uwCL Col. ` y>�E. ai ��� V COL n o d H m 3 d c m �y 3 �c Q° m' O m� N seU 0.�•V�0/Nty`.�i C1 m O to N y� F 01 z U r V y ca�a�CmE > g Y T7 O W N 3 U V y d " OIL to, E W ►� x C y g 4, E O$ �:K L v;� m ° os >.>gs ® C 0 >tA Co ♦- in A> 61 u °-2 N/ ai moot ; bs - ®C.taF 0 z vw� 0 H x min��9 �.. CL .0r Ymxd tree ® c G m U .k R Q Zy cc4 m r oil C. 2 a,1.S• ��o �c r. �. .�� Amwa On >,fi.y� QQQ�t f. N Fga,o mS G G- c J _ >�_ d m N a o p$ AEeppa o3 mgxs � A m m M1 ffd u3s a �sv m G C CB� W SC QQ y 93 (a" . m -- �� comics TV �p•�S� �►����"r• Firms give Week lonely homes I! religion TLC/ iew 'n Mexicu rp mr!ud- 'am lino rp; ran, .•: tr e6 j p. -N liras. e.,ma ;P .Qes age D, Valley day care called scarce The roachella Valleys need for child care is ci-teal arenrlinlz In d report to be released next week Research by the Coachella Vallev Assrx•Iation of Governmen:c shows the area has 3 000 spaces to serve 43.00f, rhildren. Other findings ■V paces exist for 15 irr ele- nnen!.,rs school ctuldren who need care before and after schooi ■.No licensed care exists for chil- dren younger than 6 months ■.Nlnre than 3000 of the va;lev's N 000 rhi'dren ynun¢er than 2 are cared '•.r by re;nh\os frieno, and t7.-Aj;, , EILP + �� JULO i IM CITY Of to tjUINTA pi ammitif & nFvE fJPVEIIT OEPT. P., Ktutivtu ,JUN 14 0 June 19, 1991 RIEU JUN U 4 199' LA QU1141 P.O.City La Quinta of Box1504`�G g La Quinta, CA 92253 Attn: Planning & Development Department To whom it may concern.: I would like to request that the city approve the plans for the preschool/daycare center to be built on property located at the corner of Sagebrush and Date Palm Drive in La Quinta as proposed by Michael and Glenda Bangerter. Our city desperately needs a high quality child care center and I feel this facility will meet the needs of many La Quinta residents. Thank you for your consideration. Sincer y, u a Nelson 52- 00 Avenida Diaz La Quinta CA 92253 619)564-9107 1, c PETITION TO THE CITY OF LA QUINTA JUN i '? 1004 AND THEIR PLANNING COMMISSION C11V Ur Lh VJU1NTA PLAIMING b QI.VEWFNEW t)F 9 Dated this 1st day of June, 1991, We,the Residential Property owners of Desert Club Manor Tract No.1, in the city of LaQuinta PETITION TO THE CITY OF LAQUINTA, County of Riverside, State of California by personal delivery at vour Council Meeting, and also by mail certified at your offices in the City of L aQuinta, "TO REJECT AN APPLICATION" presented by a . Ms, Glenda Bangerter to obtain a permi t to build and operate a daycare center lice ise for approximately 200 children, operating 12 hours daily, and S days weekly, for reasons set forth hereinbelow, and based upon existing statutes relating to residential property owners, for themselves, their heirs, successors and assigns, and for additional reasons affecting their safety, security, as real property taxpayers rights, of residential property owners of Desert Club Manor Tract No.I as follows, to wit: A. For the record, a copy of this Petition is being sent to all Regulatory Agencies that have any jurisdiction in the subject area of this proposed development such as the Traffic Control Division, the Fire Department, the Ambulance Service, the Police and Sherrif's Department, the Utility Departments of Water and Power, the Environmental Protection Agency and others whose concern and interest will be affected dramat- ically, and risk increaseu, B. We propose an immediate rational and accurate functional analysis to be conducted by experts in these divisions of the County of Riverside and our local divisions as well, so that such a proposal will receive a just and non -prejudicial opinion and judgement. C. A FEW LETTERS ONLY were delivered by Ms. Glenda Bangerter. Most homeowners received no notice or letters at all from anvone. A 90,7 majority homeowners of Desert Manor Club Tract No.l, are opposed to this for the following reasons, to wit: D. Based upon Ms Bangerter's letter, and upon a full capacity of two hundred "YOUNGSTER CLIENT", an increase traffic flow of 200 cars in each am and 200 cars in each pm, and 200 cars drive in each pm, and 200 cars drive out each am (which totals thus far 800) in and out Sagebrush per day, and added to this the autos of the existing homeown- ers primarily dayworkers, but also some seniors, and added the service trucks that will service the daycare facility, and added to that, the school buses that pick up, and take home the homeowners children, and added to that the additional traffic anticipated by the planned culdesac improvement to Saguaro and Bottlebrush, and added to that the increase traffic from Planned right in right out on Pare LaQuinta's entrance onto Washington, plus of course the conventional traffic that occurs daily currently. D. (Con't) THE UNIMPROVED LOTS that are being planned for development and workmen and deliveries to these lots have not even been considered or estimated. E. Can anyone with any experience or logic imagine what an estimated (greater than one thousand cars) create? How will ingress and egre.ss be affected ? Another very profound point. THE LEFT TURN LANES AS PER CURRENT TRAFFIC PLANS PROVIDE FOR ONLY 2 CAR LENGTHS W WAITING TO ENTER ONTO SAGEBRUSH: The same type left turn lane to Madera going North. Have gentlemen any idea what it means to stop on a "RACE TRACK" Washington St. in the am & pm. F. There are other concerns as well. What about Medical Emergencies? Fires? Police Alarms? Accidents? G. The accident rate currently on Washington and in Desert Club Manor Tract No. I may be headlined in local papers more often than not: H. On the PLUS SIDE the dissenting approximately 907 group of home- owners definitely support an additional day care center, but not in inaccessable locale as the 106 residential lots and home thereon: It should be situated in an area that WILL NOT create congestion, gridlock the Washington left lane exits, and statistically it will cause traffic accidents and perhaps fatalities. Little accessabil.ity in and out is impossible to improve or expand from any angle. I. An honest and fair decision supersedes all pro and con on this matter. We advise those responsible for any errors in decisions, and expressly advise the LaQuinca City Group and Planning Commission that if this matter slides through without a th-c rough functional analysis, and our dissenting home- owners are ignored AGAIN with no regard, the consequences of any accident, loss, or fatality, all liability, SHALL INURE TO THEM. We desire no more POOR JUDGEMENT ON SAGEBRUSH, since we have had a sump to beautify our area, a very sad event that cannot be undone. Experience is the best teacher, let us have the wisdom to apply it..... Glenda L. Bangerter 53-245 Avenida Martinez La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Neighbor, This letter is to introduce myself and the proposed preschool and day care center now being planned for the triangular piece of property at the end of Sagebrush and Bottlebrush. My name is Glenda Bangerter. My husband Michael and I have lived here in La Quinta since 1986. We are the parents of nine children. My background is in children's education and business management. Currently, I am president of an organization for children's education, a program consisting of over 150 children under the age of 12. As you are probably aware, there is.a critical need for child care in our area. To meet that need, I have been meeting with the City of La Quinta and it's planning department, for a number of months, to find an appropriate yite. At the above location, I am planning an attractive building which would correspond with and enhance this neighborhood. I will personally own and operate the facility which will be properly licensed for approximately 200 children, ages 2 to 5, with a future toddler center for 30. The scheduled operational hours will be Monday through Friday from 6:30 A.M. to 6:30 P.S. Based on a study of traffic flow with housing development and street improvements, the center would only increase the traffic flow by 3% on these days. However, we have recently been informed —by tFe_ de loper of the new housing project at the end of Sagebrush, that the entrance for that subdivision will now be someplace other than Sagebrush. Prior to a formal hearing, I am looking for neighborhood input. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions, concerns or suggestions. I would sincerely look forward to your support of this very needed project. Yours.truly, Glenda Bangerter �. ✓'_;�.� N'h- Cl„A�V- A%d1A J1 u.J-*tAUNUA v !�H 31[s 79 3ad:)scLKVII IN not �r tot i! _ � i � � . /� ;rut -- - � 4• e ri Qi �'1 \ �•� i � I � I II I 1,.1Oli ., 2 i O 1 t r w 2 � f :3 �` i f b �•1 • ! � 1� .. i -i---tom � 1-►- �= --. 68-400 HIGHWAY 11' CATHEDRAL CfiT1l, CA 9M (619) W-M City of La Quinta: As the property owner of 78-720 Saguaro and 78-730 Saguaro, I would like to add my support to the petition that was circulated throughout the neighborhood - TO STOP THE DEVELOP- MENT OF THE PROPOSED PRESCHOOL AND DAY CARE CENTER BY GLENDA L. BANGERTER. I feel that the preschool would hurt our property value, and cause a terrific traffic mess every- day. With 800 car trips by parents dropping off and picking up their children everyday down the narrow streets that currently exists in the neighborhood, the preschool would create a quite a safety risk to the residents and their children of the neighborhood. Please take into consideration that non a of the residents are in favor of the preschool, and it would do nothing to improve the area. SALES 9 LEAStMG 9 SERVICE H V- 4 m E�� J . J IM Pik. vtxrs 56 Yfb1 3 8 (lC ,--to'so GvAsz Sr, ��.�y� rg- �S �S•�cx�2� dlze �� ��-s3� �6r s44- OVA 11 t �6Y -c �297 (fe 7 ya Aa-__0(1S3 ��-Cr3 7S ',Oe To: La Quinta City Planning Commission La Quinta City Council 6-24-91 I am writting this letter in opposition to the proposed Daycare Center at Sagebrush and Date Palm Drive. To begin with, let me state that we have a quiet, friendly neighborhood that talks to one another. So far all the people I've talked to are opposed to this project; and have signed a petition to this effect. These people will be directly effected by this daycare, are we just being ignored?! My wife is active in this and at a recent meeting she was told by the contractor, Michael Bangerter, that she had better move! This was stated in front of C. Anderson and her assistant. Your public notice said that the project negative declaration after the environmental assesment had been completed. Yet when my wife went to the planning commission on 6-20-91, Glenda Lainis informed her it wasn't finished. And I can believe it isn't finished, for how can a 2000 plus more cars in the area not have an impact on the environment? I have a lot directly across from this proposed project and own a house within 300 yards from it, so yes I am taking this personally: Would you choose to build the house of your dreams there? I think it would be in the best interest of the Planning Commission to listen to the people it is supposed to be safe- guarding, instead of worring about the size of the city treasury! Sincerly, Jack Nelson ��-7017549L+i1v44. �4a .moo 1¢ ?'6 To: The Ladies & 3entlemen of the La ;orwdssion, sent for considerat ECE!u C17 Y Ur LA VUINT, A. J. Aarago s 'I ANNIMP & DEVEWpiprIjT 0E 76540 3ottleorush _r_-ive La '4uinta) C3liforni4 92253-2401 June 18, 1991 nta City Council and Pl4aning at meeting of each division. 9 pending application for the licensing and approval of a 200 child day care center is in motion. The Desert Club Manor, Tract-1, where my family and horse is situated since July, 1986. In reference to this Tract, I shall refer to it as ''DCH Tract-111. About 1 year ago, Parc La 4uinta was developed near 0wi Tract-1.It is one of the most unique and beautiful, in our area, yet it provided some problems in sump and water drainage. in late 1989 the surrounding home- owners of this sump, had an amicable meeting with Mr. Pena, who agreed to improve its cosmetics which he did . This was well done, considering financial and rational alternatives to remedy it. 3ituati.ons will occur in innovative or experimental projects. So be it for now. This preceding episode should alert each of you, as a strong signal of consequences that may occur again if this proposed application is ap- proved, as aescribed in the above first naraeranh of t is lwttPr_ Consider the increase of over 900 to 1,000 car traffic -flow, its noise, and the environmental impact it will impose upon 32i Tract-1 and to its Fa-�ailies of jay adorkers, it children and other conventional current traf- fic, with extremely limited egress and ingress daily. Osl-de-sacs on the Streets of Bottlebrush & Saguaro will increase the intensity and risk to everyone going or coming. What about fires? Or medical or other e-aergen- cies? Jid it ever occur to whoever proposed this site applied for, is . itwas zsflerred by any of your group, that IN" Tract-1 children could and should be provided a small pars or recreational facility, as many other children now enjoy, instead of a 11 death trap? ?ermit me one more quest- ion. You are not obligated to answer it, but think hard over it. Would any of You with growing families with children and day workers 90:4Y want'o raise your families and Chi! r�en in a situation like 70:i Tract-1 ? If this application was approved? Think about this for your families, not D,1H Tract-1 families, BUT YOUrZ3 1 In your hearts, you know the answer, If these risks are not carefully studied, and if it so approved, .you will exoress Conte-wt for the homeowners of D" Tract-1, TO AC A:C.aM several hundred "outside .fa-ailies --living elsewhere' to enjoy your decision at the cost of v1,75t s _w_F65 now-Irve and pay their taxes there, and whose peace & safety and security is ignored. Let me tell you about their f4ith and tr at in you, and why their rights should suoercedepres sure, urestige or po er" ( continued on next page) June 8, 1991 City of La Quinta 78-106 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Proposed pre-school/daycare center TO 'WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: The Board of Directors for Parc La Quinta Homeowners Association and myself, as their management representative, shall be present for the city council meeting dated June 13, 1991. We are concerned regarding the proposed pre-school/day care center to be constructed on Sagebrush, regarding access routes throve the Parc La Quinta complex. Sincerely, Cam Anderson Project Manager CfMt-U JU% 121041 4A ImG & DEVELMUIT DM- P. O. SOX 1032 I PALM DESERT, CA 82261 1(619) 568-2717 City of LaQuinta Planning Commission LaQuinta City Hall 78105 CAlle Estado LaQuinta, CA. 92253 78565 Sagebrush LaQuinta, CA. 92253 June 20, 1991 JUN 2 1. 19 CITY Ot L04, tjuINTA PIANNINr x nEV[L0PkJrNT DEPT RE: Public Use Permit 91-010 Preschool/Daycare Center Dear Ladies and Gentlemen of the Planning Commission: I am in receipt of the Notice of Public Hearing re: the construction and operation of the Daycare Center at the end of my street (Sagebrush) at Date Palm, and fail to see how the location of the center cannot have an adverse effect on the OBVIOUSLY BIASED Environmental Assessment conducted by the Bangerter project. When I purchased my home on Sagebrush, I choose this Desert Club Manor for the family community setting it offered, :its location to a quality school, its easy access to my employment, and its security of owning property that after much hard work and improvements could provide a solid investment for myself and my two schoolage children. In the past 22 years, I have seen added traffic from Parc LaQuinta, I have witnessed a burglary, an automobile theft, an "almost" vehicular homicide, and numberou s other break-ins. We can all argue it is growth, but I see it as an infringe- ment on my rights to allow for a FOR PROFIT DAYCARE CENTER to be placed right in the middle of our residential neigh- borhood! Our working class neighborhood has now already become a raceway, even prior to taking on the additional 2000 cars estimated from parents racing to drop kids off and racing again to pick them up. This creation of this death trap is not needed in this neighborhood. In the near future, we will assume traffic from Bottlebrush and Saguaro and the Park LaQuinta residents wanting to turn left in to their development. In addition, the beautiful view I once had at the mountains, has been removed and now I look at a 6ft. retention wall atop a 6ft. property eleva- tion that somehow got approved by the City. Now this wall will allow all the fumes from the some 2000 cars to breeze throught my home, and the noise from the added traffic to echoe from 6a.m. to 6p.m. Monday through Friday. I can no longer sacrifice my rights to allow for such a poorly thought out plan for an easily accessible daycare center at the expense of the homes here to allow these greedy investors to continue with their total disregard for the homeowners in the already developed plot of Desert Club Manor. -2- I don't believe our "fine" Mayor Pena and our Planning Commission whose meetings I have attended would allow for a daycare center to be situated in this plot. Wouldn't a better location on a major road in LaQuinta be a more optimal plan???? I'd personally like to see the new YMCA daycare get on its feet before we open another facility with capacity for 230 kids within 3/4 mile of each other. This childcare project sounds like another serious project or shall I say accident to the Desert Club Manor. I plead with you for your help in hearing our community and assist the Bangerter's to locate in an area more conducive to the added 2000 cars we estimate. Sincerely, Mary Kate Kelly 0141 cc: J. Pena, Mayor J. Herman, Planning Commission Director ERAL UCTION Glen Way East I.519(749.9396 6313011 June 26, 1991 RE: #91-010 11 io.... La Cuinta Planing And Development Comm. We recently purchased property in the desert Club Manor Tract, Lots 19,20,21 As we plan to retire in the desert area. When we purchased the property sagebrush St. was a nice quite st. Its hard to belive the Planing Comm. Assessment that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. What environment?. If dfinitely plays a large part in our enviroment. The traffic alone plays a large part. Parents shuttling childern to and fro,workers to and from the complex, delivery trucks in and out, salesman in and ou.. Children who live in Desert Club Manor would be also in danger on the streets. Also noise, from cars, trucks 230 children and just plain business noise from running a commercial project. This projest not belong in a residental area, especialy with small streets in this area. Sincerly, �aiC..--? RECttvtu JUL 0 1 1991 ca Y u� LA vuiNTA 'LANNINP & DEVELOPMENT DEP7 PARC LA QUINTA HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION P.O. BOX 1032 PALM DESERT,CALIFORNIA 92261 June 26, 1991 Ms. Katie Barrows La Quinta Planning Commissioner 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Dear Commissioner, 3131- 0 '4 100• C111 Ulr UH QU �N��Q� QIANNING & N"[ On behalf of the hf�meowners in the Parc La Quinta subdivision we would like to express some areas of concern a-�d recommended solutions regarding the proposed day care center at Date Palm and Sagebrush Drives in La Quinta. The concerns we feel that need to be addressed are as follows: -Limited Access (Sagebrush Drive) to and from the proposed site. According to Mr. Steven Spiers, the traffic count anticipated would be in excess of 2,400 cars per day. As there are currently only 5 homes on Sagebrush and Parc La Quinta is only two-thirds occupied, this road is not currently being used to this extent. -We further contend the Washington Avenue general plan must be reviewed and revised to present an accurate picture of the traffic impact resulting from 5 years of extensive development in the City of La Quinta. Also, as Mr. Spiers indicated, both Saguaro and Bottlebrush will be closed at Washington Street. Parc La Quinta residents were told of a median being placed on Washington, which will cause an unneccessary diversion of traffic to Sagebrush Drive. -Another concern connected to this increase in traffic is the bus stop, located at Sagebrush and Via Bolero. Placing the stop at Washington and Sagebrush will only increase the potential for harm to our school children, as will moving the stop further from the neighborhood. These issues are not without solution however and we would like to recommend the following as solutions to these unsettling concerns. 1). Install 25 MPH speed limit signs on Sagebrush. 2). Allow left turn access into Parc La Quinta from Washington Street, thereby eliminating 1,050 car trips, on Sagebrush daily as represented by Mr. Spiers calculations. PAGE TWO 3). Extend Date Palm Drive along wash to Avenue 50. This will allow the burden of traffic to be shared by two streets, not just one and will prevent all traffic from having to enter Washington Street (a major thoroughfare). This extension will also allow school buses the ability to service that area without having to turn around and solve ingress/egress concerns for undeveloped land at the Northeast Corner of Washington and Avenue 50. 46). Sidewalks on Sagebrush will become a necessity, incurring additional cost. The eventual development of this parcel as proposed would most certainly violate the intent if not the letter of the R-2 zone. Its size is simply overwhelming and more accurately qualifies as a commercial endeavor operating in a residential neighborhood. Your approval would seriously compromise the residential quality of life and therefore serve to reduce our property values. As a neighborhood of 300 plus Voters, our concerns must be addressed and we hope to hear your positive comments during the July 9th hearing. Thank you for your time and attention and we 1 meeting. / Sincerely, Treasurer Member at Large TM/tgh to this r at Large ct;vf--,.h To the LaQuinta planning and Development Departt0 100. CITY ur-1-H VUINTA 'CANNCdG & DEVE,1 CM,FNT DEPT This is in regards to the preschool/daycare center that the Bangerter's want to build. I am a school teacher and I am all for children being educated and taken care of, especially if a nice school is being built for needs of children. I am glad that they want to build an attractive building ... for 200 children. What I don't agree with is the location of the school. I own a house on 78 695 Saguaro and a lot on Bottlebrush. I do not wish to have the flow of traffic increase in this neighborhood. Glenda states in a letter that only an increase of 5% traffic flow would occur. I happen to know that this is not true. I work in a private school and believe me I am aware of the traffic coming and going ALL DAY LONG. Not just to drop off the children and pick them up at the end of the day. Parents come and go all day. I also am aware of all the night time functions, Parent night, open house ..... that will have these three streets lined with traffic during the occasion, and the noise that goes along with it. This is a neighborhood, not a business area. So what happens to my quiet walks with my twins that I just had, do I have to foreit my quiet time after I teach school all day. I get home at 4:00 but I will hear pre- school noise from 4:00-6:00... and will not be able to walk down t the end of the street with my babies for a relaxed quiet time. I work with children all day long and would like to enjoy the quiet neighborhood that I purchased a house in. How can you tak( that away from my family???????? I know from speaking to everyone in this neighborhood that NO ONE IS HAPPY ABOUT THE SCHOOL BEING BUILT. We are asking that this school be build in another area. They will never have the neighborhood in support of their school if they build here. I am not a 4lainer at heart but I do not want to see my neighborhood change with traffic and noise. I think that you should seriously think about this. If you liVEdat the end of these streets with your family, would you seriously want a school to be built so close to your home. Please answer honestl, and realize that we are families with children and homes. We cherish our quiet, peaceful neighborhood, we want to have con- tinued safety ... with minimum traffic flow. I would be very supportive of a school but not at the end of my street. Thank you for taking the time to read this. I will be at the hearing on July 9, 1991. This letter is written on behalf of my husband and I. Sincerly, _T*�o 6-, Mr. and Mrs. Robert Norlin :area Kle.r, and Curtis Klein 78-585 Sagebrush St -a Quinta, CA 92253 La C)uinta City Planning Dept. La Quinta, CA Re: Proposed Day Care Center Sagebrush and Date Palm Streets CE'u JUL n 5 iqo! C11V yr Ln VUjrjTA PMNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT. ladies and Gentlemen of the P1anninc Development Dept.: We re:'�pectfully submit our request to have the above- :eference,` Day Care Center and our concerns regarding to-ts rroposa;. added Lc the Agenda for the July 9. 19y1 crenerai meet:ncT. our pr:,nary concerns are as follows: '1RAFFI�. A capacity of two hundred -plus crildren in -he prQpoeec: Center mearis an increast-d traffic :lDw before 9:00 AM of apprcx. 25 cars IN and 225 cars OUT, ail racing agalr:_t the clock. Add to this. Staff for `:.ie Center. all deliveries of food and operation supplies, various other del,vt=ries - again with schedules to keep - and you have well over 500 vehicles racing up and down 2acebrush Street before 9:C0 AM, with a nearly equal number coming and going again in the late afternoon. On this street are school -aged children, who will be walking to school and the bus -stop, at the same time as the heaviest traffic flow. Since this street is not posted for speed limit, the average speed driven on it (although it is only two extra -long blocks in length) is in excess or 50 MPH. There are already skid marks over 30 feet in length, where a driver from another area nearly hit a child who lives on Sageb,-.^ush. One car parked on Sagebrush has been demolished. and another scraped, by drivers using excessive speeds. WE ARE CONCERNED FOR OUR CHILDREN. WE DO NOT WISH TO HAVE ANY OF THEM INJURED OR KILLED. Your proposed plan is also to close Bottlebrush and Saguaro streets, making them Cul-de-sacs, and routing all traffic from these streets down Sagebrush Street. Also. Parc La Quinta will soon (supposedly) have only right turn in or out of their development, and will therefore be forced to use Sagebrush St. to make left turns in or out. Between these three proposed changes. it adds an unnumbered amount or Lioftic to Dna n.,il , :street. Letter to Ls Quir:ta F'lanr,:rn,-T Dev. Dept. EP1`JIR��t+1VlEPI''',l, ' P7CF'-.i Since the dr a:-:aa? r,,*teY ns ice i. �Y"r,"i wE're d:.'a3tll'3i i Ch3n @� at the t; a Parc La Cluinta was developed, Sagebrush Street f 1 oods each t ime i t ra j ns . As much as a foot and a half of water has racked --yip on the street, tranPing hor;e:,wners on the westerly erid. In the early spring of 1991. rainwater backed--p on 7 lots. so deep the chiidren were s•w:.riming in the street. There is no effective d:.-ainage for this water, and `hat particular floou was not evaporated out of our street, driveways aria yara: ur,ti: long after a swamp -like condition had developed. The pr•cposed Day Care Center ha_-• also been planned with an e'evation much higl:er than the existing_ lots and homes. This w--li only add to the drairiage problem. and with Saaeb:is-h St. t'.-.e only means of entrance and exit, will mean closure for the Center, and much vehicular damage, as well as time loss at _chooi and at work, for the residents of both Develcpments involved. Another environme,.'a; concern is the greatly increased pollutant em,ssions fi r�m such heavy traffic. The hiah walls on the Sout:^.ern end of Parc La Quinta crake an effective trap for exhaust fumes and ri,-,lse. Small cl-:: _dren. and the elderly - both of whom we have in year-rouna residence - are extre-mFly susceptible to these pollutar._s. in conclusic-:, we would li)-'e to say thar we are not ajainst a Day Care Center, a l though we question t::e need f or any n,­ ,re at present, considering the number of such Centers curren�ly being built in this area. We ARE opposed to building a Center in a residential area, with all the inevitable problems listed above, and many, many more. �Ury 7, ,,;11 -a uiiiw r la� 'k"'ov,ri,,ssion etru h Avenue in the area. of Le Quinta also known as Desert Club sr sir -r .'_i (: 1 j, ?7r not supp--,rt tree oroposed development of Glenda Bangerter's ca car C- fo,- the area cast cif Cate Palm Drive and soith of the Sagebrush extension. Public ar �c leer r s Jr e reasonable Grid seared by a clear and undeniable rnaior ity of property Jwners i n t'1F 8r �a 'ra'fl,' �•c t c` the appro:e� conversion of Bottlebrush and 5a ua o str et: to cul-de- a re_•u c r � e at their _Vas-nngton Street entrances, all traffic for the three streets it QUe:.tl3r, 'will come and go on Sage5r ush alone Considering the day care l:er,te"'5 F i-st. 1S n- ^ned t^ accommodate ?GO children, there will be 20Q cars coming AND going down ,..e.r,J, r, m;xn1no AND evening, S days per week. (The 2nd and Ord prases',n,i11 briri:, "��r�`-�C. 'fl'; �7'� Unre; -ob e, unju5tiflatIle and unsafe volume of tretf�C i^ 7 d� i 15 ���- l ra. rl--,t,;l, fare hrod Furthermore, Sagebrush ha: nc side-=;lt.sl to CthG' `ervires we have no quarrel with tr.e need for day care tle lr''.rIN'_OaC:Ir is `va'ley Hcv,e,/er, it makes little sense to provide these da', caae �eJ ,7t Irle C'id ��f -h�_ir " 1j�; �',,C"�UC w day care is already availaL)le at the Y ' - ,7UJrJl&lt r^ceJ Site cn -,a-�� rUch r%UUi�IJI1 1,'}', uiC rlev, 1-6 „la'fl�-u v�'y'-D 3 ,u is Club Is boir,g built a�;ijve'� to he neap �r _�' I tie business rature of the Drepered da\; care facility does rot c+oi ri�r h,.-i- rr + e n� 2�;ryna of tre Desert Club Manor area. As property c\,�`ners or, Saaeor us,,�, v!e ����C�i�i tht Girl"IaCrtC; � proposal. -,ease consiaer our position ano that of the majority of our neiohbors 'wrien deciding t`iF fate r!, t,-,is propo°.ed day care facility. 5incerely,q., sober' :arid Revae PE>'nolds DENICE A. BROADHEAD 53-395 Avenida Bermudas La Quinta, CA 92253 July 1, 1991 To: La Quinta City Council, L.'%Z" uk:,/ r wr I I/ L-'� - 9199, It is with great pleasure that my husband and I lend our support for the project: La Quinta Little School. We have a 3 year old son and it was a concern of ours on where he would be attending preschool. We feel that this project will be nothing but a asset to our community. Not only is our city in need of this project but the entire Coachella Valley. We appreciate the opportunity to voice our opinion and hope that it will malKe a difference on your vote. Sincerely, Device A. Broadhead Resident dab/me C. ! #I -�. L; CIl Y ur LtA VuINTA PLANNING x DLEQ-L;t M NT DEPT. Steven E. Sanchez 78740 Saguaro Rd. La Quinta, CA. 92253 IS M-.:(� ; f'r- J A/L 0 loe. C/I P tlr 9 lftk�c p Cityof La Quinta 1 ��Q Planning and Development C�cr'�r.Worn, 78105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA. 92253 This letter is in reference to the proposed child care center (La Quinta Little School) at 49500 Date Palm in the Desert Club Manor residential housing tract. I have a 3 year old daughter and know the need for child care in La Quinta. I believe this is an important issue that needs to be addressed. I also believe the needs of the residents of the immediate area should be considered. As a parent,homeowner and police officer I am opposed to the installation and operation of this school for the following reasons: 1) I do not feel that a 200+ child day care center in the back of a residential area is a sound planning decision. a) There will be only one access road in to the day care center (Sagebrush). Bottlebrush and Saguaro will be blocked off as agreed by the planning commission. Emergency response times for ambulances, fire and police personnel can be tragically lengthened due to moving vans, construction vehicles, traffic collisions or road work. b) The increase of traffic on Sagebrush of only 5%, as Ms. Bangerter's letter states, is incorrect. With an enrollment of 200 children and a staff of 18 (employee parking spaces) the influx of vehicles on this small residential street of less than 10 houses will be considerably more than 5%. A more accurate percentile would be 1000%. c) I have seen the Washington Street expansion plan and the medium turnout for the south bound traffic turning onto Sagebrush. This turnout will accommodate only 3-4 vehicles. During the morning and evening traffic hours this poses a significant chance for a traffic collision. 2) I do not believe that there is a need for a day care center in this immediate area. a) There is a day care center about 500 yards away that is near completion (YMCA at La Quinta Middle School). It is more conveniently located and readily accessible to both parents and emergency personnel. b) A stronger need for a day care center lies in the upper cove area. There also appears to be land more suitable for this purpose. c) The neighborhood is strongly opposed to this project with over 90% of the homeowners and property owners voicing opposition to the project. The neighborhood has worked extremely hard at gaining approval to close Saguaro and Bottlebrush so that we may have a quiet and safe environment to live and raise our families. This location is an extremely poor choice for a day care center for the above reasons. I do understand and agree with the need for a day care center in La Quinta. But this is a business and should be located in a business area and not in the middle of a residential area. Sincerely, Steven E. Sanche BI- 1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: JULY 9, 1991 PROJECT: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS FOR UNITS TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON 44 LOTS IN TRACT 23269 APPLICANT: WILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LOCATION: LA QUINTA HIGHLANDS, LOTS 31-72, 165 AND 149, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE. THESE LOTS ARE LOCATED ON SONESTA WAY, VILLETA DRIVE , AROSA WAY AND LA PALMA DRIVE. BACKGROUND: 1. Tract 23269 totaling 255 lots has been developed by a number of developers including Triad (original subdivider of whole tract) La Quinta Vistas and Williams Company. 2. The Williams Company has developed a number of tracts in the northern area of La Quinta including Cactus Flower and Rancho Ocotillo which are located across Adams Street to the east. The attached Design Review Board Staff Report describes the proposal and Staff comments. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEETING At the Design Review Board meeting held July 3, 1991, the Board made the following recommendations on the above architectural elevations: - Increase shading on side elevation. - Resolve the potential security problem created with the recessed area near the front door on Plan No. 2. - Relocate the fireplace on Plan No. 4. - Provide a third roof tile color selection. STAFFRPT.032/CS -1- RECOMMENDATION: Approve by Minute Motion the Architectural Elevation and color scheme fox• Tentative Tract 23269, Lots 31-72, 165 and 149, as proposed by the Williams Development Company with the following amendments: - Increase shading on side elevation. - Resolve the potential security problem created with the recessed area near the front door on Plan No. 2. - Relocate the fireplace on Plan No. 4. - Provide a third roof tile color selection. Attachment: A. Staff Report for Design Review Board meeting dated July 3, 1991, with attachments. STAFFRPT.032/CS -2- ATTACHMENT A STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD DATE: JULY 3, 1991 PROJECT: REVIEW OF ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS FOR UNITS TO BE CONSTRUCTED ON 44 LOTS IN TRACT 23269 APPLICANT: WILLIAMS DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LOCATION: LA QUINTA HIGHLANDS, LOTS 31-72, 165 AND 149, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE. THESE LOTS ARE LOCATED ON SONESTA WAY, VILLETA DRIVE , AROSA WAY AND LA PALMA DRIVE. BACKGROUND: 1. Tract 23269 totaling 255 lots has been developed by a number of developers including Triad (original subdivider of whole tract) La Quinta Vistas and Williams Company. 2. The Williams Company has developed a number of tracts in the northern area of La Quinta including Cactus Flower and Rancho Ocotillo which are located across Adams Street to the east. PROPOSAL: The table below describes the proposed units: # Sq. Footage Unit # Sq. Footage Garage PLAN 1 1470 640 PLAN 2 1805 647 PLAN 3 1686 656 PLAN 4 1818 598 # Stories 1 1 2 2 # Different Elevations 3 3 3 3 # Bedrooms 3 3 3 4 # Bathrooms 2 2 1/2 2 1/2 3 # Family Rooms 1 1 1 _ 1 # Car Garages 3 3 3 3 DRB7/3.F1/CS -1- The applicant has proposed six different color scheme combinations using two different roof tile colors, red/brown and beige/brown. Six different alternate colors have been proposed for facia/barge/trim, garage field/louvers and stucco. These are all desert colors. The architectural style used, Spanish/contemporary, is similar to that used for the surrounding tracts. Note should be made that the conditions attached to the approval of this tract require all lots less than 150 feet from Fred Waring Drive and Adams Street to be one story, less than 20 feet in height. This affects approximately 17 of the lots (see attachment #2). STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Front elevations are attractive and well proportioned 2. Side and rear elevations seem to show sufficient architectural treatment. 3. Eaves overhangs and shading of windows on the sides of units are minimal. Increased shading on windows on the side elevations could be achieved by larger pop outs around the top of windows or by using tinted windows. 4. All units are 50 feet wide and therefore will fit on the smallest lots provided (60 feet wide). 5. Only Units 1 & 2 (one story) will be allowed on Lots 31 to 45 and Lots 71 & 72. Each unit has three alternate front elevations. Staff feels this will provide enough variety of house design on these lots. 6. Only two color roof tiles have been proposed. A third roof the should be used to provide more variety in roof color for the lots along Fred Waring and Adams Street. RECOMMENDATION: Review plans in conjunction with Staff comments and determine acceptability. The Design Review Board recommendation will then be forwarded to the Planning Commission. Attachment: 1. Locality Plan 2. Tract Map 3. Architectural Plans & Elevations Full scale architectural plans attached. DRB7/3.F1/CS -2- I I TR 23269 ! h W W N EX ON sms wm� of to C MILES AVENUE ATTACHMENT No. 1 FR r— WESTWARD NO DRIVF sT ,RM ,/!e/e/!/!// 'eieieieieilw'/T C')Y4ti eeej u j a i � nti►i►►����tiv'''`�, LOCATION MAP " AC)I :?S"/n'F a 0 ATTACHMENT No. 2 +s +,= tx-, C304elcvcd Willi ants co. 65g 73'J ATTACHMENT No. 3 EXAMPLES OF HOUSE DESIGNS AND ELEVATIONS MN!!0/tYa19 b1Nit10 ill � SONVINDIN VINK10 Vl — 3 *"0* IKMWUAMsxvnm � N1Ild OW-KV1164W .q PO Alr VWWAM* SONV�INDIH VM ,% r �o VI V1N- I V IAN,XVITI ,,, N0l1YA313 _ V t NY1d �. n r+ 0 y {1� •� �� a o U 4�a A4 rr�-ar saNV tN01�1 v1H�no vivi -� NOIIVA313 t NV1d 1/I,m . rro�ra�m�'rurino �n N011YA313 Scwm0lwv.LNlno VI .".ram...- "-- `v e^• /.t . r..✓t ts�f O dab I A � • D v � I � ��t •� • VIdcYOt(lYJ iil�tkl0 :: SQWNV 614 VINT 6 V1 3:-ar�� � `�r�4� twe�sOisaaa t�rrtwl N011YA313 I NTM a 71 4 vw*oaw* Nano in SCINMOiH VINInO vl 'M** iA wwonAm amyrr to F W NOIIVA313 a o t NM1d Ld �., 4 — —+� � f . o , tit lots I 4� p o • ... ( _ I !� r! L �, „l SONVINDIN VINInO VI Ia** L40Msx u"A" vrma .NP-7—f wvwzm I N011YA313 t NV1d 3 u"n3 'r1ar50 1I7 fwvmui - SONTA4ocH VINino vl VM LUAMNUASG MV"V^ NVId UOOIA _ . 9-NV1d - - ------------------- f;, NOiIVA313 ~ .ss SONMO N VINMO Vl s we sw ' !. tY ••sf �� •f _.:- �'•� ey�e • , Ir x.�i irk -3 YtKeiou�r� btwkfp y� SCNVIHDIH V1Nino V1 *003 1>'t UAJG 1XV171" V NO(.1dA3n.3 Z NYId a0 r _ • r���ro,m� v�,�mo r� 8 t+t6 1K A�l3 SONVINO N ViNino V1 3 •moo ta.aecso ua ournwr► tv hVld r r. its rwrci;-mo iuno vi SGNV"I iDIH VINino vi '~3 txs UAW torma N �"�T ., • r a�a.n.a Yiar►o In ._ ... m_ NOUVA313 •r�roo axs�asa a�rn�u► t NVId t ow •'j �I Li vim k*J W* *VLxulo �n SCNVIHDI �Jll1n 0 0 VillbOAnVa VINM 1I1 bw�rww�n,.o.�a�rz��rbw+ww+rw�rl� SONVINOIN VINino Vl *~* VtMWoUAH SAY"X4 C NVld itn • ...ref .f �^.xs vu+�owirn� burino n NOLLVA313 •a03 LN3*40MAM 6«rrr M V E NVId ib ,�'�P .._,....,.9WYOfr"111� �'�..n S o�N1i'�HAIH �'1N1R0 11l -� �� •�ep� 1x3�iti.sa trtvntt� E W" A N riurt+inro'Vt�r'�s 1►1 .•tea-••-...�—�•........�..., ,.. 68NM OIN v1Nino vl 8 •doa LXM"UAW tnVn" NOLLV46313 E NVId `art Uil SaNMDIH VINIM 1 l -�: NY1d qvuoa ts» ta,rr� �� . NOLLVA313 --- ��, vnee�e8snva Yt1ti"Yp Ill saK no v- i CIA 0 E NVId h `.w*a t sm"Q $xvr"w .A. M d Od TIV 3 *VL k InO VI V NOLIVAaI3 SONTUADIN VINMO VII VIZ.- T's LUX"UAM SIWMA 9 NV"W I YIK#OAr 3 1'ikrip h sONTI DIH VINino vi h 3, 1, 1 s 8I,i t► NVId 1 • �' � • � 1 lrtorYOdttr� •Y1xr'� Y1 ass SQNIPIHOIH VIN no vi r >� Boa «,o ���► "©LLV/3 l7 _� 1 V NV : • r, i , rw»om�ra lrtkmo �n V ' NOUVA313 sabV-w01H VINino vi g 3 �i a wa�eovFAsa �r�mx� � NVId - ovixime VI o� s SONTU401N VSNino vi 7 3 •0403 Lkw%40 xAN txvmu per., r�F..:a xy K'- Acf+ti:+• a �.if NOLLYA-413- :: a f NVId s •• ' •� taNu0Itly* *V'R D V1 e SCNVIHDIH vlNino vi 3 � •aooa ixu�sa eKvrru� NOIIVA313 * HYM N Wf I ..rra,. i•'y' s ���, m....�.vexxo�rnr' Yur�np 1r7 �. �.. a.. Y1N1 SaNfY1N0lN li0 V1 NOLLWA313iT.--- =411111 t Nrr'1d l-.r •c_ a K;k L--j W _�: - �i V , • r lt"#nva birwo r� 0 �NOtlit A3i3 V.m.......__. 6QNVIHDIH V1Nino vl �J � i� MINUTES OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD EXCERPT July 3, 1991 Review of Architectural Elevations for Units to be constructed on 44 lots in Tract 23269; a request of Williams Development Company Boardmember Curtis questioned whether a noise study had been made. Associate Planner Lainis stated it had been made and a noise wall was recommended. Boardmember Anderson stated he felt the units were appealing but again stressed the issue of shading for the windows. Even though the units may pass Title 24 requirements the need additional treatment to address the lack of shading. Marty Williams, Applicant stated they would have their architects address this problem. Boardmember Curtis inquired as to why only two roof tile colors and would they have any objections to adding additional colors. Ms. Williams stated they would not. Ms. Williams stated her only objection or concern was regarding Condition #5 regarding two story units along Fred Waring to Adams Street. She stated they would design another single story units to avoid monotony. Boardmember Harbison stated his concern for security for the Plan #2 unit with the bedroom next to the front door with a cut away next to the front door. Ms. Williams stated she would consult her architect regarding the issue. In addition Plan #4 needs to have the fireplace moved more toward the center of the house rather that on a corner. This would enable the fireplace to function properly. Boardmember Barrows and Walling agreed with the need for additional shading on the windows. Discussion followed regarding the need for the shading. Boardmember Anderson moved to recommend to the Planning Commission approval of the project subject to Staff recommendations as well as additional treatment to address the shading of windows, additional roof tile colors, consideration of moving the fireplace on Plan #4 to the center of the house, and resolve the potential security problem created with the recessed area near the front door on Plan #2. fiF MEMORANDUM jKp�pCAFi� ,�' OF T� TO: HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: JULY 9, 1991 SUBJECT: VON'S SHOPPING CENTER - NEW CART STORAGE SCREEN WALL BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL: The Plaza La Quinta Center was approved and construction started prior to the incorporation of the City. The Von's store had their cart storage within the building. Von's is now proposing to construct a screen wall along the frontage of the building. The carts would be placed behind the screen wall. In addition a new pedestrian walkway would be provided in front of the existing columns by removing some of the small planter areas. The screen wall will be designed architecturally to blend in with the existing architectural style of the Von's Center. Additionally 3 feet 2 inches in height. The concern of the shopping carts is its visibility. The wall should have a minimum height to totally screen the cart itself. Outside storage is permitted of less than 200 square feet. However the application when processed did not identify outside storage. ANALYSIS: 1. The Von's store was originally approved without an outside cart storage area by the County. 2. The screen wall will be 3 feet 2 inches in height. The top of the shopping cart could still be visible. 3. Pedestrian access in front of the carts will be provided. 4. The C-P-S zone permits 199 square feet of outside storage as approved by the City. Over 200 square feet requires a Conditional Use Permit. 5. The concern is the visibility of the carts which might detract from the architecture of the Center. MEMOJx.103 6 . The screen wall should be designed to completely hide the carts. However the side areas (eastern and western end) of the cart storage should be open for easy access. RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion allow the screen wall to be constructed as illustrated subject to the condition that the height of the screen wall shall be at a minimum height of the typical grocery cart to be stored behind the wall. MEMOJH.103 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California June 25, 1991 7:00 P.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting was called to order at 5:10 P.M. by Chairperson Steding. The Flag Salute was led by Chairperson Steding. II. ROLL CALL A. Chairperson Steding requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Mosher, Dowd, Ladner, Barrows, and Chairperson Steding. B . Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, Principal Planner Stan Sawa, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, and Department Secretary Betty Anthony. III. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. General Plan Amendment 90-031, Change of Zone 90-056, Specific Plan 90-016; a request of Landmark Land for approval of a 327 acre project, including golf course, residential and commercial uses, incorporating a 21 acre commercial site and 1208 residential units. 1. Chairperson Steding read the Staff recommendation to continue this item to the next meeting. She then opened the Public Hearing and as no one wished to address this issue, it was moved by Commissioner Dowd and seconded by Commissioner Mosher to continue the matter to July 9, 1991. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Dowd, Mosher, Ladner, Barrows & Chairperson Steding. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. B . Specific Plan 87-011, Amendment #1 and Vesting Tentative Tract 27031 (EA 91-207) (Washington Square); a request of Birtcher for approval of an Amendment to a previously approved Specific Plan to allow a mixed use development consisting of a combination of retail, office, commercial service, entertainment, and restaurants on 65.4 acres. I . Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. He further stated that since the report was typed Staff had met with the Applicant and some of the conditions had been amended and asked that a finding be added and an additional condition be added to the Tentative Tract stating "approval of this Tentative Tract be subject to adoption of a new resolution amending the existing resolution concerning commercially vesting tentative tract maps". 2. Commissioner Barrows asked Staff to clarify how many stories high the buildings would be. Staff replied a total of three. 3. Chairperson Steding opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Lee Redmon, Applicant, asked if the Commission would consider their request to have a signalized access with full turning movement at the Washington Street access. In addition Condition 19.b.3. regarding their costs to improve 47th Avenue they felt there should be a like sharing with the other property owners. Condition #34 should conform to Specific Plan Condition #42. 4. Chairperson Steding asked Mr. Redmon to clarify what he was asking regarding Condition 19.b.3. Mr. Redmond stated he would like the condition to allow for reimbursement from the property owners to the east for their half of the cost of the street improvements on Adams Street. 5. There being no other members of the public to address the issue, Chairperson Steding closed the Public Hearing. 6. Commissioner Dowd asked Staff if a signal could be installed at Lot E with the distance required for the median. Senior Civil Engineer Steve Speer explained how signals are decided to be installed. Discussion followed regarding the Commission's desire to have a signal at this intersection, traffic counts, and how soon this could take place. 7. Commissioner Mosher asked if Sunline Transit would ask for a full turning access. Mr. Speer stated explained the proposed plans of Sunline . 8. Commissioner Ladner asked why Staff had recommended there not be a full turning movement. Planning Director Jerry Herman stated this was to comply with the General Plan. The option was for the City Council to decide. The Commission could inform Council that they support the installation of this signal in their motion. 9. Commissioners, Staff and Engineering Staff discussed the wording for a condition regarding reimbursement costs for Condition 19. b . 3. 10. There being no further discussion it was moved by Commissioner Barrows and seconded by Commissioner Ladner to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 91-016 and 91-017 recommending to the City Council concurrence with approval of a Negative Declaration of an Environmental Impact and approval of Specific Plan 87-011, Amendment #1, and Vesting Tentative Tract 27031, respectively, PCMIN6-25 subject to the attached conditions and with the following changes: a. That Condition #37 be added to the Vesting Tentative Tract. b. Council be directed to Condition #11 access to Lot E and the possibility and need for a signal. c . Condition # 19 . b . 3 . be amended to state the Applicant be reimbursed by the adjacent property owner for a fair share in the cost of street improvements to Adams Street based on land mass. d . Condition 11. c . there be a right in and right out only between 47th Avenue and other east/west streets south of Simon Drive. e. Verify conformance of Condition #34 in the Vesting Tentative Tract and Condition #42 in the Specific Plan to be sure language is in agreement and verify that all of the conditions between the Vesting Tentative Tract and Specific Plan are in agreement. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Dowd, Mosher, Ladner, Barrows & Chairperson Steding. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINING: None. C. Specific Plan 90-020, Parcel Map 26471, Tentative Tract 26472, Tentative Tract 26473 (EA 90-183) (Vista Santa Rosa); a request of Stuart Enterprises (Craig Bryant) for approval of a specific Plan to allow 935 total residential units in 7 master plan villages (or tracts) on 271+ acres, a parcel map creating 6 residential parcels (or villages) on 235+ acres, a tentative tract (#26472) creating 130 single family lots on 36+ acres, and a tentative tract map (#26473) creating 116 single family lots on 35 acres. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Chairperson Steding opened the public hearing. Mr. Craig Bryant, Applicant, addressed areas of concern such as building heights, Fire Department request for 2-3 entrances to each Village, and the Engineering Department conditions. 3. Commission discussed with the Applicant and Staff the concerns addressed above as well as a consensus of everyone that there was not enough time to read and understand the Engineering conditions. 4. Based on the above, it was moved by Commissioner Mosher and seconded by Commissioner Ladner to continue the public hearing to July 9, 1991. PCMIN6-25 ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Dowd, Mosher, Ladner, Barrows & Chairperson Steding. NOES: None. ABSENT: None. ABSTAINING: None IV. PUBLIC COMMENT: - None V . BUSINESS SESSION A. Determination of Rear Yard of a Triangular Lot and Related Interpretation of the Fencing Regulations for SR Zone; a request of Dan Featheringill J DODCO Construction Services for the property surrounded by Calle Paloma and Avenida La Fonda. 1. Planning Director Jerry Herman asked that the Commission continue this matter, to give Staff an opportunity to speak with the Applicanx regarding the affect the street improvments and vacation will have on his property. 2. It was moved by Commissioner Ladner and seconded by Commissioner Dowd to continue the matter. Unanimously approved. VI. CONSENT CALENDAR Approval of Planning Commission Minutes of June 11, 1991. It was requested that the Minutes be amended to read Commissioners Barrows and Ladner were absent due to "Personal circumstances". It was moved Commissioner Dowd and seconded by Commissioner Mosher to approve the Minutes of June 11, 1991, as submitted. Unanimously approved. VII. OTHER -None VIII. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner Barrows and seconded by Commissioner Ladner to recess this regular meeting of June 25, 1991, to a joint meeting with the City Council at 7:00 P.M. in the La Quinta Middle School. This meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was recessed at 6:35 P.M. PCMIN6-25 4 MINUTES JOINT MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION Mayor Pena called the adjourned meeting of the City Council and continued regular meeting of the Planning Commission together at 7:05 P.M. Mayor Pena led the flag salute. ROLL CALL: Councilman Bohnenberger, Sniff, Rushworth, and Mayor Pena Planning Commissioners Mosher, Ladner, Dowd, and Vice Chairperson Barrows Councilman Bohnenberger moved and Councilman Sniff seconded the motion to excuse Councilwoman Franklin. Unanimously approved. Commissioner Mosher moved and Commissioner Dowd seconded the motion to excuse Chairperson Steding from the meeting. Unanimously approved Mayor Pena expressed his thanks to members of the community for attending and explained this was the beginning of the process to update the City's General Plan. He then introduced Principal Planner Fred Baker who gave a brief description of the General Plan process and introduced the Mr. John McNamara of the consulting firm of BRW, Inc. whose responsibility it was to update the General Plan. Mr. McNamara give an overview of the General Plan process and summarized the results of the first phase of information gathering. He then explained the contents of the Master Environmental Assessment (MEA) which contained information on land use, zoning, circulation, public facilities and services and infrastructure, natural resources, environmental hazards, and economic development opportunities. The key issues addressed in the MEA will be opportunities and constraints for the future. The second phase will be to develop visions, goals and objects in the six areas mentioned above. These will be based on a 20 year span and will provide a "guiding light" for the City. The third phase will be the General Plan alternatives. These alternatives include the existing General Plan and twc new alternatives that review current economic forecasts in terms of potential population and employment growth and try to make a determination at to how the City will grow. The final phase, the Environmental Impact Report will be a draft of the final plan and look at the potential impacts both positive and negative of developing out the City in accordance with the new General Plan. Lastly will be the public hearings and adoption of the General Plan. Mr. McNamara introduced Mr. Tim Campbell who spoke on general planning, land use existing zoning, and some major circulation issues. Mr. Campbell then went on to explain the different graphs and the information contained on those graphs. The following is a breakdown of that information: La Quinta is composed of 17,000 - 18,000 acres in the incorporated area Open Space (mostly mountains) is composed of 6,000 acres 30% Residentially planned land uses, composed of 2, 00 acres 60 % 700 acres of commercially planned land 6.2 % He went on to explain the different specific plans within the City as well as different commercial classifications and those uses within the classifications. At the present time there are 700 acres of commercial zoned land of which 10 acres, (or 20%) are developed. Compared to 10,000 area of residentially zoned land of which 2000 acres is developed. All this information helps to determine how much traffic will be on the streets, how many schools will be needed, and how to address the infrastructure system. One of the areas of concern is the amount of commercially designated acreage and lack of development and how to encourage development of that land. Secondly refining existing commercial land use classifications to be more consistent to achieve a desired tenant mix and appropriate scale and location of those uses. Third is the net residential density versus the growth which is important in establishing the planning base so as not to over design the types of infrastructure or circulation systems. Fourthly is the residential density mix. Most of La Quinta is planned for medium and low density developments. The City may want to look at high density to provide housing close to employment. Fifth is to address the open space issue. Lastly, any issues of concern expressed by the audience, Council, or Commission at this meeting. The existing circulation system is developed with either 4, 3, or 2 lane streets. The current General Plan identifies various street configurations from 6 to 2 lanes. The General Plan process will text to see if these street designs are needed based upon future traffic needs. Mr. John Vlaming addressed the issue of open space, slopes, and alluvial fans. He stated the visual assessment is based upon an analysis of ridge lines, vegetation, and view sheds in the La Quinta area. By doing this identification it could be determined which areas are of high sensitivity in terms of their visualness to La Quinta and should be addressed. Vegetation is set up in three areas, native, agricultural (south and to the east of the City), and non-native (golf courses & other man-made improvements within the City) . Again trying to preserve a 360 degree view. The geographic/topographic features of the City should be addressed as well as the number of endangered and threatened species of plant life as well as animals. Mr. Vlaming explained where the Santa Rosa Mountain Game Refuge, the Santa Rosa Mountain Wilderness Study area, Principal Big Horn Sheep Habitat area, Habitat for the Magic Gecko, areas are located and should be retained as open space for preservation and propagation of these species. Public services or police and fire, schools, parks and recreation facilities are addressed and are adequate for the City. The new public administrative facilities will provide more centralized facilities for the City as well as space for growth. Health facilities are basically covered by two hospitals located in Indio and Rancho Mirage. Parks and Recreation parks and facilities are addressed by the number of existing facilities as well as the number of parks proposed. Schools exiting locations PCMIN6-25JT 2 and proposed facilities were discussed. The infrastructure, or portable water, water supply, waste water services, natural gas, electrical facilities, and storm water improvements all will be addressed during the General Plan review, but service the City adequately at the present time. The soil and mineral resources located within the City, hydrological resources (stormwater system), seismic zones, blowsand hazard zone, and the effect of liquefaction were explained during the presentation. The meeting was opened for questions and answers from the community as well as the Council and Commission. The result of these questions were that the following concerns be addressed during the General Plan review: Land Use 1. Need for neighborhood retail/services in Village 2. Economic justification for art -related development 3. Infrastructure needs in downtown 4. Child-care facilities located adjacent to employment areas and in Cove (medium and high density residential areas) 5. Agricultural preservation to retain character and sense of history 6. Open Space preservation of natural areas on public and private properties Circulation 1. Potential traffic impact of High School site 2. Bridge crossing at Adams and Dune Palms (High School access) and other major streets 3. Upgrading of Highway 111 and Washington a. Bus stop locations b. Dual left turns C. Access to commercial projects 4. Ingress/egress on Washington (Highway 111 and 52nd Avenue) 5. Sagebrush intersection with Washington 6. Cul-de-sac improvement on Saguaro and Bottlebrush 7. Increase pedestrian circulation (children/illumination) 8. Need exclusive right turn lanes on: a. Highway 111 b. Jefferson Street c . Major commercial areas Natural / Cultural / Infrastructure / Environmental 1. Reinforce mini -parks in Cove 2. Protection of slopes outside of City to the west 3. Bedrock Mortars - historic/archaeological site preservation a. Laguna de la Paz b . Near 52nd Avenue Fire Station 4. General Historic preservation 5. Plan schools for pedestrian access 6. Parks need toilets 7. Planned parks for neighborhood walking PCMIN6-25JT 3 3. Need additional access to parks at 50th Avenue complex 9. Bike paths in Cove cause security problems 10. Potential elementary school located in revised floodplain area 11. Need for increased water conservation 12. Need landscaped (Palm trees, uplighting, Xeriscope) medians: a. Washington Street b. Jefferson Street c . Eisenhower Avenue d . Highway 111 13. Reduce above ground utilities and require burial of new utilities This adjourned meeting of the City Council and continued regular meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:30 P.M. PCMIN6-25JT