Loading...
1991 10 08 PCPLANNING COMMISSION A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California October 8, 1991 7:00 P.M. •*NOTE== ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING Beginning Resolution No. 91-040 Beginning Minute Motion No. 91-038 CALL °I'® ®RDE R — Flag Salute ROLL CALL PRESENTATION OF RESOLUTION OF RECOGNITION - Elly Dowd PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Item ................ Applicant ........... Location ............ Request ............. Action .............. PC/AGENDA CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 91-020 City of La Quinta City wide Request for approval to establish a new commercial/office medical zoning district which will Include provisions for medical facilities, offices, limited retail, public and quasi -public uses, and other land uses deemed permissible by the Planning Commission and an Amendment to Section 9.160, Off - Street Parking Code. Resolution 91- , 1 2. Item ................ CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING - PLOT PLAN 91-465, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 91-037; CHANGE OF ZONE AMENDMENT 91-065, TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27267 Applicant ........... Desert Hospital Location ............ West side of Washington Street at Via Marquessa (generally north of 48th Avenue and south of 47th Avenue/Highland Palms Drive. Request ............. Request for approval of a plot plan to permit a three story medical/office complex with heli-pad on a portion of a 30 acre site located on the west side of Washington Street at Via Marquessa; A request to amend the City's General Plan Land Use Element from Low Density Residential to Office/Medical Commercial; A Change of Zone from R-1, Single Family Residential to Office/Medical and related uses (OMS) ; A request to approve a tentative parcel map to subdivide 30 acres into two parcels. Action .............. Resolutions 91- , 91- , 91- Minute Motion 91- — 3. Item ................ Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #1 Tentative Tract 25154, Amendment #1 Applicants .......... North Star Corporation & Valley Land Development Location ............ Northeast corner of Sagebrush Drive and Date Palm Drive intersection ±1, 320 feet east of Washington Street. Request ............. Amend the Specific Plan to add approximately 30 contiguous acres and subdivide into 75 lots with private streets and common area with access from the Pyramids project. Action .............. Request to table 4. Item ................ TENTATIVE TRACT 26769, CONDITION OF APPROVAL AMENDMENT Applicant ........... Qualico Development, Inc. Location ............ West side of Monroe Street +1 / 2 mile south of 54th Avenue. Request ............. Approval of an amendment to Condition of Approval #43 for Tentative Tract 26769 which subdivides 20 acres into 14 custom single family lots. Action .............. Resolution 91- 5. Item ................ PREANNEXATION ZONING 91-068, GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 91-039 Applicant ........... Valley Land Development Location ............ The area northeast of the corner of Fred Waring Drive and Washington Street. Request ............. Preannexation zoning and amendment to the General Plan. Action .............. Request to continue to November 12, 1991 PC/AGENDA 2 PUBLIC CONMMT 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 ................ SIGN APPLICATION 91-153 (TT 26769) Applicant ........... Qualico Development Inc. Location ............ East of Monroe Street south of 54th Avenue. Request ............. Sign adjustment application for subdivision signs. Action .............. Minute Motion 91- 2. 3. 4. 5. Item................ Applicant ........... Location ............ Request............. . Action .............. Item............... Applicant ........... Location :........... Request............. Action .............. Item................ Applicant ........... Location ............ Request ............. Action .............. Item................ Applicant ........... Location ............ Request ............. Action .............. TENTATIVE TRACT 23269 - LA QUINTA HIGHLANDS Century Homes Southwest corner of Adams Street and Fred Waring Drive. Lots 79-94, 96-148, 245-251. Review of architectural elevations for four units. Minute Motion 91- TENTATIVE TRACT 2454S Northstar California Corporation East of Washington Street and south of 48th Avenue within the Pyramids project. Approval of First One Year Extension. Resolution 91- TENTATIVE TRACT 239959 EXTENSION #1 A. G. Spans Construction, Inc. Generally located between Washington Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash. Approval of First One Year Time Extension Resolution 91- TENTATIVE TRACT 24890, EXTENSION #1 J. M. Peters Company, Inc. Area generally bounded by 52nd Avenue on the south, Jefferson Street on the east and Calle Rondo on the west, within Oak Tree West Specific Plan area. Approval of First One Year Time Extension Resolution 91- PC/AGENDA 3 S. Item ................ Applicant ........... Location ............ Request............. Action .............. CONSENT CALENDAR STREET VACATION 91-018 City of La Quinta Portion of Calle Tampico General Plan consistency to allow vacation of portions of Calle Tampico between Avenida Bermudas and Eisenhower Drive. Minute Motion 91- Approval of the Minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting held September 24, 1991. OTHER 1. Appointment of Environmental Conservation Committee representative. -2 . Height controls. 3. Commissioners communication with press. ADJOURNMENT ----------------------- STUDY SESSION MONDAY, OCTOBER 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 . PGA West Specific Plan - review C. Guest houses, - draft regulations d . Satellite Dishes - Commercial & Residential zones PC/AGENDA 4 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ITEM: ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 91-020 DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1991 (CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 24, 1991) APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA LOCATION: CITY WIDE BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission continued discussion on this case from the last meeting of September 24th. The continuance was to allow staff time to modify the proposed ordinance to include additional comments of staff, Desert Hospital, and the Planning Commission. The previous report is attached, however, a revised ordinance has been drafted. A summary of the changes to the text are: Section 9.92.020 (Item la); added medical colleges Section 9.92.020 (Item 2j); added Gift Shop Section 9.92.050 (Item A); added penthouse mechanical area Section 9.92.050 (Item H); modified parallel plane to permit massing greater than 50% Section 9.92.050 (Item a); added covered walkways between buildings. Complexes should be encouraged. Section 9.92.050 (Item Ib); deleted the word "front" Section 9.92.050 (Item K); reworded the provisions for building signs Section 9.92.050 (Item L); reworded parking space location provisions Section 9.92.050 (Item M); added parking structure location statement to end of paragraph ON -SITE PARKING DEMAND: The Planning Commission voiced an opinion that an office/medical complex or clinic would generate a need for more on -site parking than an office complex or retail user. The parking standards for the surrounding communities are attached. STAFFRPT.054/CS -1- The standards vary from 1 space per 150 square feet to 1 space per 250 square feet. One space per 200 square feet is the standard for Rancho Mirage, Indio, and Palm Desert. Palm Springs and the other cities are lower. Desert Hospital has stated that 1 space per 200 square feet (GLA) is a typical standard for medical facilities. The Planning Commission had discussion with Desert Hospital on this issue. It was the general consensus that staff should evaluate a ratio of 1 space per 200 square feet (GLA). Attached is staff's recommended parking amendment (Exhibit B) of 1 space per 150 square feet (GLA) for less than 20,000 square feet and 1 space per 200 square feet (GLA) for more than 20,000 square feet. On October 3, 1991, staff received new data regarding hospital parking requirements from Desert Hospital (see attachment). Of the seven surveyed cities, only Plano, Texas and Naperville, Illinois, are using a square foot to car ratio. In conversations with Mr. Jeff Sobczyk, Mediplex Representative, he indicated that they are trying to find other communities which use this type of provision. However, since this type of standard is a relatively new standard, he was unsure if he would have other available data prior to staff's October 4th deadline. At the meeting, the Desert Hospital Group requested that the Planning Commission examine a change to the hospital on -site parking code provisions. The present code requires 2 spaces per patient bed. It was stated at the meeting that from an industry standpoint, communities should evaluate a parking ratio using square footage calculation instead of a per bed ratio because bed usage is being reduced. The desert cities which have large hospitals vary from 3 per bed (Palm Springs) to 1 per bed (Indio). None of the cities locally use a square foot parking program at this time (see attached). If new data is presented which supports Desert Hospital's claim, we would request that the Planning --ommission evaluate the material. If inclined, recommend a change to the existing hospital parking requirements. Otherwise, the parking code for hospitals should be left in its present state. RECOMMENDATION: Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 91- , recommending to City Council addition of Chapter 9.92, Office, Medical & Relates Services (OMS) (previously deleted I-P Industrial Park Section) to the La Quinta Municipal Code and amending Chapter 9.160 of the Off -Street Parking standards, and concurring with the Environmental Determination that a Negative Declaration is appropriate for filing. STAFFRPT.054/CS -2- Attachments: 1. Previous Planning Commission Report 2. October 3rd, 1991 Parking Survey, Mediplex 3. Planning Commission Resolution 91- 4. Draft Ordinance 5. Off -Street Parking Code Amendment STAFFRPT.054/CS -- STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING ITEM: ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 91-020 DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA LOCATION: CITY WIDE BACKGROUND/REQUEST: The City has been asked to develop a new zoning category for the City which will be aimed toward office professional and/or medical uses. The City's present code does not have a district which is consistent with this request. Independent of the Village Zone Districts, the present code was drafted to allow heavy commercial uses which reflected the Riverside County standards for the Highway ill area. The design standards are very liberal, in say the CPS Zone category, thus allow the developer an enormous amount of design flexibility. As a result, the City had to adopt specific plans to accomplish its needs since the zoning text was lacking. Staff's feeling was that since the Desert Hospital Group has submitted a development request for Washington Street (GPA 91-037, CZ 91-065, PP 91-464 et. al.) it is appropriate at this time to develop a new category which might be used in some of the City areas. The draft ordinance is attached. OFF-STREET PARKING CODE: The existing off-street parking code does not adequately address out -patient medical facilities. The current code discusses hospitals at 2 spaces/patient bed and professional offices at 1 space/250 square feet gross leasable area. Staff is therefore requesting that the Planning Commission consider a amendment to Chapter 9.160 for this purpose. To facilitate this discussion, Staff has attached a summary sheet from the American Planning Association which cites examples of parking requirements in various areas of the United States. Staff is not requesting the calculation for hospitals be amended. However, we are asking that the Commission examine a new classification for medical offices. As you can see from the attachment, the codes use floor area, treatment rooms or number of physicians to determine the on -site parking needs. The latter two ways are very difficult to monitor and Staff prefers not to use this type of standard. Our research has shown that offices/clinics for medical purposes are essentially the same as business professional offices. STAFFRPT.042/CS -1- They do not require as much parking as people use public transportation to utilize these types of facilities by appointment or referral services. We believe a ratio of 1 parking space per 300 square feet gross leasable acreage is sufficient for out -patient medical facilities. ANALYSIS: 1. The development of this new category could assist the city in the implementation of the General Plan. 2. The proposed regulations will not have an environmental impact on the community. 3. The proposed regulations provide more flexibility in property development subject to the City's approval. 4. The proposed amendment is in conformance with the City's General Plan Land Use Element. CONCLUSION: Staff is at the Commission's pleasure Planning Commission would like more topics which should be addressed, Commission continue this case to the 1991. RECOMMENDATION: on this subject. If the information or has other we recommend that the next meeting of October 8, Move to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 91- adding Chapter 9.92 (previously deleted I-P Industrial Park Section) to the La Quinta Municipal Code Zoning provisions and amending Chapter 9.160 of the Off -Street Parking standards, thereby establishing a new Zoning Text Section which provides office/medical related facilities requirement, and concurring with the Environmental Determination that a Negative Declaration is appropriate for filing. Attachments: 1. Planning Commission Resolution 91- 2. Draft Ordinance 3. Off -Street Parking Code Amendment 4. APA Parking Summary 5. Environmental Assessment STAFFRPT.042/CS -2- RESOLUTION 91- ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 91-020 EXHIBIT "A" OFFICE, MEDICAL & RELATED SERVICES (OMS) Purpose: This district is intended to provide an environment desirable for and conducive to development of medical or office facilities which can be located adjacent to residential uses and other similar types of facilities (e.g. vic center, downtown, etc.). In addition, certain other kinds of uses are permitted under conditions and standards which assure their compatibility with a general concentration of office/medical uses as well as with different types of residential districts which will adjoin this district. This district will generally serve to provide a transition from, and occur between, the commercial core and residential districts. Allowable uses - Buildings, structures, or premises shall be used and buildings and structures shall hereafter be erected, altered or enlarged only for the following uses: 1. Business and Professional a. Business college, limited to the teaching of office and business practices and skills. b. Corporate headquarters, which may include transient residential units only for employees on a site less than 10 acres. C. Office, professional, for: Accountant, architect, chiropodist, chiropractor, dentist, engineer, lawyer, minister, osteopath, physician, surgeon, surveyor, optometrist, veterinarian. d. Office, semi-professional, for: Insurance broker, public stenographer, real estate broker, stockbroker, and other persons who operate or conduct offices which will not require the stocking of goods for wholesale. e. Laboratories: Medical, dental, blood bank. f. Museum, library, post office. g. Clinic h. Out -patient medical services. i. Hospital (less than 100 beds) j. Municipal Uses k. Governmental offices 1. Day-care or Preschool 2. Retail a. Establishments primarily supplemental in character to other permitted principal uses, such as: Pharmacy, prosthetic devices and optical goods. b. Blueprinting, photostating. C. Drug Store d. Candy Store printing, publishing or ORDPC.001/CS -1 3. Services a. Banks, financial offices, lending institutions, savings and loan associations, credit unions, and stock brokerage firms. b. Telephone answering service. C. Temporary buildings for uses incidental to construction work, which buildings shall be removed upon completion or abandonment of the construction work. d. Travel agency e. Barber or beauty shop f. Fitness studio g. Book store h. Florist i. Stationery store 4. Food Service a. Cafeteria/restaurant which is incidental to the operation of one of the above uses. b. Ice cream store Conditional Uses 1. Church 2. Corporate headquarters which includes transient residential units only for employees on a site greater than 10 acres. 3. Funeral home 4. Hospital - when larger than 100 beds 5. Research and development facilities (indoor research only). 6. Restaurant or cafe (less than 5,000 square feet in size which can have on -site alcoholic beverage sales but cannot have live entertainment) which can have outdoor seating. Drive-thru facilities will not be permitted. 7. Day Care or preschool for more than 150 children. 8. Helipads. Non -permitted Uses Any use which is not prescribed above to be a permitted or conditional use item shall be deemed to be not allowed by the adoption of this Ordinance, and any use which is in this Zone District prior to the adoption of this Code which does not meet the minimum requirements of this section, shall be deemed Legal Nonconforming and subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.152 of the Zoning Code. Site Development Standards Building Height - No building shall exceed 4 stories in height above finish grade except for appurtenant structures which do not increase the square footage of the facility. Facilities which qualify for this exception are: chimneys, architectural oRDPC.001/CS -2- towers, transmission equipment integral to the operation of the facility, etc. All building heights greater than two stories shall be approved by the Planning Commission on a case -by -case basis. Yards a. Front - Projects which front a major, primary, or secondary arterial street in the City shall have an average landscape setback along the frontage of the site of not less than 20 feet to any parking structure or facility. All buildings shall be a minimum of 50 feet from the property line and no building shall exceed one story in height within 150 feet of the front property line unless approved by the Planning Commission on a case -by -case basis. Any project fronting a local street shall have a front yard setback of 20 feet from either parking facilities or building structures. b. Street Side - A side yard of not less than 20 feet shall be maintained. C. Side - A side yard of not less than 50 feet from a building to the property line shall be maintained where the side of the lot abuts a single family residential district, or use. A side yard of not less than 25 feet from a building to the property line shall be maintained for all other districts. d. Rear - A rear yard of not less than 50 feet from a building to the property line shall be maintained. e. Special - In no case shall any yard setback be less than five feet wide. Setback adjustments may be made by the Director of Planning and Development for minor architectural appurtenances (balconies, stairwells, trellises, eaves, chimneys, towers, etc.) which do not involve square footage building increases by up to twenty percent. Distance between Buildings There shall not be less than 10 feet between accessory buildings and main buildings. The minimum distance between main buildings shall be based on a ratio of 10 feet for each building floor proposed (above ground structures only) for the highest of the two buildings involved. ORDPC.0011CS -3 Lot Size The minimum lot size shall be 5 acres, and all properties shall have a minimum street frontage of not less than 600 feet and a depth not less than 600 feet. Walls and Screening 1. A decorative masonry perimeter wall of not less than 6 feet in overall height shall be constructed along all interior or rear property lines which abut residentially zoned properties. 2. All parking areas shall be screened from view from all public streets by a wall, berm, or landscape hedge a minimum of 42 inches in overall height. 3. All mechanical structures and appurtenances shall be screened as approved by the Design Review Board. 4. All storage and refuse areas shall be screened by masonry walls. 5. All operations and storage shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building or within an area contained by a wall or fence as determined by the Director of Planning and Development. Lot Access All lots shall have frontage on and have vehicular access from a dedicated public street unless a secondary means of permanent vehicular access has been approved by the Planning Commission either by Specific Plan approval or other legislative action. Views into Buildings Building clustering shall be encouraged and in no case shall the building mass along a parallel plane exceed 50 percent of the width of the lot, as determined by the Planning Commission. Pedestrian Access and Shading a. Covered walkways shall be provided and designed for all ground floor building levels for each proposed structure. The arcade shall be a minimum of seven feet wide, and shading should be placed along all areas of the building which provide primary entry or exiting or are affected by mid -afternoon sunshine. Canvas awnings will not be permitted to be counted toward meeting this provision. ORDPC.001/CS -4 b. Bicycle parking facilities shall include provisions for locking of bicycles, either in lockers or in secure racks in which the bicycle frame and wheels may be locked by the user. The racks shall be placed in areas which are shaded by landscape or building structures. One rack with a capacity for six bicycles shall be installed for every 80 parking spaces. The facilities shall be placed within 80 feet of the front entry/exit to the building complex. C. Concrete walkways shall be designed internal to the project so that pedestrian access is not hindered by vehicular traffic movement. Walkways shall connect buildings to parking and buildings to off -site public transportation facilities which are in the immediate area. d. Fifty percent of the on -site parking spaces shall be shaded by detached structures or by proposed buildings. Phasing of the required covered structures will be permitted if approved by the Planning Commission. e. Decorative paving surfaces should be used to distinguish pedestrian areas from vehicular areas where necessary to reduce on -site conflicts, and all main entries in the project shall include textured concrete areas which promote architectural identity and promote community pride. Landscaping At least 10 percent of parking lot area shall be landscaped. One-third of the required landscaping area for a parking lot for more than 50 cars shall be in planting areas distributed throughout the lot other than on the perimeter. The landscaped area shall contain street trees device, and adequate sprinklers or other appropriate irrigation as approved by the Planning Department. The other landscaping provisions of the Off -Street Parking Code shall be maintained. Signs A master sign program shall follow the guidelines as prescribed in Sign Ordinance (Chapter 9.212) and the Planning Commission shall have final approval of all new projects. Special Provisions: All building signs shall not be internally illuminated but may be lit by an outside source. Freestanding signs can be internally lit if they provide information which serves emergency personnel, however, externally lighted signs shall be encuraged. not freestanding signs should be monument typeg ns exceeding 7 feet in overall height as measured from the average street grade curb height within 20 feet of the proposed sign location. ORDPC.001/CS -5 off -Street Parking Off-street parking lots should be located within 100 feet of any proposed building structure. Parking Structures The architectural character of above ground parking structures shall be compatible with the surrounding area, and consistent in design with the project within which they are contained. No above ground structure shall be over 2-1/2 stories (32 feet). Subterranean parking floors will not be counted in the 2-1/2 story height requirement. Emergency Traffic Signal Project Access All hospital projects shall be required to provide emergency traffic signal(s) on or close to the project site to assist public or private emergency personnel response vehicles. The signal can either be private or public. If a public signal is used, the signal shall be redesigned to include an emergency frequency transmitter which will override the traffic signal during a crisis situation. The developer is required to design and install the necessary hardware at their expense unless other arrangements are made with the City Council. nRDPC.001/CS -6 ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 91-020 EXHIBIT B Off -Street Parking Code Amendment (Chapter 9.160) Amend Chapter 9.160.045 - Subsection C, and add item 10 (M) as follows: Medical Offices: 1 space per 300 square feet GLA including lobbies and reception areas. DOCGT.001/CS- -2- MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRWOMAN AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: SEPTEMBER 24, 1991 SUBJECT: PARKING CODE SURVEY CITY MEDICAL OFFICE/CLINIC HOSPITAL RANCHO MIRAGE 1 Sp/200 sq. ft. GFA 3/Bed (Acute) 3/Room (Out patient) INDIO 5/Doctor or 1/200 sq. ft. GFA (which ever is greater) PALM SPRINGS ** 1 Sp/150 sq. ft. GFA CATHEDRAL CITY * 5/Doctor or 1/150 sq. ft. GFA (which ever is greater) PALM DESERT * 1 Sp/250 sq. ft. less than 2200 sq. ft. 1 Sp/200 sq. ft. over 2200 sq. ft. DESERT HOT ** 1 Sp/150 sq. ft + 1/employee SPRINGS 1/Bed 2/Bed + 1/vehicle owned by Hospital 1/Bed 1-3/4 / Bed 1/Bed COUNTY OF * See Hospital 1 Sp/2Beds + RIVERSIDE 1/Vehicle owned by Hospital/Clinic + 1/Staff Member * NOTE: Used City Library material ** Parking Standards might be less for research areas. Office, Medical One space per 300 sq.ft. of gross floor area if over 10,000 sq.ft., then one space per 200 sq.ft. of gross floor area (Orange Co., Calif.) One space for each 250 sq.ft. of gross floor area (Columbus, Ohio) 4.5 spaces per 1,000 net sq.ft. (minimum], five spaces per JAW net sq.ft. (maximum] (Bellevue, Wash.) One space per each 200 sq.ft. of floor area (Bozeman, Mont.) One space per 100 sq.ft. of usable floor area, with a minimum of four spaces, plus one space for each employee (St. Clair Shores, Mich.) One parking space for each 50 sq.ft. of gross floor area (Bonner Springs, (Cans.) One space for each four seats provided for patron use (Aurora, Colo.) One space for each employee, plus one space for each examining room (Hilton Head Island, S.C.) Three spaces per treatment room and one for each doctor or dentist (Norman, Okla.) Four spaces per doctor or dentist on duty during busiest shift (Arlington, Mass.) Five spaces for each doctor (Albuquerque, N.M.) Six spaces per practitioner (Fairfax Co., Va.) Heliport One space per employee, plus one space for each vehicle used in connection with t}ie facility, plus sufficient space to accommodate the largest number of visitors that may be expected any one time (Fair fax Co., Va.) One space per each 1,000 sq.ft. of operational area (,Albemarle Co., Va.) Helistop A minimum of five spaces for commercial helistops and a minimum of two spaces for noncommercial helistops (Fairfax Co., Va.) Comment. A helistop differs from a heliport in that it has fanlities only for the loading and unloading of passengers and equipment. A heliport has maintenance and refueling facilities. Am. Planning Association Planning Advisory Service Report No. 432 May 1991 Hospital One space per four beds (Orange Co., Calif.) One space per three beds (Fairbanks, Alaska) 1.2 spaces per room or 0.6 space per bed, whicheve greater, plus five spaces per 100 sq.ft. of gross floor area for medical offices in building (Long Beach, Cal One space per two beds, plus one space per doctor, plus one space per two employees on the largest sh plus one space per hospital vehicle (Citrus Co., Fla.) One space per two beds, plus 1.5 spaces per each emergency room examination table or bed, plus on space per employee on the major shift other than doctors, plus one space per doctor assigned to the staff (Fairfax Co., Va.) One space per patient bed (Bellevue, Wash.) One space per bed intended for patients (except bassinets or beds in student nurses quarters), plus space per each medical staff member, plus one spa per each two other employees on shift of greatest employment (Charlotte -Mecklenburg Co., 9-0 Two spaces for each bed (Salisbury Township, Penn One space for every two beds, plus one space for i five outpatients, plus one for each employee on th largest working shift. Bassinets shall not be count as beds for the purpose of computing parking. (St. Clair Shores, Mich.) 2.25 spaces per bed at design capacity (Arlington, Mass.) z.. crri or u QozatA PIP ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: _ y 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:, 3. Date of Checklist: 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: $tea Mrs S. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Ach Q " Oz! -- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers to required on attached sheets.) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes Maybe No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in 6000, geologic substructures? _. — b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or ool overcovering of the soil? — - -- c. Change in topography or ground surface f/ relief features? -- --- d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geolcgic or physical features? — e. Any increases it wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? — -� f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach, sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? --- -- g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? — 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? — — b. The creation of objectionable odors? _. c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? -- 3. hater. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction marine or fresh of water movements, in either waters? — —" b. Changes in abscrption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? --- d. Change in the sanount of surface water in any water body? — e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, in- cluding but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? — —" g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? — — (3) Yes Maybe No h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? _ i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? ___- _jeo0*0 b. Reduction of the nunbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? — AeO00 c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or result in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _ Age- d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? _ S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: , a.. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? _ V 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? _ 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the prcposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of any use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any renewable natural resource? 10. Risk of set. Does the proposal involve a risk oT an explosion or the release of hazardous sub- stances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, ist� T labuontion, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? _ !. 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional / vehicular movement? _ JC b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or L� demand for new parking? (4) Yes Maybe No c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems?— d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? Q/ e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic Yazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govern- mental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? _ b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? _ f. Other governmental services? _ _-Leo." 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? _ �� b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? _ Joe" c. Water? _ ars d. Sewer or septic tanks? 1r�� e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and dispcsal? 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b.. Exposure of people tc potential health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. Will the prcposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreation. Will the prcposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recrea- 6001 tional opportunities? 20. Archeolo ical/Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? r V 21. Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the envircnment, substantially re- duce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plan or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the / major periods of California history or prehistory? _ j/ (S) Yes Maybe No b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term. en- vironnental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION IV. DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation; koO find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect oa the environment, there will not be a s}gnificant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an E�1'IRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: C1" I �a y �O ignature /�.c asiaEcc,•� 10/02/91 16:50 a Z14 991 6E49 M n G 1� r•°G M E D I P L E X el' ' MEDMAL eul+biAG CORPO"A"A" ► October 2, 1991 Mr. Greg Trousdell Associate Planner City of UOuinta P.O. Box 1 b04 78.105 Calle Estado Lafluinta, California 92253 I MR OCT 0 3 1991 1W PLA+' WNG DEPART#/FNT REGARDING: Desert Fospital Project - El Mirador MedlCal Plaza Dear Mr. Trousdell: wtl.!, ►,H►sioh ROAD Su 11 600 1 XX Wx ►5 DA.l AS i f %AS 75M The following are different parking requirements for cities around the country. These requirements are for medical office buildings (MOE) and Hospitals. None of these have any criteria for Outpatient Surgery facilities, but i anticipate the arrival of research from the Urban Land Institute tomorrow. This research material may address the parking requirements for current trends in healthcare. I will forward this additional information as soon as it's available. no" YA MOB - f car/f 75 Vfusable area) Hospital - 1 car/425 GSF g MOB - 1 car/200 GSF Hospital - 1 space,4 bed capacity plus 1 space/2 employee (mgximum shift) Bicycle - 5% of total GAftgnsbu�..ro, PA MOB, Clinics - 1 car/2 employees plus 4 ;ars/do:tor or practitioner Hospital - f car13 beds plus 1 car/two employees j�ew ritin,Sr3 MOB - Hospital - 1 caN150 SF of lit space 1 car/2 beds plus f c9r/2 employees on the premises at any one time. Naga Ilia, IL MOB, Clinics - f car/200 GSF Hospital - 1.5 cars/1,000 GSF Kansas City,_MQ MOB - 5 car/doctor but not less then 1 car/500 GSF Hospital - r car/3 beds (less bassinets) plus f car/4 employees Including staff doctors Arlington, TX MOB, Clinics - 1.0 car/150 SF of useable SF (excludes corridors, storage roams, etc.) Hospital - 1.5 cars/bed Sincerely, Phi hl. Tay r, AI' Vice President Architecture RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDING ADDING SECTION 9.92, AN OFFICE/MEDICAL & RELATED SERVICES (OMS) ZONE DISTRICT TO THE LA QUINTA MUNICIPAL CODE, AND AMENDMENT TO SECTION 9.160, OFF-STREET PARKING STANDARDS. CASE NO. ZOA 91-020 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, did, on the 24th day of September 1991, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and continued Hearing on the 8th day of October, 1991, to consider a City initiated Amendment to the Municipal Code (Zoning Ordinance), providing a new Medical/Office District to the Zoning Code and providing a parking standard for medical facilities. WHEREAS, said Text Amendment has complied with the requirements of "California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended), and adopted by City Council Resolution 83-68, in that the Planning Director has determined after initial study that the amendment will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and that a Negative Declaration should be filed. 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 recommendation for approval of said Text Amendment. 1. The Text Amendment to the Municipal Code is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan. 2. Approval of the Amendment will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. 3. The Amendment provides for more flexibility in property development in the City in the future. 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; RESOPC.023/CS -1- 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of the Environmental Assessment that the approval of this zoning text amendment will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment, and that a Negative Declaration is appropriate for filing; 3. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment No. 91-020 as contained in Exhibit "A" & "B" attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of October, 1991 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: KATIE BARROWS, Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.023/CS -2- RESOLUTION 91- EXHIBIT "A1Y ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 91-020 SECTIONS: 9.92.010 Purpose 9.92.020 Permitted Uses 9.92.030 Conditional Uses 9.92.040 Non -Permitted Uses 9.92.050 Site Development Standards OFFICE, MEDICAL & RELATED SERVICES (OMS) 9.92.010 Purpose: This district is intended tc provide an environment desirable for and conducive to development of medical or office facilities which can be located adjacent to residential uses and other similar types of facilities (e.g. churches, civic center, downtown, etc.). In addition, certain other kinds of uses are permitted under conditions and standards which assure their compatibility with a general concentration of office/medical uses as well as with different types of residential districts which will adjoin this district. This district will generally serve to provide a transition from, and occur between, the commercial core and residential districts. 9.92.020 Permitted Uses: Buildings, structures, or premises shall be used and buildings and structures shall hereafter be erected, altered or enlarged only for the following uses: 1. Business and Professional a. Business or medical college, limited to the teaching of office or medical business practices and medical skills. b. Corporate headquarters, which may include transient residential units only for employees on a site less than 10 acres. C. Office, professional, for: Accountant, architect, chiropodist, chiropractor, dentist, engineer, lawyer, minister, osteopath, physician, surgeon, surveyor, optometrist, veterinarian. d. Office, semi-professional, for: Insurance broker, public stenographer, real estate broker, stockbroker, and other persons who operate or conduct offices which will not require the stocking of goods for wholesale. e. Laboratories: Medical, dental, blood bank. f. Museum, library, post office. g. Clinic h. Out -patient medical services. ORDPC.001/CS -1- i. Hospital (less than 100 beds) j. Municipal Uses k. Governmental offices 1. Day-care or Preschool 2. Retail a. Establishments primarily supplemental in character to other permitted principal uses, such as: Pharmacy, prosthetic devices and optical goods. b. Blueprinting, printing, publishing or photostating. C. Drug Store d. Candy Store 3. Services a. Banks, financial offices, lending institutions, savings and loan associations, credit unions, and stock brokerage firms. b. Telephone answering service. C. Temporary buildings for uses incidental to construction work, which buildings shall be removed upon completion or abandonment of the construction work. d. Travel agency e. Barber or beauty shop f. Fitness studio g. Book store h. Florist i. Stationery store j. Gift Shop 4. Food Service a. Cafeteria/restaurant which is incidental to the operation of one of the above uses. b. Ice cream store 9.92.030 Conditional Uses: 1. Church 2. Corporate headquarters which includes transient residential units only for employees on a site greater than 10 acres. 3. Funeral home 4. Hospital - when larger than 100 beds 5. Research and development facilities (indoor research only). 6. Restaurant or cafe (less than 5,000 square feet in size which can have on -site alcoholic beverage sales but cannot have live entertainment) which can have outdoor seating. Drive-thru facilities will not be permitted. 7. Day Care or preschool for more than 150 children. 8. Helipads. ORDPC.001/CS -2- 9.92.040 Non -permitted Uses: Any use which is not prescribed above to be a permitted or conditional use item shall be deemed to be not allowed by the adoption of this Ordinance, and any use which is in this Zone District prior to the adoption of this Code which does not meet the minimum requirements of this section, shall be deemed Legal Nonconforming and subject to the provisions of Chapter 9.152 of the Zoning Code. 9.92.050 Site Development Standards: A. Building Height - No building shall exceed 4 stories in height above finish grade except for appurtenant structures which do not increase the square footage of the facility. Facilities which qualify for this exception are: chimneys, architectural towers, transmission equipment integral to the operation of the facility, etc. Mechanical penthouses are also acceptable if the area of the penthouse does not exceed 100 of the aggregate. All building heights greater than two stories shall be approved by the Planning Commission on a case -by -case basis. B. Yards a. Front - Projects which front a major, primary, or secondary arterial street in the City shall have an average landscape setback along the frontage of the site of not less than 20 feet to any parking structure or facility. All buildings shall be a minimum of 50 feet from the property line and no building shall exceed one story in height within 15C feet of the front property line unless approved by the Planning Commission on a case -by -case basis. Any project fronting a local street shall have a front yard setback of 20 feet from either parking facilities or building structures. b. Street Side - A side yard of not less than 20 feet shall be maintained. C. Side - A side yard of not less than 50 feet from a building to the property line shall be maintained where the side of the lot abuts a single family residential district, or use. A side yard of not less than 25 feet from a building to the property line shall be maintained for all other districts. d. Rear - A rear yard of not less than 50 feet from a building to the property line shall be maintained. e. Special - In no case shall any yard setback be less than five feet wide. ORDPC.001/CS -3- C. Setback adjustments Setback adjustments may be made by the Planning & Development Director for minor architectural appurtenances (balconies, stairwells, trellises, eaves, chimneys, towers, etc.) which do not involve square footage building increases by up to twenty percent. D. Distance between Buildings There shall not be less than 10 feet between accessory buildings and main buildings. The minimum distance between main buildings shall be based on a ratio of 10 feet for each building floor proposed (above ground structures only) for the highest of the two buildings involved. E. Lot Size The minimum lot size shall be 5 acres, and all properties shall have a minimum street frontage of not less than 600 feet and a depth not less than 600 feet. F. Walls and Screening 1. A decorative masonry perimeter wall of not less than 6 feet in overall height shall be constructed along all interior or rear property lines which abut residentially zoned properties. 2. All parking areas shall be screened from view from all public streets by a wall, berm, or landscape hedge a minimum of 42 inches in overall height. 3. All mechanical structures and appurtenances shall be screened as approved by the Design Review Board. 4. All storage and refuse areas shall be screened by masonry walls. 5. All operations and storage shall be conducted within a completely enclosed building or within an area contained by a wall or fence as determined by the Director of Planning and Development. G. Lot Access All lots shall have frontage on and have vehicular access from a dedicated public street unless a secondary means of permanent vehicular access has been approved by the Planning Commission either by Specific Plan approval or other legislative action. H. Views into Buildings Building clustering shall be encouraged and in no case should the building mass along a parallel plane exceed 50 percent of the width of the lot. Building massing greater than 50%, but less than 70%, shall be approved by the Planning Commission on a case -by -case basis. ORDPC.001/CS -4- I. Pedestrian Access and Shading a. Covered walkways shall be provided and designed for all ground floor building levels for each proposed structure. The arcade shall be a minimum of seven feet wide, and shading should be placed along all areas of the building which provide primary entry or exiting or are affected by mid -afternoon sunshine. Canvas awnings will not be permitted to be counted toward meeting this provision. Covered walkways between building complexes should be encouraged. b. Bicycle parking facilities shall include provisions for locking of bicycles, either in lockers or in secure racks in which the bicycle frame and wheels may be locked by the user. The racks shall be placed in areas which are shaded by landscape or building structures. One rack with a capacity for six bicycles shall be installed for every 80 parking spaces. The facilities shall be placed within 80 feet of an entry/exit to the building complex. C. Concrete walkways shall be designed internal to the project so that pedestrian access is not hindered by vehicular traffic movement. Walkways shall connect buildings to parking and buildings to off -site public transportation facilities which are in the immediate area. d. Fifty percent of the on -site parking spaces shall be shaded by detached structures or by proposed buildings. Phasing of the required covered structures will be permitted if approved by the Planning Commission. e. Decorative paving surfaces should be used to distinguish pedestrian areas from vehicular areas where necessary -to reduce on -site conflicts, and all main entries in the project shall include textured concrete areas which promote architectural identity and promote community pride. J. Landscaping At least 10 percent of parking lot area shall be landscaped. One-third of the required landscaping area for a parking lot for more than 50 cars shall be in planting areas distributed throughout the lot other than on the perimeter. The landscaped area shall contain street trees and adequate sprinklers or other appropriate irrigation device, as approved by the Planning Department. The other landscaping provisions of the Off -Street Parking Code shall be maintained. ORDPC.001/CS -5- K. Signs A master sign program shall follow the guidelines as prescribed in Sign Ordinance (Chapter 9.212) and the Planning Commission shall have final approval of all new projects. Special Provisions: No internally illuminated signs will be permitted. Freestanding signs can be internally lit if they provide information which serves emergency personnel, however, externally lighted signs shall be encouraged. All freestanding signs should be monument type signs not exceeding 7 feet in overall height as measured from the average street grade curb height within 20 feet of the proposed sign location. L. Off -Street Parking The first parking space within a parking lot should be located within 100 feet of any proposed building structure. M. Parking Structures The architectural character of above ground parking structures shall be compatible with the surrounding area, and consistent in design with the project within which they are contained. No above ground structure shall be over 2-1/2 stories (32 feet). Subterranean parking floors will not be counted in the 2-1/2 story height requirement. The parking garages should be located behind proposed buildings so that they are not highly visible from any scenic arterial. N. Emergency Traffic Signal Project Access All hospital projects shall be required to provide emergency traffic signal(s) on or close to the project site to assist public or private emergency personnel response vehicles. The signal can either be private or public. if a public signal is used, the signal shall be redesigned to include an emergency frequency transmitter which will override the traffic signal during a crisis situation. The developer is required to design and install the necessary hardware at their expense unless other arrangements are made with the City Council. ORDPC.001/CS -6- ZONE ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 91-020 EXHIBIT B Off -Street Parking Code Amendment (Chapter 9.160) Amend Chapter 9.160.045 - Subsection C, and add item 10 (M) as follows: Medical Offices: 1 space per 150 square feet GLA (including lobbies and reception areas) for any building or building complex less than 20,000 square feet. 1 space per 200 square feet GLA (including lobbies and reception areas) for any building or building complex greater than 20,000 square feet. ORDPC.002/CS -1- STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1991, (CONTINUED FROM SEPTEMBER 24, 1991) PROJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 91-037 CHANGE OF ZONE AMENDMENT 91-065 PLOT PLAN 91-465 TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27267 APPLICANT: DESERT HOSPITAL, C/O MR. PETER BERGMANN, EL MIRADOR MEDICAL COMPLEX OWNER: ASH, DANKO, HODGE AND COMPANY ARCHITECT: MR. GERALD C. GENRICH, HDR (HENNINGSON, DUCKAM, & RICHARDSON, INC.) TRAFFIC CONSULTANT: ASL ENGINEERING/BARTON-ASCHMANN ASSOCIATES, INC., C/O MR. GAROLD B. ADAMS, RCE, TE. REPRESENTATIVE: MR. JEFF P. SOB CZYK, MEDIPLEX MEDICAL BUILDING CORP. REQUEST: A PLOT PLAN TO PERMIT A THREE STORY MEDICAL/OFFICE COMPLEX (78,557 SQUARE FEET/PHASE I) WITH HELI-PAD ON A PORTION OF A 30 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET AT VIA MARQUESSA. TEN ACRES OF THE SITE ARE LOCATED IN THE SANTA ROSA MOUNTAINS RESPECTIVELY. TO AMEND THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE/MEDICAL COMMERCIAL; A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE/MEDICAL AND RELATED SERVICES (OMS); AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 30 ACRES INTO TWO PARCELS. LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET AT VIA MARQUESSA (GENERALLY NORTH OF 48TH AVENUE AND SOUTH OF 47TH AVENUE/HIGHLAND PALMS DRIVE, A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION) . BACKGROUND: See the attached Planning Commission Staff report of September 24th. PCST.016 1 Public testimony was received at the previous meeting of September 24, 1991. There was both recommendations for and against the project which were presented orally or in writing prior to the meeting. However, due to the complexity of the project, and to the last minute receipt of two of the supplemental studies proposed by the Applicant, Staff requested the continuance to October 8th. NEW INFORMATION FROM DESERT HOSPITAL: The Applicant has submitted to Staff new correspondence which is attached. The first letter which was received on October 1st, outlines the Desert Hospital's long range hospital plan for approximately 100 acute beds and between 15-20 additional beds for post -operative recovery. The second letter which was received on October 3rd, summarizes the existing Valley hospitals and their existing facilities. CITY ENGINEER DEPARTMENT REVIEW: The City's Engineering Department has reviewed the project and has had time to examine the Developer prepared draft traffic study and hydrology report which were required by Staff. An Engineering Department representative will be present at the meeting to present their findings and recommendations and further information will be presented at the October 7th Study Session. In addition, their updated Conditions of Approval are attached to this report. DAY CARE PROPOSAL: The Developer has been reviewing with Mr. & Mrs. Bangerter the possibility of having the La Quinta Little School (childcare center) in their project. It is Staffs understanding that the facility proposed would be consistent with that which was submitted to the Design Review Board and Planning Commission recently (i.e., +230 students) on Date Palm Drive and Sagebrush. The plans have not been submitted but the Developer would like the Planning Commission to conceptually agree to the location as depicted on the site plan. If this type of approval was granted, it would allow the future Day -Care Facility to be reviewed as a plot plan application without requiring another public hearing. Staff is not opposed to the facility being on this property or with the request of the Applicant if the Planning Commission is comfortable with this request. LAND USE DISCUSSION: The City presently has an over abundance of commercially zoned property in the City. However, the city does not have any property devoted to strictly Office / Medical related services. With the implementation of Zone Ordinance Amendment 91-020, the City would be in a position to consider rezoning properties to the OMS category and/or perhaps redesignating this property. Positive traits for this site are: 1.) the site is less than one mile south of the City prime commercial property ( Washington/ Highway 111) and across from existing commercially zoned property; and 2. ) it would be located in the center of the City with immediate access to various major or primary north/south and east/west corridor streets; and 3.) the property to the north is presently developed with the St. Francis of Assisi Church, a non-residential use. PCST.016 2 The site is well suited for development since it is fairly flat, vacant and it fronts a major City arterial street. Development in the area has been toward low density, however, heavy commercial zoned areas exist in the immediate area (east side of Washington Street; Washington Square and Lake La Quinta projects), but areas south of 48th Avenue are generally residential in nature. A copy of the City's Zoning Map exhibit for this area is attached to the Change of Zone Resolution. Staff is not opposed to the development of this site for office/medical purposes provided the City limits the future potential of the site to uses which do not conflict or impede development of the C-P-S properties. STAFF COMMENTS: No new communications have been received by Staff from the general public on this case. Therefore, we would recommend approval of the subject case(s) subject to the attached revised documents. FINDINGS: Findings necessary to justify a recommendation for approval can be made and are attached to the draft resolutions for your use. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends: 1. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 91- , recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan and Text Amendment 91-037, and confirmation of the Environmental Determination. 2. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 91- recommending to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 91-065, from R-1 Single Family Residential to Office/Medical and related services (OMS) . 3. That the Planning Commission loy Minute Motion 91- approve Plot Plan 91- 465, subject to the attached conditions. 4. That the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution 91- approving Tentative Parcel Map 27267, subject to the attached conditions as noted in the Planning Commission Resolution. Attachments: 1. Letters from Desert Hospital (October 1st and October 3rd) 2. Previous Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 24, 1991 (without resolutions) 3. Draft Planning Commission Resolution recommending GPA 91-037 4. Draft Planning Commission Resolution recommending CZ 91-065 5. Draft Conditions of Approval for PP 91-465. 6. Draft Resolution approving TPM 27267 PCST.016 3 DESERT HOSPITAL September 19, 1991 Mr. Jerry Herman Mr. Greg Trousdell Planning and Development Department City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Gentlemen: D D O C T 0 1 1991 CITY OF !A ON IA PLANNING DEPARTMENT In response to your letter of September 6, 1991, I am pleased to confirm that the master plan which we have completed for the proposed medical facility on Washington contemplates approximately 100 general acute care beds. In addition, either on an interim or permanent basis, we are considering 15-20 postoperative recovery center beds. This bed classification permits longer recovery observation from minor surgeries to be completed in the proposed surgery center. These beds also require less rigorous licensing and architectural requirements than acute care beds, and will likely be housed in medical office buildings such as our proposed Phase II and III developments. I appreciate your continuing interest in the project, and look forward to the Planning Commission meetings next week. Kind regards, Peter D. B r ann Chief Finan 'al Officer Eleven Fifty North Indian Avenue, P.O. Box 2739, Palm Springs, California 92263 (619) 323-6511 s EELL >> MIRADOR MEDICAL PLAZA L A 0 U IN T A COACHELLA VALLEY HOSPITALS -------------------------- BEDS PERSONNEL MEDICAL STAFF MEMBERS SERVICES INTENSIVE CARE UNIT COMMUNITY HEALTH EDUC. OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH SERVICES OUTPATIENT SERVICES PEDIATRIC INPATIENT OBSTETRICS NEONATAL INTENSIVE CARE UNIT (NICU) CANCER PROGRAM (RADIATION THERAPY) CARDIAC SERVICES REHABILITATION INPATIENT OUTPATIENT DIALYSIS HOME CARE HOSPICE SKILLED NURSING FACILITY (SNF) EMERGENCY DEPT TRAUMA CENTER PSYCHIATRIC CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY OFFICE SPACE (USEABLE SQ. FT.) I B I - D OCT 0 3 1991 PI.ANN604 DESERT EISENHOWER JOHN F. HOSPITAL MEDICAL CTR. KENNEDY --------------------------------- 350 239 131 1600 1500 450 243 210 66 16Cr,000 185,500 93,500 1150 NORTH INDIAN CANYON DRIVE • PALM SPRINGS O CALIFORNIA 92262 0 (619) 323.1234 Phi-3 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: SEPTEMBER 249 1991 PROJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 91-037 CHANGE OF ZONE AMENDMENT 91-065 PLOT PLAN 91-465; DESERT HOSPITAL TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27267 APPLICANT: DESERT HOSPITAL, C/O MR. PETER BERGMANN, EL MIRADOR MEDICAL COMPLEX OWNER: ASH, DANKO, HODGE AND COMPANY ARCHITECT: MR. GERALD C. GENRICH, HDR (HENNINGSON, DUCKAM, & RICHARDSON, INC.) TRAFFIC CONSULTANT: ASL ENGINEERING/ BARTON -ASCHMANN ASSOCIATES, INC., C/O MR. GAROLD B. ADAMS, RCE, TE. REPRESENTATIVE: MR. JEFF P. SOBCZYK, MEDIPLEX MEDICAL BUILDING CORP. REQUEST: A PLOT PLAN TO PERMIT A THREE STORY MEDICAL/OFFICE COMPLEX (78,557 SQUARE FEET/PHASE I) WITH HELI-PAD ON A PORTION OF A 30 ACRE SITE LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET AT VIA MARQUESSA. TEN ACRES OF THE SITE ARE LOCATED IN THE SANTA ROSA MOUNTAINS RESPECTIVELY. TO AMEND THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN LAND USE ELEMENT FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE/MEDICAL COMMERCIAL; A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE/MEDICAL AND RELATED SERVICES (OMS); AND TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP REQUEST TO SUBDIVIDE 30 ACRES INTO TWO PARCELS. LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET AT VIA MARQUESSA (GENERALLY NORTH OF 48TH AVENUE AND SOUTH OF 47TH AVENUE/HIGHLAND PALMS DRIVE, A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION) . LAND AREA: 30 ACRES (20 DEVELOPABLE) BUILDING AREA: +78,559 SQUARE FEET (PHASE I) - MEDICAL CENTER PCST.016 SURROUNDING ZONING AND LAND USE: NORTH: SOUTH: EAST: WEST: R-1-AND HC/HILLSIDE CONSERVATION; ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI CHURCH SAME; VACANT R-1 RESIDENTIAL/C-P-S VACANT; LAKE LA QUINTA DEVELOPMENT HILLSIDE CONSERVATION (HC); VACANT HILLSIDE. PARKING PROVIDED: +370 SPACES PARKING RATIO: ONE SPACE PER 208 (WITHOUT DAY CARE) SQUARE FEET DESCRIPTION OF SITE: The proposed 30 acre site is a portion of a 42 acre property. The Desert Hospital Group is in escrow on the 30 acre property contingent on the approval of this development plan. The westerly portion of the site, approximately 10 acres, is in the Santa Rosa Mountain range. The remaining 20 acres has frontage along Washington Street. The property has 1, 000 feet of frontage along Washington Street and is 1, 275 feet in depth. The parcel(s) are vacant at this time and the area outside the mountainous portion contains native vegetation and an accumulation of migrated sand fines which have formed ten to fifteen foot high sand dunes along the rear portion of the site against the mountain. The site elevation along Washington Street is approximately 59 feet and at the toe of the mountain it is approximately 105 feet. The highest westerly - most point on the site is roughly 325 feet. The site is partially improved with new street paving along Washington Street, but the site does not have curb, gutter or sidewalk improvements. A raised median island which exists on Washington Street was installed by the City in 1989. Further, the existing frontage road (along the frontage of the Saint Francis of Assisi Church and northerly) terminates at the northeast corner of the property emptying onto the southbound lanes of Washington Street. APPLICATIONS UNDER CONSIDERATION: 1. Plot Plan 91-465; this plot plan application would permit the construction of the proposed three story medical complex. ( The day care center is not a part of this review.) 2. General Plan Amendment 91-037; this application is to change the General Plan Land Use designation from Low Density Residential and Open Space to Office/Medical Commercial and Open Space. The change is required in order for the Applicant to construct the proposed medical complex on this site. PCST.016 2 3. Change of Zone 91-065; this Change of Zone is to allow the zoning to be changed from the present residential 1� 1 to Office/Medical Commercial as requested by the Applicant. This zoning category is necessary to construct the proposed medical center. 4. Tentative Parcel Map 27267; a request to subdivide 30 acres into two lots to correspond with the Hospital's Phase I building plan. GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT/CHANGE OF ZONE AMENDMENT: In order for the plot plan application to become effective for this site, the property must be redesignated from residential to another land use designation. Initially, the Applicant thought they would pursue a Commercial General Plan category with C-P-S Commercial Zone District provision. However, the project proponent indicated that the C-P-S category was not truly appropriate for their needs since they do not want to examine, for example: a laundromat, gas station, department store, pool hall, hotel/motel, theater, car dealership, equipment rental yard, etc. In summary, Zone Ordinance Amendment 91-020 is being examined in conjunction with this multiple application submittal and would create a zone geared towards professional office and medical uses. SITE DESIGN: The proposed ( Phase I) three story medical building has been positioned in the center of the lot with proposed parking encircling the building. The proposed plan, as presented, will include: medical offices, pharmacy, and urgent care facilities for approximately 45, 000 square feet of the building complex. The remaining portion of the building will be devoted to diagnostic imaging, clinical laboratories and out- patient surgery. LANDSCAPING/ SCREENING: The landscape setback along the frontage of the site is approximately 100-120 feet, and a meandering sidewalk is shown along Washington Street. The sidewalk along Washington Street, a major arterial, should be eight feet wide to allow pedestrian and bikeway travel. The plans are drawn at a small scale (1" = 50' & 601) and it is hard to clarify this matter, however, Staff believes that the Applicant is meeting this requirement of the City in their design submittal. A concept landscape plan was submitted on August 21, 1991, and the plan is attached. The preliminary concept is to rough to comment on but latter on in the report a recommendation has been drafted concerning this matter. The Applicant has not submitted cross-section drawings of the site, or a parkway plan (street view elevation showing landscaping features), therefore, Staff is not able to comment fully on this submittal. However, these type of final construction details should be reviewed by the Design Review Board if the project is approved by the Planning Commission and City Council. PCST.016 3 ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Medical Complex The three story building is 300 feet from Washington Street and is designed to allow easy access from the abutting parking lot areas into the first floor common waiting area. The proposed Spanish style design motif is indicative of this region (e. g. , the roof, rough stucco exterior, large glass windows, etc.) . Preliminary discussions with the architect have indicated the building will be painted white with the balconies and wood trim painted green. The design group has stated that they will bring the finalized color board to the meeting for review/consideration. A covered arcade is proposed for the perimeter of the building around the first floor and the architect has included textured paved areas to define the public spaces. Planters are also interspersed along the pedestrian areas to add additional character to the entry into the proposed facility. The proposed building meets the design parameters of the City. STAFF & DESIGN REVIEW BOARD COMMENTS: The Design Review Board met on September 4, 1991, and concurred with Staff comments on the project which were: 1. The Applicant should prepare a preliminary landscape plan which would identify all proposed plant materials which would be installed at the site. A parkway plan should be done separately, and it should be drawn to a scale not less than 1" 20' and include all hardscape and softscape features along Washington Street within 120 feet of the proposed street curbing. The landscape plan shall include an eight foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail. The plan should be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to submission of the final landscape plan by the Applicant/Developer. 2. The landscape program for Washington Street should include a variation of planting materials, such as Palm trees, accent shade trees, lawn, shrubs, and groundcover. Consideration should be given to maintaining existing mountain vistas. This can be achieved by plant spacing and selective tree groupings. The design should consider using a more open type tree, such as the California Pepper, Australian Willow and Mesquite. Native (low water use) plants should be used, and the landscape architect should consult with the Coachella Valley Water District's plant materials list prior to designing their proposal. Uplighted trees or palms should be considered along Washington Street. Incandescent light fixtures will be required (less than 160 watts) . 3. The proposed retention areas on -site should be landscaped with materials which will support growth even though they are accepting water run-off from paved surfaces. 4. A meandering eight foot wide sidewalk should be installed along Washington Street along the frontage of the site, and an on -site easement shall be offered if the sidewalk is to be located on a portion of private property. 5. The proposed parking lot lighting plan should be reviewed by the Design Review Board prior to building plan check. A photometric study should be developed with analysis of the lighting pattern on the project and meets the pcsT.016 4 City's Lighting Ordinance provisions as explained in Chapter 9.210. The height of the light poles should not exceed 20 feet in height, and the lighting contractor should try to reduce this height if physically possible during review of the project. 6. The Developer should consider using dark rust colors for all portions of the building in order to make the complex blend in with its rocky surroundings. 7. Should the Applicant wish to provide public art on the site, the center of the project facing Washington Street (at Avenida Marquessa) in the landscaped areas would be an ideal location since it is visible to public and will not be blocked from view by existing or future buildings. 8. All future buildings will be subject to further study by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission through Plot Plan applications. 9. The Applicant should examine covered parking spaces for 10 percent of the proposed on -site parking spaces. The covered trellises should be either wood or metal and spaces should be interspersed throughout the site. 10. All trash and loading area facilities should be located so that they cannot be seen from any public thoroughfare. The areas should be screened by using masonry wall enclosures and landscaping. 11. All windows on the second and third floor should be recessed into the building envelope (approximately 6 to 18 inches) and sunshade canopies should be used to reduce the sun exposure on the areas which are susceptible to mid- afternoon heating. 12. The overall height of the facility (to roof ridge) should not exceed 3 stories as determined by the Planning Commission. 13. A master sign program should be reviewed/approved by the Design Review Board prior to the issuance of any permits for permanent signs at this location. 14. Design measures should be examined to minimize the exposure of the proposed parking lot(s) as they relate to Washington Street, a public thoroughfare. The landscape plan submittal should include provisions for both planter hedges and masonry screen walls along the property frontage. 15. The finished pad height of this phase and any other phases should be as low as possible to reduce the overall height of the building structures as they relate to the surrounding elements (e.g., existing St. Francis of Assisi Church, Santa Rosa Mountains, etc.) . HELI-PAD ISSUE: The helicopter pad is a new element to the Phase I development plan which was added after the initial application. Staff did not address this feature in the environmental assessment, and the Applicant has not provided a noise study to address the impacts of the proposal on abutting neighbors. At the Design Review Board meeting the Applicant stated that the heli-pad is not necessary for their initial first phase, PCST.016 therefore, Staff would prefer to not address this matter during this review stage. A condition has been imposed which eliminates this feature from the Phase I approval. TRAFFIC STUDY: Staff has requested as part of the submission of the project that the Applicant prepare a traffic study which analyzes the off -site traffic impacts this development would have on streets within the area. The purpose of the study was to examine: 1) whether or not the City should pursue the extension of the Washington Street frontage road southerly from Highland Palms/47th Avenue to 48th Avenue along the frontage of the parcel; 2) whether direct access to Washington Street should be permitted with or without the extension of the frontage road; or 3) whether the frontage road was necessary at all. The developer contracted with ASL Consultants, Inc. and Barton-Aschmann Associates, Inc., to perform this task and a copy of the study is in your environmental assessment . Staff believes that the site should not be permitted direct access to Washington Street and that the further extension of the Washington Street frontage road is appropriate for this site because if access is allowed a traffic signal would probably be necessary since a median island break was also requested by the Applicant. A traffic signal at the proposed entry to Washington Street would be at a 1 /4 mile interval and the General Plan and City Council has discouraged mid -block signals unless they are at 1/2 mile intervals along Washington Street. The project to the east, Lake La Quinta, has also requested a signal at Via Marquessa, but the Council has not approved their request. The traffic report has indicated that the plan as prepared by the Developer, with signalized access to Washington Street without the extension of the frontage road is, from a traffic safety and traffic movement scenario, an acceptable or preferred alternative to that recommended by City Staff . The consultant, however, did recommend that the City require a cul-de-sac for the frontage road at the northerly end of the site and further provide reciprocal access to the abutting private property owners for cross traffic on -site traffic movement. The Engineering Department has tentatively reviewed the traffic study document, and they concur that the alternative recommended in the study is functional. However, their feeling is that the City should maintain their standard of eliminating access driveways on major thoroughfares even if they are right-in/right-out driveways and not allow traffic signals at 1 /4 mile intervals. The Engineering Department will be at the meeting to elaborate on the final traffic study because the document was not received until September 19th. Further, it is the Engineering Department's contention that the change in land use designation from Low Density Residential to Office/Medical dictates that the developer should be required to improve both Washington Street and the Washington Street frontage road for their frontage and south of their site to 48th Avenue because of their added burden to City services. With this in mind, conditions have been included which require no direct access to Washington Street, and extend frontage road improvements in front of site and southerly to 48th Avenue. PCST.016 6 LAND USE DISCUSSION: The City presently has an over abundance of commercially zoned property in the City. However, the city does not have much property devoted to strictly Office/Medical related services. With the implementation of Zone Ordinance Amendment 91-020, the City would be in a position to consider rezoning commercial properties to the OMS category and/or perhaps redesignating this property. Positive traits for this site are: 1) the site is less than one mile south of the City prime commercial property (Washington/Highway 111); and 2) it would be located in the center of the City with immediate access to various major or primary north/south east/west corridor streets. The site is well suited for development since it is fairly flat and vacant at this time, and it fronts a major City arterial street. Development in the area has been toward low density development, however, heavy commercial zoned areas exist in the immediate area (east side of Washington Street; Washington Square and Lake La Quinta projects) , but areas south of 48th Avenue are generally residential in nature. A copy of the City's Zoning Map exhibit for this area is attached to the Change of Zone Resolution. Staff is not opposed -to the development of this site for office medical purposes provided the City limits the future potential of the site to uses which do not conflict or impede development of the C-P-S properties. FINDINGS: Findings necessary to justify a recommendation for approval can be made and are attached to the draft resolution for your use. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends: 1. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 91- , recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan and Text Amendment 91-037, and confirmation of the Environmental Determination. 2. That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution 91- recommending to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 91-065, from R-1 Single Family Residential to Office/Medical and related services (OMS) . 3. That the Planning Commission by Minute Motion 91- approve Plot Plan 91- 465 , subject to the attached conditions. 4. That the Planning Commission adopt Planning Commission Resolution 91- approving Tentative Parcel Map 27267, subject to the attached conditions as noted in the Planning Commission Resolution. PCST.016 n 2 AVE. �I �''` • kh%q4iw,i&y�I I WESTWMO No oa. .................. ................. M Location/Property in Question AVENUE ds MAJOR ARTERIAL � 120' R.O.W. PRIMARY ARTERIAL 100.110, R.O.W. SECONDARY ARTERIAL �%........mmi 98' R.O.W. QCOLLECTOR 61J2' R.O.W. CASE MAP CASE No. General Plan Amendment 91-037 Zone Change 91-065 Plot Plan 91-465 Environmental Assessment 91-210 j SCALE: p� pit M�IE .�Mh��.Y_• } !, ` 4 'iNayu'r i�"'� t' aT 7. . •: •. yo r •� N rw � - � .t. h\ t.► •• •} _�•t yr •k- • � '� •T' �r ' t�i •, .� '.�jV , V ' • -.'�. ' �!i.,t is :�.:! f r � i- •• ���, $ #• ♦ . •� �• �. ""Alt • �• y�F .h � AV •• 1 ir 10 '•�► - Rs 1 • • A j� •v; �ERPUDA OUNES ; RV CLUBUPS 41 :. G Water . 18 :m tt �{y�♦ r ras DAR V ROAD.. "� �• Water • .., j `•� ? ' �' ��. ` t v _ III v4 ..•... - ® I \` Trailer Part • \•.` `C �A x119 ' S \ ndian Wellstiappy - Poinl' �• y. e�_ O to �13C -� - BN 61 � �\ a.. ,�� Ill �\� /j u� � ' i- I�;7..� ��° ,• • 1\� ur �/ I ,ram � • �� 1 � / ^ �` i 1\\-�` `.��- •mot: n• •77 •.�.� 31 w�.A QUtNTA QUAD. _- . I Water C�r� ti• i' • � vJ:a� 1 y 60 `� ter •� •• • ••. so \yWeter Well N " �J' ..�- Well A � A t Y •`� �� • r / _ .. •• my toWlT • • �� rflto Mail '_`^3#`�r#L7.n.�i� -w 4.1r�\L..d..i.al.►w t..1� tv- - -r+. ♦r.� I � M ice,• I - ,,(ma(y,�, � :•:-.r /,;:i� .�� �,yy���� �C,` y �'4r � �•�j�y. "� I c f 1/S v \ � >"i�.:.JR `("'� .•'�.dM'�. ��•�'r.�'�Srr*•.q.tly,•t; � t• �_ 1 4 YT 7 � �uzu .,•`� Sri f •,.t ♦ Wit. • ' � , � `�_ , -' B ju .... .-.�+r .�„�:' ,.,� .... : •*.. . .�� .. 1, �� �� �-• .f• •.4 I ;� :, • :•^• �• :s Ya'•°=�: '� �_' = ri•:�''... 1..� rat`; ,4 � � I � CL r mow. _4�. �,•�•i •'.��:;' 't • � � :w�,�•'•. d• ��� uj i IL .... =�~ •\ � May I I' TO ca rwt• � . , � � � + I l I � Z 1 ��, � q/— o3h �Z• 9�-oG5 s;— CM or u Qonrrtt ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: �%� tlbfpl 2. ddress and Phone Number of Pro onent: 0400 or V( Are aw 3. Date of Checklist: �� y•'/ 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: a • S. Name of Proposal, if applicable: �► I I . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS — 2i144 "Yes" "Mo' " (Explanation of all and aAl. is required on attached sheets.) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes nybo No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? J/ c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction„ covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? r e. Any increases in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach, sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? _ g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- hazards? slides, ground failure, or similar r� 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of anbient air quality? ___ _ _ b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. A:teration of air movement, moisture or te=perature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? _ b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, I� or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? c. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? — d. Change in the amount of surface water in any is water body? — . e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, in- cluding but not limited to temperature, 6000, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? _ . — f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? —_ g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? (3) Yes Maybe No h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? _ i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? — b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? ____ 1� c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or result in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _ ____ d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? __-_ ____ S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: , a._ Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthie organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? __Ae - c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? _ _00000, __ 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? _ b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new A light or glare? _ _ S. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? — —. 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of any use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any renewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk o an explosion or the release of hazardous sub- stances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event / of an accident or upset conditions? _ P _ 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, istri ution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? _. 12. Housin . Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? _ Aeol' — b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or �� demand for new parking? _ (4) Yes "0 No c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? _ d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govern- mental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? _ d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? _..._ f. Other governmental services? r 1S. Energy. Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? _ b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development 6000, of new sources of energy? _...- 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need or new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? — b. Commur.ications systems? _ Jrow C. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? _ e. Storm %ater drainage? lee, - f. Solid baste and disposal? — 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: i a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? _ &0000' - b. Expos-..e of people to potential health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. will the proposal result in the obstructieof any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open - S to public view?-- 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact Upon the quality or quantity of existing recrea- `*001 tional opportunities? _ ___- 20. Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? _ _ 21. Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially re- duce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plan or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the _ S major periods of California history or prehistory? AL (S) Yes Maybe No III IV. Date. b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short -tern, to the disadvantage of long-term, en- vironmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term 600000 impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) -- d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? .--.- DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation; — I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. j?001, find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described or, an attached sheet have been a4ded to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an E%N IROtiTtENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 00001// Signaturg,.♦ CITY OF LA QUINTA INITIAL ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY CASE NO. GPA 91-037, CZ 91-065, PP91-465 (EA91-210) DESERT HOSPITAL GENERAL DESCRIPTION: The proposed three story office/medical center is located on the west side of Washington Street, north of 48th Avenue and south of 47th Avenue. The proposed 78,000 square foot facility will be designed to care for out -patient services and the center will be located on a portion of the 30 acre property. The applicant has also designated a small portion of the site toward the development of a (future) child care facility on the westerly side of the site (the approximate size is 5,000 sqaure feet). Twenty acres are buildable and the remaining 10 acres are located in the Santa Rosa Mountain Range. In addition, the applicant has requested a change in the land use plan for this area to support the center; they are requesting a commerical designation versus the present designation of single family residential. ENVIRONMENTAL, IMPACTS EXPLANATION OF "YES" AND "MAYBE" QUESTIONS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 1. EARTH: The soil on this property has been classified as Myoma Fine Sand. This type of soil has rapid permeability and it can be used for crop production or homesite development. The site has been vacant (never developed) but the applicant is desirous to pursue development of the site with urban services (i.e. medical complex). The front portion of the site is flat, but the rear portion of the site includes a portion of the Santa Rosa Mountains. The slope of the mountains in this area is approximately 20 percent or greater. The recontouring of the earth to support the project will be done as part of the grading plan, and no on -site work shall be done until a study has been prepared which identifies the cut and fill needs of the site. The general elevation of the site is approximately 60 feet above sea level but the mountainous areas are approximately 350 feet above sea level. The site is in a Zone 3 Seismic/Geologic Hazard area as noted by the County of Riverside Planning Department (1983). A Zone 3 is an area with moderate shaking qualities but less severe than a Zone 12 (highest level). It is categorized as: "effect on people: felt by most people indoors. Some can estimate duration of shaking. But many may not recognize shaking of building as caused by an earthquake, the shaking is like that caused by the passing of light trucks (Riverside County Manual)." Although earthquake damage should not be a major problem at the site, landslides can be considered a problem at this location since it abuts a steep section of the Santa Rosa Mountain Range. The fracturing of rock can produce hazards for this area. Therefore, it is important that the Civil Engineer and a Geologist examine the natural forms of the site to determine areas that are subject to seismically generated landslides. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1) . Grading of the site shall occur pursuant to the approval of the future grading plan as specified by the City's Engineering Department. All work shall be conducted in a manner so that it does not disturb other abutting properties unless off -site agreements have been made and/or approved. The grading quantities have not been submitted, it is assumed that most of the earth moving at the site (contouring) will occur on the premises and limited importation will occur. 2). No disruption to the Santa Rosa Mountain range shall occur unless approved by the City as part of the grading review stage. At this time, it is anticipated that the project proponent will perform minor excavation work at the toe of the mountain to develop a portion of their on -site parking lot but any related construction work which is done, and effects the mountain, shall meet all the requirements of the City's Hillside Conservation Ordinance. 3). Provisions shall be made which will reduce any impacts associated with falling (fractured) rocks from the abutting hillside area. The design solution could include: concrete substructures, earthen basins, chain link fencing, or other facilities which will protect people from the unknown landslides which might occur in this section of the Santa Rosa Mountain Range. 4). All recommendations of the Buena Engineering Report, La Quinta Health Center, dated April 17, 1991 (Report B7-3091-P1) shall be met. This will include: site grading, building foundations, landslide design measures, building construction design methods, and all the other noted mitigation measures which are noted herein. The report is attached. 5). The site shall meet the provisions of Uniform Building Code Section 2312 (d) 2 because the projectd lies within a Seismic Zone 4. It is recommended that all structures be designed according to current Uniform Building Code requirements. 2. AIR: The project site is located within the Southeast Desert Air Basin (SEDAB) and is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). With the proposed construction, there may be air pollutant sources which may deteriorate ambient air quality. These sources are stationary and mobile sources. Stationary source considerations include emission from on -site construction activities and natural gas combustion. Mobile source consideration include exhaust emissions resulting from short term construction activities and long term generation associated with the project. It could be anticipated that with the construction of the proposed project there will be a reduction in the overall mobile emission releases because the medical complex would provide a convenient service to local residents of this area. Presently, no medical facilities of this magnitude exist in this area, therefore, the closest facilities of this caliber are in Indio (JF Kennedy Memorial Hospital - approximately 4 miles) or Rancho Mirage (Eisenhower Medical Center - approximately 10 miles). However, there are other smaller immediate care clinic at the area but none are as large as the one proposed. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). Adequate watering techniques shall be employed to partially mitigate the impact of the construction generated dust. 2). Areas graded but not immediately constructed on shall be planted with a temporary ground cover to reduce the amount of open space subject to wind erosion. 3). Grading and construction shall comply with all applicable City Ordinances and the requirements of the Air Quality Management Plan. 4). The operator of the facility should devise a car or vanpool plan which can be reviewed by the City to assure employees and doctors of the site are actively involved with reducing vehicle trips to and from this facility. 3. WATER: With the proposed construction it can be expected that there will be a change in the absorption rate (due to impervious surfaces), drainage patterns and amount and rate of surface water run-off. The project proponent will provide an on or off -site retention/detention basin (off -site if approved by the City Engineer) for the collection of storm water and nuisance water run- off and, special measures will be needed to divert mountain area run-off around the buildings into the proposed detention basins. The applicant has prepared a preliminary hydrology report (Sanborn/Webb Engineering stamp dated 9-18-91) which is attached. The applicant has analyzed the project and has made recommendations to the developer and the City concerning on --site water retention. This area is not subject to liquefaction (similar to the problems of the Downtown area). Liquefaction is the term which is used when the ground water table is very close to the surface, and during an earthquake the ground has a tendency to vibrate building structures from their respective foundations and, thus causing failure and other adverse side -effects. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The project shall comply with all applicable City requirements regarding storm water and nuisance water. The developer shall complete a hydrology study, prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer, which identifies the increased water run-off quantities which will be generated at the site by analyzing the assumed quantities in an undeveloped state and factoring this against the development proposal. Based on this study the project engineer shall design the necessary on or off -site drainage basins (retention/detention) which will maintain storm water run-off from the property and allow gradual dissipation of the water into the ground. The above - cited hydrology study is presently being reviewed by the City's Engineering Department and further information will be provided at the public hearing. 2. Diversion channels should be established which will funnel run- off from the hillside area into manageable storm water areas (as noted above). 4. PLANT LIFE: The subject site is presently vacant and void of any significant plant life. The site has existing desert shrubbery intertwined amongst the fifteen foot high sand dunes, which are at the base of the mountains, were probably formed by drifting sand over the past few hundred years or longer. No impact is anticipated by the development of this site. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. 5. Animal Life: The subject site is located in an area defined as a Fringed -Toed Lizard Habitat area (a Federally protected species) and it has been determined that a mitigation fee shall be paid to the City of La Quinta if the site is developed. The City is required to contribute the money to the Valley's Nature Conservancy, and the Conservancy is required to use the money at their Thousand Palms preserve (1300 acres) to protect and maintain this endangered species. All the valley cities contribute to this preserve through contractual arrangements which were made in the early 1980's and, although all properties in the City do not pay toward this fund at such time as they are developed, this project is required to contribute funds toward the continued preservation of this federally protected species since the property is designated as property that might have (or currently is) supported refuge for the lizard in the past. Another type of species which might be seen in this area is the Black -tailed Gnatcatcher and the Carissal Thrasher. These two birds are native to the Southern California area but they are not listed as a species which is rare or endangered at this time. It can be assumed that the development of this small property will not impede their continued survival since they are native to the Southern California region, and they usually thrive in areas with adequate water or arid scrub. This site has a marginal supply of desert scrub and no known existing source of surface water. Therefore, until these wildlife species are Federally protected it is assumed that they will migrate to other areas which are not developed in order to find safe areas to bred based on the assumption that adequate vegetation is available. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). The applicant/developer shall contribute at the time a building permit is issued money in the amount of $600.00 per acre which shall be used by the Nature Conservancy to mitigate the development of this parcel to an urban use. 6. NOISE: Because of the proposed construction and subsequent operation of the medical center, it can be expected that there will be some increase in the existing noise levels on the site. Most of the noise generated will be from motorized traffic coming to the site for medical care, and it is assumed that no noise will be generated by the primary users of the site (doctors, nurses, etc.) because it will be operated similar to an office complex in that no internal noise will be projected externally outside of the building mass. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). As required by the General Plan, this project shall prepare a noise analysis to minimize noise impacts on surrounding land uses. The City's General Plan Guidelines for indoor and outdoor noise shall be meet. 7. LIGHT AND GLARE: It is anticipated that the building(s) and/or parking lot/landscaping will include lighting. However, at this time, much of the material has not been submitted to staff but it is assumed that during the plan check process of this case in the future the applicant will be required to gain approval of this material from the City's Design Review Board and the Planning and Building Department prior to construction permit issuance. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). All lighting will have to comply with the City's "Dark Sky Ordinance". Additionally, light sources shall be shielded to eliminate light glare and off -site spillage onto abutting vacant or developed properties. 2). A lighting plan shall be submitted for the on -site parking lot and the plan shall include a photometric study of the lighting which analyzes the necessary footcandle light intensity as well as identifies the height of the light poles, spaces of the poles, type of lighting fixtures, and any other pertinent information which is necessary to assure compliance with the City's Off-street Parking Ordinance and the Dark Sky Ordinance. 8. LAND USE(S): The General Plan has designated the property as Low Density Residential (2-4 units per acres) and Open Space and the existing Zoning of the site is Single Family and Hillside Conservation. The 20 acres fronting Washington Street is the residentially zoned portion of the site and the remaining 10 acres in the rear (mountainous hills) is designated open space. The proposed land use is commercial which will necessitate a General Plan/Zone Change Amendment. Applications for this change have been submitted as part of the development plan application, and they will be reviewed by the Planning Commission and City Council as to their merit in the next few months. The City Council action is final unless the matter is appealed to the State Court System. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). None is required. However, it is necessary that the City Council approve the land use designation change in order for the applicant to develop the proposed medical complex. If this does not occur, the site is to remain vacant until other land use plans can be reviewed and be determined to meet the intent of the City's existing General Plan and Zoning Code. 9. NATURAL RESOURCES: No major adverse impacts are anticipated with by the construction of this project. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. However, the applicant shall meet all necessary requirements of the local serving agencies as outlined in the attached agency comments or as mandated during construction plan implementation. Building energy conservation will largely be achieved by compliance with Title 20 and 24 of the California Administrative Code. These standards are handled by the Building and Safety Department during construction plan check review. 10. RISK OF UPSET: No adverse impact is anticipated due to explosion or release of hazardous substances. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. However, all construction activities whether or not they are permanent or temporary shall meet all necessary safety standards of the Federal, State and local government requirements. 11. POPULATION: It is not anticipated that the proposed project will have an adverse or significant impact on population distribution, density or growth rate in the area. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required. 12. HOUSING: With the proposed project there may be an incremental demand for additional housing for employees of the development. However, due to the size of the medical center any demand would be insignificant because the City presently has an overabundance of land either vacant at this time (but slated for residential development) or developed with existing housing units. Single family housing is the primary type of housing at this time, however, multiple family housing projects will be forthcoming in the City's high density areas in the future. MITIGATION MEASURES: None are proposed. 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION: With the proposed project it can be anticipated that there will be a generation of additional vehicular traffic movement in the immediate area. The project is fronting on an existing partially developed major arterial (the median island is already installed) which provides both access to Interstate 10 and Highway ill (State roadway systems) and, access to the City's downtown and other residential areas. Washington Street is also serviced by the Sunline Transit bus system. The site is bounded on the east by Washington Street and generally located south of 47th Avenue and north of 48th Avenue, at the Via Marquessa intersection. The Washington Street frontage road dead ends at the northerly edge of the project site. The City has determined that they would like the existing Washington Street frontage road to continue southerly of its present location so that it will ultimately connect (Simon Plaza Motors area) with 48th Avenue. The continued development of the frontage road will eliminate the need for the project to have direct Washington Street access, and the development of the frontage road will both provide development access and reduce off -site traffic -problems. The applicant's preliminary traffic report is attached. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). Compliance with all applicable City requirements regarding street improvements of adjacent street(s). 2). The project shall provide adequate on -site parking to accommodate the proposed use of the property. 3). The Washington Street frontage road, west of Washington Street, shall be extended southerly along the frontage of the site. The project will be allowed access to this new frontage street system, but the development will not be permitted access to Washington Street, a major arterial. 4). A traffic signal should not be allowed for this project since the proposed light would be located 1/4 mile from the existing traffic light at 47th Avenue and Washington Street. This would be contradictory to the City' Circulation Element which states traffic signals should be located at 1/2 mile intervals on major arterials. However, the developer should contribute to the signal costs and/or maintenance of the future traffic signal at 48th Avenue and Washington Street. The City Engineer is reviewing the alternative access plans as prepared in the developer's traffic study, therefore, further recommendations will be presented at the upcoming public hearings which are tentatively scheduled for September and October. 5). Sidewalk and bikeway paths shall be provided on Washington Street (major arterial), and a sidewalk shall be proposed along one side of the future extension of the Washington Street frontage road. 6). The developer shall offer reciprocal access rights to the abutting neighbors so that in the future cross traffic vehicular access can occur between this property and either the Saint Francis of Assisi Church (to the north) and the vacant property to the south. 7). A bus stop and shelter shall be install along the frontage of the site on the proposed Washington Street frontage road in a location approved by Sunline Transit and the City Engineering Department. The bus turn -out shall not affect traffic movement. It is recommended that the bus lane be recessed either within the parkway or located on -site. Alternative forms of transportation should be pursued by the medical complex for its employees (e.g. car and vanpooling). 8. Street improvements shall be commensurate to the magnitude of the project. 16. UTILITIES: Except for storm water drainage facilities, no significant impacts are anticipated in the area of utilities which include natural gas, communication systems, water, sewer, and solid waste. MITIGATION MEASURES: All necessary infrastructure improvements has mandated by the City or any other public agency shall be met as part of the development of this site. As mentioned before, the site will be required to install appropriate drainage facilities which will house storm water run-off during seasonal rain storms or to contain nuisance water from both irrigation and surfaced areas (i.e. parking lots, buildings, etc.). 14. PUBLIC SERVICES: The project may create a need for additional fire protection, police protection and maintenance of public roads in the area. However, it is anticipated that any increases in this area will be incremental, and further, should only have negligible impacts on existing personnel or services. The location of this facility will decrease the number of miles (response time minutes) public safety personnel might have to travel to take an injured person to a medical facility for additional treatment. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). Prior to the issuance of a building permit the applicant will be required to pay an infrastructure fee of $6,000.00 per acre. This fee will help mitigate impacts as noted above. 2). The project shall comply with all requirements of the Fire and Riverside County Sheriffs Department and, further, the School District's mitigation fees shall be paid. 3). Water, sewer, and electric service provisions shall be made and secured prior to securing building permits. 17. HUMAN HEALTH: The facility is designed to provide a care treatment center for short and long term health problems, and it anticipated that the medical facility will generate various low- level hazardous materials which will require special handling and/or disposal (e.g. used needles, blood, human tissue, radioactive material, etc.) for any or all materials which are deemed hazardous. The on -site containment and off -site transport of such material shall be done in a professional manner so that life -safety hazards will not be problem either on -site personnel or off -site City residents. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). The disposal of various low-level waste products shall be done as required by the State and Federal Licensing requirements and, further, contractual arrangements shall be made with the City's Disposal Agency (Palm Desert Disposal or other licensed Contractor) so that special care is taken to dispose of any and all materials which are classified as hazardous by the medical profession, State of California, Federal Government, or City of La Quinta. The materials shall be identified and disposed of in either approved landfill areas or incinerated if permitted by law. At this time, staff is unaware of any provision by the medical operator to incinerate some waste products on -site. 2). No adverse impacts are contemplated and it is assumed that this proposed center will assist the City of La Quinta in providing additional medical services which will broaden the scope of services the City can provide for their existing and future residents. 18. AESTHETICS: The site is presently vacant, the construction of buildings will disrupt the site and change the existing viewing views of the Santa Rosa Mountains. However, in order to reduce this impact the developer has placed the buildings to the rear portion of the site so that the view from abutting residential properties to the east are not drastically affected as they would have been had the developer placed the building(s) along Washington Street. The applicant has proposed the multiple story building approximately 200 feet from Washington Street in order to reduce the impact of any associated view lose, plus the developer has proposed large landscape areas to create a pedestrian scale along is major north/south thoroughfare. The building masses have been separated (detached), thereby, creating interest to the development and maintaining view corridors. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). The height of the building shall not exceed the requirements of the City's Zoning Code and the buildings shall be designed to accentuate the natural mountain terrain to the west of the site. Measures should be taken so that the no scaring of the mountains occurs which would affect the future enjoyment of the residents of this community while the prcject is under construction or any time in the future without City approval. 2). The development of the on and off -site landscaping program should take into consideration the unique setting of this property as it relates to the Santa Rosa Mountain Range. The developer should consider vertical type plant material (Palm trees, etc.) and the use of accent type trees (Jacarandas, etc.) which will create view "windows" into the project but accentuate the mountains to the west of the proposed buildings. Native landscaping should be pursued and accent lighting on the landscaping should be encouraged. Parking lot lighting should be discouraged wherever possible without sacrificing pedestrian security. The building complex should blend in with the mountainous setting to the west and,parking areas should be nonvisible is possible. 3). Earthen building colors should be used to downplay the building mass, thus accenting the desert environment to the west. 19. RECREATION: No significant adverse impacts are anticipated in this area. MITIGATION MEASURES: None required but it is assumed that the medical complex will provide therapeutic recreation for its clients as part of its operation (e.g. cardiac, podiatry, etc.) on a pay - for -service plan. 20. ARCHEOLOGICAL/HISTORICAL: Due to the historical nature of the City, there may be an adverse impact created by the construction of the project. A copy of the applicant's preliminary site survey is attached. MITIGATION MEASURES: 1). An archaeological survey of the city by qualified archaeologists will need to be completed prior to activities which would disturb the site (i.e. site grading). Compliance with the results of the archaeological survey will be required. 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS: It is not anticipated that there will be any adverse impacts by the project in the areas of plant and animal life, long term environmental goals, cumulative impacts, or impacts on human beings. Attached: Agency Comments Preliminary Hydrology Study Preliminary Traffic Report Preliminary Geotechnical Report Siud,tne Transit MEMBER AGENCIES Cathedral City Coachella Desert Not Springs Indian Wells Indio La Quints. Palm Desert Palm Springs Rancho Mirage Riverside County August 2, 1991 Mr. Greg Trousdell Associate Planner CITY OF LA QUINTA P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: PLOT PLAN 91-465 Dear Mr. Trousdell: AUC 6,lov cl I Y ur im vuiNTA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT OEPI Thank you for allowing SunLine Transit Agency to review the plans for the E1 Mirador Medical Complex. As you know, SunLine Transit Agency operates Line 4 past this site. Beginning September 1991, this service will operate on a 30 minute headway during peak hours. Usually, SunLine Transit Agency carries a large number of people to medical complexes. Therefore, we request that in the plans for the E1 Mirador Medical Complex that a bus stop be included. Since this location is on a major arterial, we recommend that a bus turn -out be used for the bus stop. We recommend that the bus turn- out be located on Washington far -side of the main entrance -way, but as close to the main entrance -way as is feasible. In addition, we suggest that a sidewalk be provided from the bus stop area into the complex. We do request that a passenger waiting shelter be included at the site. SunLine Transit Agency has suggested standards for bus turn -outs and passenger waiting shelters. Please feel free to give me a call to discuss these comments. Yours very truly, SIMLINE TRANSIT" AGENCY Pebra Astin Director of Planning DA/dy cc: File 32.505 Harry Oliver Trail . Thousand Palms, CA 92276 .(619) 343.3456 • FAX (619) 343.3845 d Prihlir dnanry q4 W TEq ESTABLISHED IN 1918 AS A PUBLIC AGENCY o TRICt 6 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX 1058 . COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (819) 3982851 DIRECTORS OFFICERS TELLIS CODEKAS, PRESIDENT THOMAS E LEVY, GENERAL MANAGER -CHIEF ENGINEER RAYMOND R. RUMMONDS. VICE PRESIDENT BERNARDINE SUTTON. SECRETARY JOHN W WADDEN July 24, 1991 OWEN McCOM ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER DOROTHY M. NICHOLS REDWINE AND SHERRILL. ATTORNEYS THEODORE J. FISH ,IFUL n 100, CITY (k U; YuINTH Planning Commission 'IANMt"' 91 b,-4 JPr. rNT f)Ep1. City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 La Quints, California 92253 Gentlemen: File: 0163.1 Subject: Plot Plan 91-465, General Plan Amendment 91-037, Change of Zone 91-065, Lot Line Adjustment 91-147, Portion of Southwest Quarter, Section 30, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Meridian This area is protected from stormwater flows by the Whitewater River Stormwater Channel and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone X on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. The district will furnish domestic 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. TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY Planning Commission -2- July 24, 1991 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, Tom Levy General Manager-Chie! RF:dr/eng7 cc: Don Park Riverside County Department of Public Health 79-733 Country Club Drive, Suite D Bermuda Dunes, California 92201 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT CHAMBER of COMMERCE GEM OF THE DESERT City of La Ouinta Plannina Department Att: Greg Trousdell Assoc. Planner Re:Plot Plan 91-465 et.al. The La Ouinta Chamber of Commerce Planning and Development Review Committee has examined the proposed project submitted by Desert Hospital. We have the following comments: 1.) The site is not now commercially zoned for the intended use. The Chamber feels that this additional zoning designation may adversely affect existing Commercially Zoned land. In addition, the Washington Street Corridor was not intended to support major commercial projects. Recently the Desert Sun .reported that Desert Hospital was considering building a 100 bed Acute Care Facility at this site. Any General Plan Amendment should consider the original intent of the Washington Street Specific Plan and Desert Hospital's future use. 4.) The site is situated next to an existing up -scale heusina proiect that is impacted by this site clan. The three story structurE may intrude upon the privacy that home owners or the housing project exrEcted when they bought the; r n -mes S.) The site is located next to the St. Frances of Assisi Church which presently has traffic and parking difficulties. This project may further complicate the traffic circulation issues at tnis location. 4 ) The Chamoer would s.:cgest that a study c' the impact of a fuliv developed Medical Center be undertaken by the Develocer prior to apprcval. Eisenhower Medical Center has had extensive traffic circulation. and parking problems that developed on -site as EMC grew. Similar problems have arisen from other planned Medical Complexes throuahout the State. Their on -site problems have often spilled over into the surrounding community. Sincerely RECElVELs AUG 519(-' Mark Moran. Chairman Plan. & Devel . Review Sub -Committee 4+11i Ui LAVUINTA La Ouinta Chamber of Commerce 'LANNING&DEVELOWNT0EP1. GLEN J. NEWMAN FIRE CHIEF To: City of La Quinta Planning Division Attention: Greg Trousdell Re: Plot Plan 91-465 El Mirador Medical Complex RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT 210 WEST SAN JACINTO AVENUE • PERRIS, CALIFORNIA 923X (714) 657-3183 July 22, 1991 With respect to the condition of approval regarding the above referenced Plot Plan, the Fire Department requires the following fire protection measures be provided in accordance with La Quinta Municipal Code and/or recognized fire protection standards: 1. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a 3 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 2. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" x 4" x 21" x 2}"), will be located not less than 25' or more than 165' from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 3. Prior to issuance of building permit 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to the start of construction. 4. 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. 5. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. PLANT KING DIVISION Rklmlo OFFICE 13 TEMECULA OFFICE 79.733 Country Club Drive, Suite F, bWio, CA 92201 41002 County Center Drive, Suite 225, Tetneculs, CA 92390 (619) 342MM • FAX (619) 7752072 Q RIVERSIDE OFFICE (714) 694.5070 • FAX (7I4) 694.3076 3760 12th Street, Riwn4c, CA 92501 ro: City of La Quinta 7/22/91 te: PP 91-465 Page 2. E1 V irador Med. Complex S. Install Panic Hardware and Exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 7. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 3. Provide fire apparatus road to within 150 feet of any portion of the exterior wall of the first floor. Such road shall have a minimum of 20 feet of unobstructed width and a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. 9. Comply with Section 801.2 of Riverside County Ordinance 546, Life Safety Support System. 3. Center divider in entrance way shall be set back a minimum of 20 feet from curb line. 1. Provide valve supervision and 24 hour monitoring of the waterflow, alarm at the automatic fire sprinkler system. 2. Approved building numbers or address shall be placed in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or road. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. 3. This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing his proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (818-960-6441) for an opinion and a classification of occupancy type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the Fire Department so that proper requirements may be specified during the review process. inal conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. A plan check ee must be paid to the Fire Department at the time building plans are submitted. 11 questions regarding the meaning of these conditions should be referred to the ire Department Planning S Engineering Staff at (619) 342-8886. Sincerely, RAY REGIS Chief Fire Department Planner Tom Hutchison Fire Safety Specialist e -7 t yor 78.106 CALU: ESTA00 — lA OUINTA. CAUFORNW 92253 l0181 544.22� FAX (819) 644.6817 FROM: PLANNING i DEVELOPMENT DIVISIO DATE: City Manager na ement j incipal ublic works/Engineering ZvG_ eral Te ep one P1 er(s) ire Marshal r Cable Vision ,G, ssociate u lding i Safety unline Transit Planner(s) amber of Commerce Caltrans (District III Assistant Agricultural Commission PlAnner mperial irrigation _City of Indian wells fanning outhern California Gas c�Y of Indio Director Bert Sands School Dist. +1S Postal Service Coachella Valley School Dist. Riverside County: CV Archaeological Society Planning Department Property Environmental Health Owner's Association _26eriffIs Department LA QUINTA CASE NOW: : Oor I/ /h^' 9� ' CPf� ql - 63 11c 9/ - ee.5; " 'T/ - N 7 - EA - PROJECT DESCRIPTION: ���� ems' t L- tecR 7Z 5-71 ze cam 61:r A .5-t Ac,ric sIrt PROJECT LOCATION: ()9!$r 5_126 of i�sl� oti SirREE 1 ,0ENop,c- H t (Po r %k - The City of La Quinta Development Review Committee is conducting an initia; environmental study pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the above referenced project(s). Attached is the information submitted by the project proponent. Your comments are requested with respect to: 1. physical impacts the project presents on public resources, facilities, and/or services; 2. Recommended conditions: a) that you or your agency believe would miti- gate any potential adverse effects; b) or should apply to the project design; c) or improvements to satisfy other regulations and concerns which your agency is responsible; and 3. If you find that the identified impacts will have significant adverse effects on the environment which cannot be avoided through conditions, please recommend the scope and focus of additional study(ies) which may be helpful. Please send your response by "5 '("''cw0F1 and return the maps/plans if not needed for your fi 1es. You re invited to attend the DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE meeting at La Quinta City Hall scheduled for: Date: ptvg.yV, (4 r Time:5 Contact Person:�.� ,VD eigivi L{v"alr� i711/j I Comments shade by: � _ Title: 11YY). Date: 2-?i-11 Phone: Agency/Divisio4� i RIVERSJDIi C UNTX COLS BYRD, SHERIFF Mr. Greg Trousdell ociate Planner Cy of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta CA 92253 Dear Mr. Trousdell: Sheriff 82-695 DR. CARREON BLVD. • INDIO, CA 92201 • (619) 342-899 July 22, 1991 RFCFIVI.0 �J I V-- LA VUINTA 'LANNING b DEVELOPMENT DEPf. RE: PP 91-465; GPA 91-037; IC 91-065; LLA 91-147; EA-91-2 The Sheriff's Department has no objection in concept to this development. However, when the plans become available we would appreciate reviewing them. Thank you. Sincerely, COIS BYRD, SHERIFF Ronald F. Dye, Lieutenant Indio Station CB: RD:gt UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, RIVERSIDE A BERKELEY - DAVIS - IRVINE - LOS ANGELES - RIVERSIDE - SAN DIEGO - SAN FRANCISCO � SANTA SAMARA - SAWA CRUZ ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH UNIT RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA 92521 (711) 787-3885 July 29, 1991 (ARU #1134) Jeffrey P. Sobczyk Vice President, Development MEDIPLEX 100 S. Sunrise Way Suite 358 Palm Springs, CA 92262 Re: Archaeological Data Recovery at the E1 Mirador Professional Plaza Site Dear Jeff: This is to inform you that our program of data recovery at archaeological sites CA-Riv-2199 and -4168 has been completed. Both sites appear to have been areas of occupation on the shoreline of ancient Lake Cahuilla. Most of the cultural deposit was located near the surface, but some deeper cultural deposit was encountered. Our work included the excavation of ten 2 x 2-m units, to depths ranging from 10 to 210 cm, with further trenching below these levels to rule out deeper deposits. Generally, the cultural materials recovered indicate that the area was used on a temporary basis. Eolian activity has resulted in a geomorphically active environment over the years, with repeated episodes of sand deposition and deflation. Materials recovered from both sites were very similar and include small and large mammal bone, fish and reptile bone, freshwater mussel shell, milling stone fragments, ceramic sherds (in one case, about 205 fragments of one vessel), a large number of unfired clay fragments, a quartz crystal fragment, flakes of a variety of Iithic materials, a Desert Side -notched projectile point, and historic and modern artifacts. The cultural deposits at sites CA-Riv-2199 and -4168 have been thoroughly investigated by a comprehensive program of archaeological data recovery, and their research value has, for the most part, been exhausted. Therefore, it is deemed that the adverse impacts that will result from development of the area have been mitigated. It is further recommended that grading activities on the subject property be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. This will entail the presence of an archaeologist during initial grading of the entire parcel. If, during the monitoring phase, a cross -sectional profile of the dunes composing the archaeological sites is exposed, the archaeologist should observe and record (by drawing and measurement) the structure of the dunes in order to supplement the data gathered during Phase III. The purpose of archaeological monitoring is to Jeffrey P. Sobczyk July 29, 1991 Page 2 continue searching for any buried deposits that may exist within the general area. If any cultural remains are found, these locations will be immediately examined, and all significant materials will be recovered in the most expeditious way. If any human remains are encountered, all work will cease in that area (as is required by law) until appropriate action can be taken. Our fee for monitoring is $250/day. Cataloging and laboratory analysis of the recovered cultural materials from both sites is in progress. The results of the analysis will be presented in our final report on the archaeology of the project area. Yours truly, "Joan S. Schneider Acting Director JS/k . 7tiDESERT HOSPITAL City of La Quinta Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 Attention: Jerry Herman City Planner II/R"C�'I�IiYt M...I /. M<M-YtLi O C 1 0 1 1991 CITY OF tom, ClUNTA PLANN.N^ OEPAUMEyT September 23, 1991 RE: Proposed LaQuinta Facility of Desert Hospital Dear Mr. Herman: This letter serves to address your questions about the hazardout and biological waste generated by a facility of the type proposed by Desert Hospital for La Quinta. A consultation with the Safety Officer and the Director of Environmental Services at the Hospital provided me with some answers that may be of assistance to you. The La Quinta facility will generate a small amount of waste, roughly estimated at approximately one hundred fifty pounds (150 lbs.) per pick up period, which is once a week. This figure is based upon the Hospital's historical production of waste from the following departments: laboratory, doctor's office facilities. pharmacy, surgery, radiology, MRI, CAT Scan and nuclear medicine. By industry standards, the anticipated waste generated by the La Quinta facility is a minimal amount. Should you have any further questions or comments, please do not hesitate to direct them to me. I look forward to hearing from you soon. S? erel P ER BER Chief Fin PB/lmk al Officer 1. o offitt% lio\ Ih_'-. Palm �hrin .. ( alitim�i.i � "» ( ol')1 3_' 3•hil l DESERT HOSPITAL CITY OF LA QUINTA MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION Q rSEP 2 4 1991 CITY � Gt;u.i� PIAX1 :NO3 CERaRTFOEUT Re: Plot Plan 91-645 (Et. Al) El Mirador Medical Plaza - La Quinta Proposal Submitted by Desert Hospital Desert Hospital and its physician partners are proud to sponsor the E1 Mirador Medical Plaza project in La Quinta, the first comprehensive healthcare facility to be introduced to the City. This project synopsis is presented to supplement the reports prepared by City staff and provide some background information for the Planning Commission and City Council. DESERT HOSPITAL STRATEGY Desert Hospital is the only community -supported healthcare provider in the Coachella Valley. The hospital's Palm Springs campus provides a full range of services to Valley residents. Many services such as trauma, rehabilitation, etc. are only available at Desert Hospital. Desert Hospital's strategic plan has focused on development of centers of excellence, such as geriatrics, women/childrens' services, rehabilitation, oncology, trauma, cardiac programs and psychiatry. This focus is complemented by area demand for development of a comprehensive network for healthcare delivery and a corresponding demand for managed care (contract) programs. The E1 Mirador Medical Plaza (EMMP) project in La Quinta meets all of these strategic goals. Healthcare access in the eastern Coachella Valley will be greatly enhanced by a convenient, full service health center. This access is key to Desert Hospital's commitment to provide quality healthcare access to all residents of the Valley. Many individuals and employers are presently feeling the pinch of escalating health care costs. The short term answer to these pressures is provided through managed care contracting arrangements such as health maintenance organizations (HMOs) and preferred provider organizations (PPOs). Desert Hospital currently provides all-inclusive health coverage to Landmark and other major employers in the Valley, but desires to expand access and be proactive in meeting the diverse geographical requirements of the patients it serves. The proposed La Quinta location meets these requirements and will permit expanded availability of cost- effective healthcare options to the City and its residents. Eleven Fifty North Indian Avenue. P.O. Box 2"3a, Palm Springs, California 92263 (619) 323-6511 SITE WCATION AND MEDICAL ZONING Prior to selection of the site, (located on the west side of Washington avenue adjacent to St. Francis of Assisi Church), Desert Hospital conducted an exhaustive review of potential locations in La Quinta. Primary concerns were access, life/safety matters, physician/patient convenience, control over adjacent development, a city vs. county location, traffic mitigation potential and zoning. Cost of the site, while always important, was not a factor in this decision. The most significant factors influencing location were the first three listed above. The Washington site provides superior access to patients. Additionally, life/safety considerations are maximized by the Washington and Highway 111 links to Desert, Eisenhower and JFK hospitals. Lastly, the site is convenient for patients, and to physicians who are frequently called to hospitals on an emergency basis. Due to the lack of depth on the site, we believe that our site is unlikely to ever be developed for residential use. Therefore, Desert Hospital proposes to provide the City of La Quinta with a "highest and best use" alternative for the site by proposing that the site by rezoned for medical use. La Quinta does not have presently a medical zoning ordinance, but one has been prepared by City Staff and is concurrently being presented for adoption. This ordinance is highly restrictive and is proposed in the absence of a suitable and appropriately zoned site in La Quinta. MASTER PLANNING In order to fulfil its duty as a responsible partner with the City in this development, Desert Hospital has completed all required studies, some which exceed developer requirements. For example, after selection of the Washington Avenue site, a master plan was commissioned to ensure that all pertinent development aspects of this 20 acre medical campus were considered. Too frequently issues such as parking, site circulation, support services, traffic mitigation and aesthetics are handled piecemeal as future phases are developed. The proposed development (estimated to be 320,000 square feet at full buildout) considers all of these factors through the cooperative efforts of Desert Hospital, Henningson, Durham and Richardson (architects), Mediplex Medical Building Corporation (Phase I consultants) and our engineering and design consultants. -2- One important planning consideration has been the constant pursuit of a "good neighbor" policy during the planning process. Since site identification in April, we have been in steady communication with representatives of St. Francis of Assisi Church, the A.G. Spanos company, Wilma Pacific and private landowners who own a site on the corner of Highland Palms and Washington Avenue. Each has been kept appraised of project developments, and their comments have been incorporated into our planning. As a result, we have agreed to provide unlimited parking to St. Francis during non -business hours, and have proposed a grading plan that would place our buildings and .the church at approximately the same elevation. Structures would also approximate the same height as the church, and conform with a complementary Spanish style and architectural vocabulary. For the benefit of all adjacent sites, our buildings are rotated 45% from parallel with Washington Street so that they provide indirect vistas from physician offices rather than facing any adjacent development directly. This presentation is also effective in lowering the solar sensitivity of the building and provides enhanced architectural interest from Washington Avenue. NO REQUEST FOR A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN RECEIVED TO DATE FROM ANY ADJACENT LANDOWNER HAS BEEN DENIED. BENEFITS TO THE CITY The cost of developing the first of four planned phases is approximately $14.5 million, which will be subject to real and personal property tax and will generate taxable sales from medical retail businesses (pharmacy, durable medical equipment, medical supplies, etc). First year Phase I revenues are projected at approximately $6 million, increasing to $14.2 within ten years. The project will initially have capacity for approximately 25 physicians, 17 of whom have made written and financial commitments to date. The project will initially employ approximately 100 individuals, many of whom will be professionals, medical technicians and administrative staff members. La Quinta's broad range of available housing and other benefits may capture a significant share of these physicians and employees as community residents. In addition, the proximity to downtown La Quinta will undoubtedly stimulate daytime commerce. Full buildout of the campus is dependent upon demand and is projected to have real and personal property expenditures of approximately $85 million with a related increase in employees to roughly 1,000. MC The City and its small business participants will also benefit through the availability of lower cost, higher quality healthcare alternatives. Desert Hospital is presently the only valley hospital with a fully insured, A.M. Best -rated insurance product for employers with between two and seventy-four employees. Employers which fall within this range typically have a difficult time obtaining affordable coverages because of the small population over which their risk is spread. Desert Hospital will actively work with local employers to fill that void. One additional benefit to the City will be a highly visible, quality development that will begin immediately after approval is granted. As indicated before, physician interest is strong, the building space is presently 80 percent reserved, permanent financing for the real property and a permanent equipment loan have been secured, and negotiations have begun for construction financing. These customary concerns have halted development throughout much of the Valley during the current economic uncertainty, but are not a factor for this project. DEVELOPMENT ISSUES Desert Hospital believes that despite the magnitude of this project, the list of concerns is minimal and limited to: 1. zoning change request Some concerns have been raised over the proposed conversion of residential property to a medical/commercial designation. As previously indicated, this request is only being pursued due to the lack of an appropriate, alternatively zoned site. Speculation that cost is a factor is also unfounded - due to the uneven terrain and mountainous backdrop on the proposed site, significant site development costs will cause the final land costs to match or exceed commercially zoned land. The commitment to this site is so strong that the first phase of development is in the center of the 20 buildable acre parcel. 2. Traffic and request fora sictna1 A traffic study contemplating volumes at full buildout was completed. The study indicates that while the traffic impact is not insignificant, traffic issues are mitigable. The study suggests that the proximity to Avenues 47 and 48, Highway ill and Washington Avenue provide strong East/West as well as North/South accesses. As Avenue 48 is completed through to Indio and becomes the "local alternative" to Highway 111, even greater diminishment of the traffic impact will occur. Also the development of the La Quinta downtown retail area will reduce traffic flow northbound on Washington. -4- Due primarily to life/safety and emergency vehicle access considerations, and further substantiated by volume increases as subsequent phases are developed, Desert Hospital proposes that a signalized intersection be provided at Via Marquessa, between Avenues 47 and 48. While recognizing that the City wishes to minimize signals along the Washington street corridor, we believe that the site use and future volumes deem such a solution as appropriate. In order to offset any increase in the number of currently approved signals, it is recommended that consideration be given to moving the light already approved for Avenue 48 and Washington down to the proposed location. We believe that this proposal impacts all the adjacent developments favorably, and solves the important life/safety issues. 3. Helicopter pad proposal Desert Hospital does not believe that a helicopter pad is required for early phases of the development; in fact a helipad may not be required in the future. Plans have been submitted with a helipad in order to responsibly identify potential future requirements, which may be legislated or mandated for licensure outside the control of the applicant. SUMMARY Desert Hospital and its physician partners are pleased to sponsor the introduction of direct access, high quality, comprehensive health care services to La Quinta. Few cities offer the comprehensive healthcare availability proposed for the El Mirador Medical Plaza. We believe that the direct and indirect benefits of this project to La Quinta are substantial, and that concerns raised to date are surmountable in every respect. On that basis, we respectfully request approval of our project so that, in partnership with the City, we can introduce a new level of healthcare services for residents of La Quinta and the eastern Coachella Valley. -5- FIDELITY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY September 24, 1991 Mr. Jerry Berman Planning Director City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quintal CA 92253 Dear Mr. Berman, SEP 2 6 1991 0TV OF LA OUINTA KANNING DE➢ARWENT -as ko-3.00ft Z am writing to express my opposition to G.P. Amendment 91-037 and the change of zone amendment 91-065 for parcel map 27267. Z am opposed to the changes due to the fact that a significant amount of commercial zoned property is available for this project without spot zoning B-1 property to commercial. Sincerely, Z?f 7 4-- Danavon Born President P.O. Box 3958 9 Palm Desert, Calif. • 92261 9 (619) 568-1048 SSW" SEP 2 a 1991 St., )emw 0 0 Catholic Church Cs iA 4t iNTA PLANN 45 U AP'%. NT P.O. Box 1503 - La Quinta, California 92253�-•"'4""� (619) 564-1255 September 23, 1991 City of La Quinta Director of Planning and Development 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California Re: General Plan Amendment 91-037 Change of Zone 91-065 Plot Plan 91-465 Dear Sir: We have reviewed a proposed complex of approximately 240,000 southern boundary of our church p Desert Hospital has been most coo to address our concerns relative have provided parking spaces with be most beneficial to our church. proposed is complimentary to ours willingness of the applicants to as they planned the proposal you are generally supportive of the c proposed we do object to certain concerns on the following element project and site plan for a sq. Ft. to be located on the roperty. Mr. Peter Bergman of perative at this stage to try to this proposal. The applicants access from our site which would The applicants architecture as and is another example of the alleviate and mitigate our concerns are now considering. While we oncept of the project as it is elements and have unansewered S. 1.) Traffic: The current traf public leaving our driveway to go first going north along the access traffic signal at Singing Palms R provides no northbound Washington other than driving south from the by directing exiting traffic to g approximately 50 feet from our dri north along the frontage road. We traffic plan or any project requi plan which would in anyway increa frontage road or eliminate our ab way and access Washington Avenue. o o fic plan will not aiiow t.ne south towards the cove without road and passing through the ad. The current proposal access from the Medical complex main exit and turning around, or to an auxillary entrance/exit veway and directing traffic object to any changes in the ring changes in the traffic si e the volume of traffic on the lity to go south from our drive- Page 2. 2.) Proposed Uses:As presented to the St. Francis advisory board, the project would provide for outpatient procedures and another separate building in a later phase for some possible inpatient services. We object to any provision of outpatient or inpatient treatments without restriction. We are also opposed to the Heliport planned to allow Helicopter landings on the site. We would like to avoid the possibility of Helicopter landings and low altitude overflight and request that this use be rejected. 3.) General: We are concerned that the approval of this large scale development so close to established neighborhoods along what is currently becoming a very congested Washington Street would detract from the quite enjoyment of our property. It is our opinion that a site which could provide access along the front of the project and additional access from a street intersecting the front street would be superior by not requiring all traffic entering or exiting the project to pass through one single entrance. During the construction of subsequent phases construction traffic would need to use the main entrance to the project, causing additional safety and traffic concerns. Desert Hospital has worked to eliminate our problems with the proposal and we appreciate the openess and willingness to compromise which has been demonstrated to date. We would like to see better provision for entry and exit and traffic circulation before we could fully support the current proposal. Sincerely, 011 Afe Franke Operations cc: Peter Berman Desert Hospital 17 BY: 9-18-91 : 1:07 % : Tne Desert Hospital- 5615617:M 2: ; ID-ESr]�T Cat +� HOSPITAL SEP 01 t ur Ln QuiNTA 'LAF 1W, R DEYROWNT DEPI September 19, 1991 Mr. Jerry Herman Mr. Greg Trousdell Planning and Development Department City of La Quinta 78-105 calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Gentlemen: In response to your letter of September 6, 1991, I an pleased to confirm that the master plan which we have completed for the proposed medical facility on Washington contemplates approximately 100 general acute care beds. In addition, either on an interim or permanent basis, we are considering 15-20 postoperative recovery center beds. This bed classification permits longer recovery observation from minor surgeries to be completed in the proposed surgery center. These beds also require less rigorous licensing and architectural requirements than acute care beds, and will likely be housed in medical office buildings such as our proposers Phase II and III developments. I appreciate your continuing interest in the project, and look forward to the Planning Commission meetings next Meek. Kind regards, Peter Chief officer Fleveii Filly North Indian Avenue, P.U. 13ae 2739, Palm Springs, 0difurnin 92263 (619) 32.3-hSIl O � P SAIBORN WEBB INC. _ ': ir [�- ,,,e... _and Sur,crur.. Ar•.r.,Ms!s • land P!a-ne,; �ANNING D�"�+(F64E�iT DEF7 EL MIRA DOR MEDICAL PLAZA LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA HYDROLOGY e HYDRAULICS STUDY SEPTEMBER, 1991 ,#JF VQVESSIpN ��t1 Quo '�'•�.��i'q�Fy 'r . ' ^' K M15 6�cR _ql�;•. CN1t .• ��e.� CAr►. i liti��� '`' 9 -13 255 N. EI C Pic R,ad • Sidle 315 • Palm Spnrgs. California 92262 • (6191 125 ___5 • ;6,9' 322 • =-' 325 5'. . WAINUU11111 rrLuu, MV. 8Y Ec M1PAPOR MCVIC4 C P4AZ4 LA QU/urA , cA F. R/uc E/s rA&c OF c'Omnnws P444 100 YEAR Sr0/t44F/zE-QUeNCY CALCULArIOA/S / GFF5l rC AREA neVA1,46e "4 P /2 Rer6AI rIOA/ Voc UMC-" Ce04119C'D C44c414,Ir/oaS /3 ,QCm'-Amom VOGUME' AVAIL ABLC C4LCUI-AROA15 /5 1Al rrNSlrY-DL1RAr1ON cUR va i4 QUIVOFF COE"FC/CIEAI r CUR VCR' /6 PAGE DATE 9-/3- WORK OR:;EP 9/-Z/. Q a � O O' LL. � V li a o� v b 2 cr. o c4 p0 E- y� O V� N nl N K1 N �,� N ►ti lt� N lt� 1� N o� � O v �9 O lti � tr Y ~ItU. O ` p •, O O N p �n O N N d t-z q\ O N N N U� m U' ao ao aj `� kx 0 o CO op �4 I ao O � N � 14\ 00 0 nl 0 v _ c v v� v Is Is w Z W �, N o— �a 1 �r I 1 e 4�r t N ' I t r t d Z ' � t t r a t� v v v u 0 U 08 V 3 W `o � w J � V a IL O ,L) �: ; at W, ! e� U III 111� 111��� �1��11 ti L o t U U a V O 0 u � c � J J U � W Q V 3w O V ., J V Z LL. O c W a N 9L cr.tj J �, �! w CL O W o O N O N Qr u. N w U ® O<1 QN U lf1 Q C m r c V) N U Q �a 3vi 2 � n J cr-a Sttr 4 STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDE NUMBER 1.10 DESIGN STORM DRAINAGE PAGE 28 GUIDES DATE 6_77 - u—w 1 tL� umILS 4 QQ ♦ 1i oct ...... > - 6 til tTWO �r 7 -- — jj -- .._ W W` t C - -_ 3 -; Ll �. 9 -- -- - - - - - -- - - Nt — - - W - - �i - N. 10 Q t t � N F-- o V••j 12 NZ Q 13 '� 14 -� -- - •- - -! Q1: lu - --rr• ((� a J -.� c � ,s 1 t6 W Q - Q q W 17 _ 20 {— v' I N 21 e ? i W ta ' Z V r 24.- .�25 3 26 I iL i 27 LLJ 28 29Lu a. LLj 30 32 — -- I i ' i �! Wa — - - -�-- --� a - --�- - f----0---- - -- + -- - -O - w r 4si- z a L 0 a OTC O 0o V � 3w 0 J VZ U. O V Q (X cr v v v � o s u u E- c� w I ix CL fl[ Q V v V T O O Z W 1� ui Its %6 H v ui lt� in Z n1 Cf � O O a U. v 'ti a �0- � z N N �� zz N Pal 0 LL Q a W u v� 03 � 1� � 4 v U` � cci �c � -c �• , 1� 0 00 O p O p O 16 p O v R.0 dS E l0 rQ 1 U) w U Q Q � 0 O O r o t u u --I m z0 4 Z J } o z Q v W O � v Q J V= � � o 3� J N V Z � LL o VQ - � oc � Q � �0 7v � t� N nti O iV m �- W N ,N Isl J y.. > a ur z' ® N w U Fie: u u � it ri _. v 4 ►S; `o v -i ' o L w i e ki J- a a 4- 7 K, I\3 x V V 3. QV IN Zc 3 J STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDE NUMBER 1.10 DESIGN STORM DRAINAGE PAGE Zg GUIDES DATE 6_77 ■ O w w V` J 43 kp DL It 12 O --w 13 W = n o 1s d � 1 it 16 17 —ZSQ— te Q t+) 19 wax 0• 20 Z =� 21 LU 23 Z p: V zs LL 27 29 `C 29 81 j r—p _I_ 4; I ' 4- T 33 sic i -t- , 4c34 - - -- -!.. a -n — - ---- - —T -= -- j-- - —t- -{- - - W W 35 -i--- — - 0.j - -- ----- ------ -- --- '� — o o • QCt z Q U- U O o i; Z O Z r u O —J a L� � Q Q U v C ' 2 W v W cc U. v w 7 tr tL N a 6A m n Vu - N Q co v p t V .� _j z 0 If o _ki o — Q e F I� i 11 Is d5 LA UN F `� a � � 3 � � ►n � ti 1! h 61 tj Z � < 4% v V z Q UO �^ z O � L a 4 Q J J Q � o U. 0 V 3w o = ., 4. V IX o Q x iv F- V W 7 O a �� 111 nllllll � �IIII �111��1�1111111� III i STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDE NUMBER 1.10 DESIGN STORM DRAINAGE PAGE 28 GUIDES DATE 6-77 2 Ti—I I u.r 4 n iEW- ,� 6 Lu w 3 to w O — V., Q - . -- - - 62 -:-; c (31- 12 -W - - b V_ 13 _.. 16 Li 17 � 4 ice- - -'— - -- • -- � � 19 W w ! N l9 20 ZO-_� - - 21 Li J - I22 ALL- 3 mot-;-- --- --� 23 •M 24 .� 2S �i 27- 28 �� i-cQ CQ�-- ,- , 30--t----�-.0 - - -- --- -- ; ----- - -- -- - - t 31 32— a $= 34 --- it , AW F 0¢ 36 6Hr // STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING DESIGN GUIDE NUMBER 1.10 DESIGN STORM DRAINAGE PAGE zg GUIDES DATE 6-?7 Lu z l,l I to 3 I ^' Iti Y ` II.M 4 tl 1 V •y _ Ism Li z Its—•— -i— --- —• -----� - — - _ •- uL - _ _... _ , n3r W E — 6 7 _ J d - - w QIL 10 O - W 12 13 14 ' W 15 d' I �-- 16 w 30 17 9 to w —� _l zo L� t—) -- - — Z - 2,ta V � 23 A .r 24 to 2526 I — rA— W I 27 W Lj _119, — ~ - Cif 26 29 30 32 33 aw _tL-- - - 0-- 34 to -- I W W 35 %)Ml UUlllli rrLuu, 111ki. PAGE �3 SUBJECT EC M1�2/f1 rX12 ,1.t�01G�L PC9ZA DATE L 4 q /MTA WORK ORDER 9/-2, BY CHK. BY DATE n R IN6 is DEr=2Ml1,1C V6LuMC OF 2c77t-7/r/00./ 02J/ C- p-avoFF c F 22, 6 Ac , ARCA OF 50/L — TY/�c "B a SOIL 01(:L4AC Apc-'A jr "Al' ! 0/L / 9t 77 AC 0,87 /00 YC--AR - 4 YOUR r r. N! D::,r tl UGC umC. 6 r 2. X(lF'F 22,6k_ X 0163 X 4,7//1 ,k'72 I 6193AC X Jr76 x ! 9, TD01.Crt' q VIS !% ! 34 L 257 EN T 0A/ 64 S/N MO, / ,QFTC-A!T7611 BASiN NO, 2 )eCTEA/TIOAI 2/51ti/ ND, 5 (ZETENi 101 i-ZA4'10'/ NO, 4 RErPN7710,`- Zl. 'Al 1'10,5 M rA(- ,eeTOI TW AI (lN�cvocs 1/,/FI67V77041) !Od Yv t? 24 #001 STORM 47 /A/ l00 Y61f,0 HOvP- srVRA'f 2,75 /N 100 YC"AR 3 HOaR S7VRN = 2,2 /Al Z�f l RCFC 14,4ffJAL 7, 44 4 c_ F-i 0, 2? (�. 74 14,47 /=`- - 124 ,,4G0 FT 3 21/1 /00 461200 2 5 p, !00 74j 300 766, /00 Fr 3 1AIF/6T2ATWAI U5CD 1,3 FTIFr2`p4 y X a, 5d 5,l Fr- rY FRc 7v2 3.5 3 Cn W 2.5 U Z F�11111111111 IR 3.5 3 2.5 2 01 1 1 ► I 10 2 5 10 25 50 100 RETURN PERIOD IN YEARS NOTE: 1. For intermediote return periods prat 2-year and 100-year one hour values from mops,then connect points and rood value for desired return period. For example given 2-year one hour=.50 and 100- jyear one hour=1.60°,25-year one hour =1.18" Reference:NOAA Aflos 2,volume XI-Californio,1973.. RAINFALL DEPTH VERSUS R C FC ei WC D RETURN PERIOD FOR HYDROLOGY ]MANUAL PARTIAL DURATION SERIES PLATE D- CEIVu AUG 2 7 100- CITY OF LA VUINTA PLANNING & DE►EIQPMrr DEP1. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING REPORT LA QUINTA HEALTH CENTER LA QUINTA, CAUFORNIA PREPARED FOR DESERT HOSPITAL CORPORATION B7-3091-P1 APRIL 17, 1991 79.611E COUNTRY CLUB DRIVE April 17,1991 Buena (Engineers, Inc. ♦■ Wrn svnt�eawe CpuNn BERMUDA DUNES, CALIFORNIA 92201 • PHONE (619) 345.1588 • FAX (619) 345-7315 Desert Hospital Corporation c/o MediplexMedical 573 Building Corporation 14126 Sherman Way, Von Nuys, California 91405 Attention: Jeffrey P. Sobczyk Project: La Quinto Health Center La Quinta, California Subject: Geotechnical Engineering Report Presented herewith is our Geotechnical the Ceringl Repo star rt paCalled for the proposed Health Center to be located In rtY of This report incorporates the tentative information lied tforur offic6 general ndsi in accordance with the request, recommendations development and foundation design are provided. This report was Prepared to stand as a wholrt art of the report should be excerpted or used to exclusion Y other pa This report completes our scope of services uednsuaccoch ordanplaeevew and cwith our agreement. Other services which may be q grading observation ore additional services anode ilbllled according to the Fee Schedule in effect at the time services provided. wQA�1 B7-3091-P1 91-04-758 Please contact the undersigned if there ore any questions conc report or the recommendations included herein. Respectfully submitted, BUENA ENGINEERS, INC. R. Layne Richins Staff Geologist Brett L. nderson, P. E. PC HD/SER �pF ESSlpi1,.\ Ayof9``�YYFy�'� m No. 0X5389 cc Exp. 9.30-94 \CMS• �r -I'TOF u►uF°�' Copies: 6 -!Desert Hospital Corporation Re iewed and Ap, b ichard Beard Geotechnical Engineer 14 Mooney ..6rr c»7 C PAUL E. MOONE`! 1 No 1227 CERTIFIED ENGINEERING GEaIOGIST �9 _ VTA File e VENTURA TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUC71ON........................................................................................................» b PURPOSEAND SCOPE OF WORK....................................................................»» 1 SITEDESCRIPTION....................................................................................................2 FIELDEXPLORATION..................................................................................................2 LABORATORYTESTING ............................................... »...................... ....................... 3 SOILCONDITIONS ....................................................................................................3 GROUNDWATER.........................................................................................................4 REGIONALGEOLOGY..............................................................................................4 LOCALGEOLOGY.....................................................................................................4 GEOLOGICHAZARDS..................................nu.........................................................5 Primary.................................................................................................................5 Secondary.........................................................................................................6 Non-Seismic.......................................................................................................7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS................................................... »7 SITE DEVELOPMENT AND GRADING.....................................................................8 SiteDevelopment - Grading ................................................... .................. »9 SiteDevelopment - General.....................................................................10 Excavations......................................................................................................11 TrafficAreas. .. .................................................................................................... 11 UtilityTrenches..................................................................................................12 STRUCTURES..............................................................................................................12 Foundations.....................................................................................................12 Slabson Grade..............................................................................................14 SettlementConsiderations......................................................................14 Frictional and lateral Coefficients............................................................15 RetainingWalls................................................................................................15 SlopeStability... ..................... o.. ................... o ................................ o .................. 15 Expansion....................................................... ..................... . .......................... ...16 AdditionalServices........................................................................................16 LIMITATIONS AND UNIFORMITY OF CONDITIONS...........................................16 REFERENCES............................................................................................................. M APPENDIX A Site and Vicinity Map Logs of Borings APPENDIX B Summary of Test Results Table 2 APPENDIX C Standard Grading Specifications APPENDIX D Site Period Investigation April 17, 1991 •1• B7.3091•P1 91.04.758 This Geotechnical center beilogcated in the City of Loort has been pG?u ntoed for the Carfornla. proposed health ce e A It is assumed that the s That the building ure will be of rwe stobe supportesteel rd ame by construction. it is assumed normal continuous or pod footings. B. Structural considerations for building column loods of up to 180 kips and a maximum wall loading, of 3.0 kips per linear foot were used as a basis for recommendations related to the construction of the steel frame buildings. C. These ore estimated values provided by Mediplex Medical Building Corporation. If design Slaoodi to is �eeva reevaluate these given values. it will be necessary recommendations. D. All loading is assumed to be dead plus reasonable live load. PURi�C?SE AND meQ- OF W9RK The purpose of our services was to evaluate the site soil conditions, and to provide conclusions and recommendations co work incluive desio the site and the following the proposed development. Thescope of A A general reconnaissance of the site. B. Shallow subsurface exploration by drilling. C. laboratory testing of selected soil samples obtained from the exploratory borings drilled for this project. D. Review of selected technical literature pertaining to the site. E. Evaluation of field and laboratory data relative to soil conditions. F. Engineering analysis of the data obtained from the exploration and testing programs. G. A summary of our findings and recommendations in written report. Contained In This Report Are: A Discussions on regional and local geologic and soil conditions. B. Graphic and/or tabulated results of laboratory tests and field studies. April 17, 1991 •2- B7.3091-P1 91-04-758 C. Discussions and recommendations relative to allowable foundation bearing capacity.- recommendations for foundation design, estimated total and differential settlements, lateral earth pressures, site grading criteria, geologic and seismic hazards. Not Contained In This Report: A Our scope of services did not include any environmental assessment or investigation to determine the presence of hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or air, on, below or around this site. The proposed project is located on the west side of Washington Street north of Eisenhower Street in the City of Lo Quinto, California. A The site is vacant with scattered desert brush, weeds and debris. B. The eastern portion of the site is fairly level but the site slopes upward to the west along the base of the Santa Rosa Mountains which form the west edge of the site. C. There are existing utilities olong Washington Street.. D. The existing St. Franca of Assisi church is directly north of the site. Exploratory borings were drilled for observing the soil profile and obtaining samples for further analysis. A Ten (10) 'borings were drilled for soil profiling and sampling to a maximum depth of sixty-one (61) feet below the existing ground surface. The borings were drilled on March 25, 1991, using on eight (8) inch diameter hollow -stem auger powered by a CME 45-B drilling rig. The approximate boring locations as indicated on the off ached plan in Appendix A, were determined by pocing and sighting from existing streets and topographic features. The boring locations should be considered accurate only to the degree implied by the method used. B. Samples were secured within the borings with a two and one-half (2.5) inch inside diameter ring sampler (ASTM D 3550, shoe similar to ASTM D 1586). The samples were obtained by driving the sampler with a one hundred forty (140) pound hommer, dropping thirty (30) inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler one foot was recorded. Recovered soil samples were sealed in containers and returned to the laboratory for further classification and testing. C. Bulk disturbed samples of the soils were obtained from cuttings developed during excavation of the test borings. The bulk samples April 17, 1991 -3- B7-3091-P 1 91-04-758 were secured for classification purposes and represent a mixture of soils within the noted depths. D. The final logs represent our Interpretation of the contents of the field logs, and the results of the laboratory observations and tests of the field samples. The final logs are included In the appendix A of this report. The stratification lines represent the approximate boundaries between soil types although the transitions may be gradual. After a visual and tactile classification in the field, samples were returned to the loboratory, classifications were checked, and a testing program was established. A Samples were reviewed along with field logs to determine which would be further analyzed. Those chosen were considered as representative of soil which would be exposed and/or used in grading and those deemed within building influence. B. in -situ moisture content and unit dry weights for the core samples were developed in accordance with ASTM D 2937. C. Settlement and hydroconsolidation potential was evaluated from the results of consolidation tests performed in occordance with ASTM 2435. D. Classification testing consisted of Hydrometer Analysis (California Test Method 203). E. Expansion Index (UBC Standard No. 29-2), Maximum Density - Optimum Moisture (ASTM D 1557) and Direct Shear Testing ASTM D 3080 was performed previously for odjocent projects. F. Refer to Appendix B for tabular and graphic representation of the test results. SQ1L CQNDITIQNS As determined by the borings, site soils were found to consist primarily of fine windblown sands with interbedded silt and clay layers. The boring logs in Appendix A contain a more detailed description of the soils encountered. A The so''lls were found to be fairly loose near the surface but blowcounts and ring samples indicate that density generally increases with depth. The soils were found to be quite dry throughout. B. Thin interbedded silt and clay layers were encountered in most of the borings. April 17, 1991 -4- 137-3091-P1 91-04-758 C. Consolidation testing indicates that the site soils ore susceptible to settlements or expansion due to the Introduction of water. D. Clay and silt contents of the soils exhibit low plasticity. Expansion tests Indicate the sandy soils to be In the 'very low' expansion category In accordance with Table 2 In Appendix 8 of this report. The cloy layers were found to be in the 'high' expansion category. Refer to section B of the structures section for specific explanations and requirements dealing with expansive soil. E. Soils should be readily cut by normal grading equipment. Free groundwater was not encountered in any of the borings. The depth to groundwater in the area is generally in excess of one hundred (100) feet. Fluctuations in groundwater levels may occur due to variations in rainfall, temperature and other factors. The project site Is located in the southern Coachella Valley near the base of the Sonto Roso Mountains. The Coachella Valley is port of the tectonicolly active Salton Basin which is a closed, internally draining trough that has been filled with a complex series of continental ciostic materials during Pleistocene and Holocene fime Non de Camp, 1973). The Son Andreas rift Zone dominates the geology of the Coachella Valley. The Banning and Mission Creek faults, which ore ports of the Son Andreas system ore responsible for earthquakes recently felt in the Coachella Valley. Other regional faults that hove produced events felt in the Coachella Valley ore the Son Jacinto, Imperial and Elsinore faults (see figures 1 & 2). Based upon the historical and prehistoricol record, the Coachella Valley segment of the Son Andreas fault system is likely to generate a magnitude seven (7.0) or greater earthquake within the next fifty (50) years. The potential for a magnitude seven (7.0) earthquake within the next fifty (50) years is estimated by Seih (1985) as 'High' (50%-90%). Uthologic units observed on site are described as follows: Gray. well sorted (poorly graded) medium sand deposited by oeotion process. c 130 32• us. 670 as- -- Base map of southern California region with major faults * Fault Hap of Southern California figure #1 BUENA ENGINEERS INC. * From Hi leman eh al (1973), : 5-�7- 9/� l FILE No: 37-3PqI-Pt ro n t i s o i e ce _ _ o�TE.__._�...-..-� MW� 1 -1 1 iii. Z� 1,�Cont Pint \ } ° Yulort 1946 (6.31 • ` ,, °CAinO LOt BoAe/Slit/4° .!� °BOA of 1952 RT,6.4.6.1.6.0 °Sonlo Morio 1916 (6) % °Borslow\ Po/rneo/t X ,, - $onto or0or-ev ^- 1941(6.0) 198 5.9) 925(63) 1971(6.4) „�. °SonBe\brdno_ • _ �0 *Los Anpt/es 1948(6.5: rfa 1923 (6eos �c KPO i 193316. L%l 0 !00 Miles 0 /00 ? Kf"S. Earth Quakes of magnitude 5.9 and greater in the Southern California Region, 1912 - 1972 (including the !forth Palm Springs Earthquake). From Hileman ct sl (1973) SITE t937(6.0) \ 1954%2) 1968(6.4) Borr qo 9rowley 19e.M.51 �\ ° 1940(67) 1 ° t 915 (61/4 6'/e ��r* % SonD;e9o_.�.. �Me:;olr t93416.51 % 1934 (TI 1 1935(6 01 m Ensenee� 1956 (6 8.6 1.6.3.1 41 �..+ m. _\ • �, 1940(6 0) 1954(63. 01 1966(63 Seismic Epicenter Hap of Southern California Figure 2 Buena Engineers, Inc. DATE. S—/%- 9/ 1 FILE Nd:51.3M'P1 ------------- 4V WOO % Cal As PCs 2% ir -k 09 r fi Je N at. r 7 M G1 ­Zm' F7 • 001, d oi V 7. a I Coo all , N a Ve uf• sale To a SW t L % CC; s-,s C4 23 C-r CA% F. kv- Cz RCSLrVN of D. 1 C:1 ee �, - ' t — •Iw �_ N ZA -y' v v "R, S 1 1:25 O0 71: -N IV 4. vim! t�PN, -CiF 1 .17, k AZI led 1. Cal a:7 �1'1 ` Not ALCA4904i71 C 'UFA K claml Cat. ty elf: i P� �4c F PROJECT SITES RELATION MAP O % .4 TO LOCAL GEOLOGY V. SANTA ANA MAP SHEET (1955) r i a u r e 3 yX ae'- t L! e r, a ngineers, Inc. J4 I CATS. F:LE N^ 151 April 17, 1991 -6- B7-3091-P1 91-04-758 b. Because of the relatively thin alluvial sedimentary nature of the soils on site, ground shaking characteristics are expected to include very high amplification of high frequencies and low amplification of low and intermediate frequencies. Duration of shaking could be from fifteen (15) to thirty-six (36) seconds. The project area Is mopped in Ground Shaking Zone III E as designated by the County of Riverside, California. Ground Shaking Zones are based on distance from causative faults and soil types. See Appendix To for results of our site period investigation. c. The project is mopped near the Riverside County Liquefaction Study Zone, however, no groundwater was observed in our borings. Secondary seismic geologic hazards that may affect the project site area include settlement, liquefaction, down slope movement of rock and ground lurching. 1. Settlement, whether seismically related or not, is considered a potential hazard in this area. Historic records report episodes of settlement In the Coachella Valley area due to seismic forces and/or heavy rain fail and flooding. 2 Liquefaction is the loss of soil strength as a result of on increase in pore water pressure due to cyclic seismic loading. Conditions for liquefaction include relatively high water table (within 40' of surface), low relative densities of the saturated soils and susceptibility of the soil to liquefy based on grain size. No free groundwater was encountered in our exploratory borings. 3. The rock slopes on the project are littered with loose cobbles and boulders. Development adjacent to the rock slopes could be impacted by down slope movement of said rocks. In addition, groding may disturb or expose more cobbles and boulders, thus increasing the potential hazard of downslope rock movement. 4. Ground lurching is generally associated with fault rupture and liquefaction. Because of the sites distance from any known 'active' faults, the possibility of ground lurching affecting the site is considered low. 5. Other secondary seismic geologic hazards that may result from on earthquake include tsunamis (tidal waves) and seiches (waves oscillating in on enclosed area, i.e., storage tanks, lakes). Based on the project sites geologic location and topography, it is our opinion that the probability of the above hazards affecting the property are negligible. April 17, 1991 - -7- 137-3091-P1 91-04-758 Other geologic hazards that could affect the project site include down slope movement of rock, flooding and erosion. 1. Evidence of post downslope movement of rock was observed at the site. These rock movements were in the form of rock topple and debris movement on the slopes of the granitic rock outcrops. Rocks that hod fallen down the slope were observed on the Quaternary sediments at the toe of the outcrop slopes. 2 Flooding and erosion are always a consideration in odd regions. On -site, the erosion rate is affected by the relatively soft rock units, sparse vegetation and seasonal rains. 3. The Coachella Valley averages four (4) inches of rain per year. When large amounts of rain occur suddenly, the surface alluvium becomes saturated and prevents further infiltration of the rains. The result is surface runoff and sheet flow drainage on slopes toward gullies and washes. 4. Generally, erosion in the desert can be reduced by minimizing soil disturbances and diverting seasonal runoff from areas of high potential erosion. On -site erosion may be reduced by diverting runoff from the hill area and the large drainages to the north of the project. The following is a summary of our conclusions and professional opinions based on the data obtained from a review of technical literature and the site investigation. A The primary geologic hazard relative to site development is severe ground shaking from earthquakes originating on nearby foults. The site is located in Southern California which is on active seismic area. In our opinion, a major seismic event originating on the San Andreas fault zone would be the most likely cause of significant earthquake activity at the site within the estimated design life of the proposed development. B. Settlement due to seismic factors or flooding is a potential hazard in the Coachello Valley area. C. Areas of alluvial soils may be susceptible to erosion. Preventative measures to minimize seasonal flooding and erosion should be Incorporated into site grading plans. . D. Down slope movement of rock is a potential hazard to development adjacent to native rock slopes. This hazard can be substantially mitigated by the following recommendations. April 17, 1991 4- 137.3091-P1 91-04.75B 1. Establishing a set back zone of a minimum of V between the toe of native slopes and habitable structures. 2 Construction of a brow ditch at the toe of the natural rock slope. The ditch should be a minimum of HY wide and slope at 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) back into the rock outcrops. E. Fluvial or oeoran erosion may affect the site during construction. F. Other geologic hazards including liquefaction, lurching, landslides, tsunamis and seiches are considered negligible. G. It Is our opinion that the upper native soil will not provide unlform or adequate support for the proposed structures without the recommended sitework. To decrease the potential for consolidation and to provide a more uniform and firm bearing support for the proposed structures, we recommend constructing recompocted soil mots beneath all foundations and slobs -on - grade. H. The project site is in seismic Zone 4 as defined in Section 2312 (d) 2. of the Uniform Building Code. I. It is further recommended that any permanent structure constructed on the site be designed by a qualified professional who is aware of the seismic hazards that may affect the site. J. Adherence to the following grading recommendations should limit potential settlement problems due to seismic forces, heavy rainfall, flooding and the weight of the intended structure. K. It is recommended that Buena Engineers, Inc. be retained to provide Geotechnicol Engineering services during site development; excavation, grading, and foundation construction phases of the work. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications and recommendations, and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of construction. L. Plans and specifications should be provided to Buena Engineers, Inc. prior to grading. Plans should include the grading plans, foundation pions, and foundation details. Preferably, structural loads should be shown on the foundation plans. •• •�� •:.Eel Prior to any construction operations, areas to be graded should be cleaned of vegetation and other deleterious materials. Appendix C, 'Standard Grading Specifications' contains specific suggestions for removal and disposal of deleterious substances and, as such, forms a part of these Site Development and Grading Recommendations. April 17, 1991 -9- 137-3091-P1 91-04-758 Site grading and the bottom of all excavations should be observed by a representative of Buena Engineers, Inc. prior to placement of fill. Local voriotions in soil conditions may warrant increasing the depth of recompoction and/or overexcavotion. 1. Prior to site grading any existing structures, stumps, roots, foundations, pavements, leachfields, uncompocted fill, trash piles, and any abandoned underground utilities should be removed from the proposed building and paving areas. The top surface should be stripped of oil organic growth and non- complying fill which, along with other debris, should be removed from the site. 2 Depressions resulting from these removals should have debris and loose soil removed and be filled with suitable fill soils compacted as recommended herein. No compacted fill should be placed unless the underlying soil has been observed by Buena Engineers, Inc. 3. in order to help minimize potential settlement problems associated with structures supported on a non -uniform thickness of compacted fill, Buena Engineers, Inc. should be consulted for site grading recommendations relative to bockfilling large and/or deep depressions resulting from removal under item one (1) above. 4. it is our understanding that the western portion of the site will be lowered in elevation and the eastern portion of the site will be raised. To control differential settlement and produce a more uniform bearing condition we recommend that the structure be supported by a recompocted soil mat. Once the building layout and location is determined, the following grading recommendations should be re-evaluated. 5. Because substantial cuts and fills ore proposed for the building areas, the recommended grading will vory dependent on location. In general we recommend that the building be supported by a recompacted soil mat o minimum of one footing width thick. In the cut areas along the western portion of the site, which ore composed primodly of fine windblown sands, we anticipate that compaction could be obtained to a depth of three (3) or four (4) feet by watering and compacting from the surface. In the fill areas along the eastern portion of the site, overexcavotion may be necessary. The recommended compacted soil mat can be composed of any combination of compacted in place native soil, recompocted native soil or compacted fill material. The intent is to have at least one footing width of soil compacted to a minimum of ninety (90) percent of maximum density compose the building pad beneath the footings. Compaction Is to be verified by testing. 6. These grading recommendations apply to building areas and nt ic-ne fvP (5) feet bevond buildina limits. April 17, 1991 -10- B7-3091-P 1 91-04-758 7. Auxiliary structures including freestanding or retaining walls should have the existing soils beneoth the structure processed os per Items five (5) and six (6). above. The grading requirements opply to three (3) feet beyond the face of the walls. If plans for auxiliary structures and walls ore provided for our review, these recommendations may be revised. 8. it is anticipated that during grading a loss of approximately one tenth (.1) of a foot due to stripping, and a shrinkage factor of about fifteen (15) to twenty (20) percent for the upper three (3) feet of soil, may be used for quantity calculations. This is based on compoctive effort needed to produce on average degree of compaction of approximately ninety-three (93) to ninety-four (94) percent and may vary depending on contractor methods. Subsidence is estimated between one - tenths (.1) to three -tenths (.3) of a foot. it Development - General 1. The following general recommendations listed in this section are in addition to those listed in the 'Grading' section A above. 2. All rocks larger than eight (8) inches in greatest dimension should be removed from fill or bockfill material. 3. Import soil used to raise site grades should be equal to or better than on -site soil in strength, expansion, and compressibility choroctedstics. Import soil will not be prequalified by Buena Engineers, Inc. Comments on the characteristics of import will be given after the moteriol is on the project, either in - place or in stockpiles of adequate quantity to complete the project. 4. Areas around the structures should be graded so that drainage is positive and away from the structures. Gutters and down spouts should be considered as a way to convey water out of the foundation area. Water should not be allowed to pond on or near pavement sections. 5. Added moisture within previously compacted fill could result in a number of reactions of the surface depending upon the amount of moisture increase, the in-ploce density of the soil, in - situ moisture content and soil type. Although the soil could in reality be expanding, collapsing, moving laterally due to the phenomenon 'creep', the result is usually movement and will most likely manifest itself visually in structural slabs and street areas as crocks, (horizontal, lateral or vertical displacement). 6. The apparent cure to the problem is to not introduce excess moisture into fill material once in place. To help minimize increased moisture into the fill material, site drainage and April 17, 1991 -11 • 137.3091-P 1 91-04-758 landscape is critical. Site drainage should be in the form of roof gutter, concrete brow ditcher, ribbon gutters and gutters, storm droin and other drainage devices. Landscaping should be such that water is not allowed to pond. Additionally, care should be taken so as not to over water landscaped areas. 7. The Recommended Grading Specifications included in Appendix C are general guidelines only and should not be included directly into project specifications without first Incorporating the site specific recommendations contained In the Site Development - Grading section of this report. Chapter 70 of the Uniform Building Code contains specific considerations for grading and is considered a part of the general guidelines. 8. it is recommended that* Buena Engineers. Inc., be retained to provide soil engineering services during construction of the grading, excavation, and foundation phases of the work. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or recommendations and to allow design changes in the event that subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to start of construction. C. Ex avations 1. All excavations should be made in accordance with applicable regulations. From our site exploration and knowledge of the general area, we feel there is a potent;al for construction problems involving caving of relatively deep site excavations (i.e. utilities, etc.). Where such situations are encountered, lateral brocing or appropriate cut slopes should be provided. 2. iVo surcharge loods should be allowed within a horizontal distance measured from the top of the excavation slope, equal to the depth of the excavation. D. Traffic Areas 1. Curbs and streets should be provided with one (1) foot of subgrode compacted to ninety (90) percent of maximum density. 2. On -site parking should be provided with one (1) foot of subgrade compacted to ninety (90) percent of maximum density. 3. Sidewalks should be provided with one (1) foot of subgrode compacted to ninety (90) percent of maximum density. 4. The surface soil was sampled and tested for R-Value per California Test Method 301. The testing resulted in an R-Value of 61. The following pavement design sections are based on a design R-Value of 60. April 17, 1991 -12- 87-3091-P1 91-04-758 E. Traffic Index use 3.0' of Asphaltic Concrete or 4.0' Class II Bose Traffic Index = 7.5 use 3.5' of Asphaltic Concrete on 5.0' Class II Base Traffic Index = 8.5' use 4.0' of Asphaltic Concrete on 6.0' Class II Base These design sections are based on paved areas being confined on two (2) sides. If the minimum requirements of the City of i.a Quinto exceed the design sections listed above, the City requirements will become the basis for design. hill inn_ hes 1. Bockfill of utilities within road right-of-way should be placed in strict conformance with the requirements of the governing agency (Water District, Rood Department, etc.). 2. Utility trench bockfill within private property should be placed in strict conformance with the provisions of this report relating to minimum compaction standards. In general, service lines extending inside of property may be bockfilled with native soils compacted to a minimum of ninety (90) percent of maximum density. 3. Bockfill operations should be observed and tested by Buena Engineers, Inc., to monitor compliance with these recommendations. aTRUCTUREB Based upon the results of this evaluation, it is our opinion that the structure foundation con be s p e°recomme rted by dotionscthot followted soils po�e based ced as recommended abo on 'very low' expansion category soils. A EQUndQfions It is anticipated that foundations will be placed on firm compacted soils as recommended elsewhere in this report. The recommendations that follow are based on 'very low' expansion category soils. 1. Table 2 gives specific recommendations for width, depth and reinforcing. Other structural considerations may be more stringent and would govern in any case. A minimum footing depth of twelve (12) inches below lowest adjacent grade for one (1) story structures eighteen )tinchesaor three for (3) storyostructurre us structures and twenty fo should be maintained. April 17, 1991 .13. 137.3091•P1 91.04.758 2. Conventional Foundations: Estimated bearing values ore given below for foundations on recompocted soils, assuming import fill (if required) to be equol to or better than site soil: a. Continuous foundotions of one (1) foot wide and twelve (12) inches below grade: i. 1500 psf for dead plus reasonable live loads. 1. 2000 psf for wind and seismic considerations. b. Isolated pad foundations 2' x 2' and bottomed twelve (12) inches below grade: I. 18W psf for dead plus reasonable live loads. 1. 2400 psf for wind and seismic considerations. 3. Allowable increases of 200 psf per one (1) foot of additional footing width and 300 psf for each additional six (6) inches of footing depth may be used. The maximum allowable bearing will be 3000 psf. The allowable bearing values indicated hove been determined bosed upon anticipated maximum loads indicated in the 'introduction' section of this report. If the Indicated loading is exceeded then the allowable bearing values and the grading requirements must be reevaluated by the soil engineer. 4. Although footing reinforcement may not be required per Table 2; nominal reinforcement should be considered to reduce the potential problem related to cracking due to temperature and shrinkage stresses and in order to spun surface imperfections. Other requirements thot ore more stringent due to structural loads will govern. 5. Soils beneath footings and slabs should be premoistened prior to placing concrete. 6. Lateral foods may be resisted by soil friction on floor slabs and foundations and by passive resistance of the soils acting on foundation stem walls. Lateral capacity is based partially on the assumption that any required backfill adjacent to foundations and grade beams is properly compacted. 7. Foundation excavations should be visually observed by the soil engineer during excavation and prior to placement of reinforcing steel or concrete. Local variations in conditions may warrant deepening of footings. 8. Allowable bearing values are net (weight of footing and soil surcharge may be neglected) and are applicable for dead plus reasonable live foods. April 17, 1991 -14- 67-3091-P1 91-04-758 I Mobs-o - rode 1. Concrete slabs -on -grade should be supported by compacted structural fill placed in accordance with applicable sections of this report. .2 in areas of moisture sensitive floor coverings, an appropriate vapor barrier should be Installed in order to minimize vapor transmission from the subgrode soil to the slab. We would suggest that the floor slobs be underlain by a four (4) inch thick layer of gravel or by on impermeable membrane as o capillary break. A suggested gradation for the gravel layer would be as follows: Steve Size Percent Passing 3/40 90 - 100 No.4 0-10 No. 100 0-3 If a membrane is used, a low -slump concrete should be used to help minimize shrinkage. The membrane should be covered with two (2) inches of sand to help protect 0 during construction. The sand should be lightly moistened just prior to placing the concrete. 3. Reinforcement of slob -on -grade is contingent upon the structural engineers recommendations and the expansion index of the supporting soil. Since the mixing of fin soil with native soil could change the expansion index, additional tests should be conducted during rough groding to determine the expansion index of the subgrode soil. Additional reinforcement due to the expansion index of the site soil should be provided as recommended in section G below. Additional reinforcement may also be required by the structural engineer. 4. it is recommended that the proposed perimeter slobs (sidewaiks, patios, etc.) be designed relatively independent of foundation stems (free-floating) to help mitigate cracking due to foundation settlement and/or expansion. C. ff iement Considerations 1. Estimated settlement, based on footings founded on firm soils as recommended, should be less than one (1) inch. Differential settlement between exterior and interior bearing members should be less than one-half 0 /2) inch. 2 The majority of settlement should occur during construction. April 17, 1991 •15• 87-3091 •P 1 91-04-758 D. FkNmal opd Lcderal CoMQie is 1. Resistance to lateral loading may be provided by friction acting on the base of foundations, a coefficient of friction of .46 may be used for dead load forces. 2 Passive resistance acting on the sides of foundation stems equal to 300 pcf of equivalent fluid weight, may be included for resistance to lateral loading. 3. Passive resistance of soils against grade beams and the frictional resistance between the floor stabs and the supporting soils may be combined in determining the total lateral resistance, however the friction factor should be reduced to .33 of dead load forces. A A one-third (1/3) increase in the quoted passive value may be used for wind or seismic foods. 1. For cantilever retaining walls backfilled with compacted native soils, it is recommended that on equivalent fluid pressure of thirty-five (35) pcf be used for well drained level bockfill conditions. 2 The faterai earth pressure to be resisted by the retaining walls or similar structures should be increased to allow for surcharge loads. The surcharge considered should include the bads from any structures or temporary loads that would influence the wall design. 3. A bockdrain or an equivalent system of bockfill drainage should be incorporated into the retaining wolf design. Bockfill immediately behind the retaining structure should be a fee - draining granular material. Alternately, the bock of the wall could be lined with a geodrain system. 4. Compaction on the retained side of the wall within a horizontal distance equal to one (1) wan height should be performed by hand -operated or other light weight compaction equipment. This is intended to reduce potential 'locked -in' lateral pressures caused by compaction with heavy grading equipment. 5. Water should not be allowed to pond near the top of the wall. To accomplish this the final bockfill site grade should be such that all water is diverted away from the retaining wall. Slope stability calculations were not performed due to the anticipated minimal slope height (less that 10'). If slopes exceed ten RHFNA FNGINFFRS.-INC. April 17, 1991 -16- B7-3091-P1 91-04-756 (10) feet, engineering calculations should be performed to substantiate the stability of slopes steeper than 2 to 1. Fill slopes should be overfilled and trimmed bock to competent material. G. ExQ!Onsion The design of foundations should be based on the weighted expansion index (UBC Standard No. 29-2) of the soil. As stated in the soil properties section, the expansion index the majority of the surface soil Is in the 'very low' (0-20) classification, however, some 'high' (91-130) expansion category soils were encountered. During site preparation, If the soil Is thoroughly mixed and additional fill is added, the expansion index may change. Therefore, the expansion index should be evaluated after the site preparation has been completed, and the final foundation design adjusted accordingly. H. Additiond krvices This report is based on the assumption that on adequate program of client consultation, construction monitoring and testing will be performed during the final design and construction phases to check compliance with these recommendations. Maintaining Buena Engineers, Inc., as the soil engineering firm from beginning to end of the project will help assure continuity of services. Construction monitoring and testing would be odditional services provided by our firm. The costs of these services are not Included in our present fee arrangements. The recommended tests and observations Include, but are not necessarily limited to the following: 1. Consultation during the final design stages of the project. 2 Review of the building plans to observe that recommendations of our report have been properly implemented into the design. 3. Observation and testing during site preparation, grading and placement of engineered fill. 4. Consultation as required during construction. The analysis and recommendations submitted in this report are based in part upon the data obtained from the ten (10) borings performed on the site. The nature and extent of variations between the borings may not become evident until construction. If variations then appear evident, it will be necessary to reevaluate the recommendations of this report. Findings of this report ore valid as of this date. However, changes in conditions of a property can occur with passage of time whether they be due to natural processes or works of man on this or adjacent properties. In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards occur whether they result from legislation or broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially April 17, 1991 .17- 87.3091-P1 91-04-758 by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and should not be relied upon after a period of eighteen (18) months. In the event that any changes in the nature, design or location of the building ore planned, the conclusions and recommendations contained in this report shall not be considered valid unless the changes are reviewed and conclusions of this report modified or verified in writing. This report u issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his representative, to Insure that the information and recommendations contained herein ore coiled to the attention of the architect and engineers for the project and ore Incorporated Info the plans and specifications for the project. It is also the owners responsibility, or his representative, to Insure that the necessary steps ore taken to see that the general contractor and all subcontractors carry out such recommendations In the field. It Is further understood that the owner or his representative Is responsible for submittal of this report to the appropriate governing agencies. Buena Engineers, Inc., has prepared this report for the exclusive use of the client and authorized agents. This report has been prepared in accordance with generally accepted soil and foundation engineering practices. No other warranties, either expressed or implied, ore mode as the professional advice provided under the terms of this agreement, and included In the report. It is recommended that Buena Engineers, Inc., be provided the opportunity for a general review of final design and specifications in order that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly interpreted and implemented in the design and specifications. If Buena Engineers, Inc., is not accorded the privilege of making this recommended review, we can assume no responsibility for misinterpretation of our recommendations. Our scope of services did not include any environmental assessment or investigation to determine the presence of hazardous or toxic materials in the soil, surface water, groundwater or air, on, below or around this site. Prior to purchase or development of this site, we suggest that on environmental assessment be conducted which oddresses environmental concerns. END OF TEXT Appendices April 17, 1991 •18• 137-3091•P1 91-04-758 1. Envicom, Riverside County, 1976, Seismic Safety Element. 2 Greensfelder, Roger W., 1974, Maximum Credible Rock Accelerations from Earthquakes in Califomia, CDMG Map Sheet 23. 3. Krinitzsky, E.L., Chang, F.K., Mognitude-Related Earthquake Ground Motions, Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists Vol. XXV, No. 4.1988, Pgs. 399LA23. 4. Ploessei, M. R. and Slosson, J. E., 'Repeatable High Ground Accelerations from Earthquakes', 1974 California Geology, Vol. 27, No. 9, Pgs. 195.199. S Seed, H. B. and idriss, I. M., 1982, Ground Motions and Soil Uquefoction During Earthquakes. 6. Seih, Kerry, 1985, 'Earthquoke Potentials Along The San Andreas Foult', Minutes of The National Earthquake Prediction Evaluation Council, March 29-30,1985, USGS Open File Report 85-507. 7. Van de Camp, P. C., 'Holocene Continental Salton Basin, Corfomia: A Reconnaissance'. America, Vol 84, March 1973. Sedimentation in the Geological Society of M IIrU 1 rld#/ I&Ic Coc 1► 4`1 APPENDIX A Site and Vicinity Map Logs of Borings On File with City Staff BUENA ENGINEERS. INC. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 91-210 AND APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 91-037, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE/MEDICAL COMMERCIAL AND TO AMEND THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN TEXT. CASE NO. GPA 91-037 - DESERT HOSPITAL WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did on the 8th day of October, 1991, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of Desert Hospital to amend the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map from Low Density Residential to Office/Medical Commercial for a portion of the site totaling 30 gross acres, located on the west side of Washington Street, north of 48th Avenue, and south of 47th Avenue, more particularly described as: APN 617-070-022 AND A PORTION OF 617-070-023 WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify recommending the approval of said General Plan Amendment: 1. Traffic impacts caused by the implementation of General Plan Amendment 91- 037 can be mitigated to a large degree. 2. The request for Office/Medical Commercial land use is consistent with the intent of the La Quinta General Plan. 3. This General Plan Amendment application complies with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended) and adopted by City Council Resolution 83-68. Mitigation measures can be generated to reduce the impact of General Commercial land uses on the subject property. 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 the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 91-037 consisting of a Land Use Map Amendment as described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto. RESOPC.029 3. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council, approval of the General Plan Text Amendment as described in Exhibit "B", attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of October, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: KATIE BARROWS, Chairwoman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.029 2 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (Text Amendment) EXHIBIT B OFFICE/MEDICAL COMMERCIAL: Office/medical facilities are often found to be located along major arterial streets which can be close to heavy commercial areas and areas with planned or developed residential population centers. This classification is intended to replace existing areas which are designated General Commercial or other categories which are not acceptable for residential development. The primary intent of this land use designation is to insure that City residents are provided necessary urban services to accommodate both their livelihood and living needs and recreational pursuits. Medical facilities which provide temporary urgent care should be encouraged. This category should be used as a supplement to the other categories of the City. This Land Use provision would be beneficial to areas along Washington Street, Highway 111, Jefferson Street and Eisenhower because these thoroughfares are the main arterial of the City which support transportation movement throughout the City. IMPLEMENTATION POLICY: Policy 6.3.9 The development of office/medical facilities should be encouraged in areas of the city which are located abutting major streets in the City and close to existing or planned residential population centers. The primary focus of this category should be to establish medical facilities for the City commensurate with demographic needs of the community. Health facilities should be within 2 miles of urban areas of the City to assure adequate travel response times in case of an emergency. Land uses which can supplement this category shall be encouraged. DOCGT.001/CS -1- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF CHANGE OF ZONE 91- 065 CASE NO. CZ 91-065 - DESERT HOSPITAL WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 8th day of October, 1991, hold a duly notice Public Hearing to consider the request of Desert Hospital for a Change of Zone from R-1 Single Family to Office/Medical and related services (OMS) on +20 acres, located on the west side of Washington Street at Via Marquessa, more particularly described as: BEING A PORTION OF THE SOUTH 1/2 OF SECTION 30, T.6.S., R.7.E., S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said Change of Zone request has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (as amended), and adopted by City Council Resolution 83-68, in that the Planning and Development Department has completed an Environmental Assessment/Negative Declaration, which has been reviewed and considered by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta. WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Change of Zone. 1. The proposed Change of Zone, as requested, is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. The proposed zoning is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan and the Land Use Plan in, accordance with the recommended amendment for GPA 91- 037. 3. The proposed OMS (Office, Medical and related services) zoning is consistent and compatible with surrounding land use and zoning designations. 4. Approval of this proposal will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment due to mitigation measures contained in the proposed Negative Declaration. 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; RESOPC.048 2. That it does hereby recommend adoption of the Negative Declaration by the La Quinta Planning Commission pursuant to the attached Environmental Assessment. 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 91-065 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as illustrated in the map labeled Exhibit "A". attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 8th day of October, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: KATIE BARROWS, Chairwoman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.048 w r IR-2-3,000 � R-1 R-I. r a a MILES 12,00 ... — v, cn qP R-1 '"I'" 12,000PO I R�3 R-I , i .... _� cirr o I rM r � to I M-C R-3-2�0 ,lei - i - •�� r H. e ' H -C' R-1•• - f ICT :OR. ` 3S7o WESTWARq _ _j I C p $8 C - P- S R 1 1-0 49 w+Y'w.a W-1 � ��!.a ?• (. I � non. w.0 ►v Whim P—iS w-1 CN I .... C-P-S R-1-'127000 'R— I •• Z-2 c-f-a c-4L-3 c;P -T R-1 E MAP EXISTING CITY OF LA QUINTA ZONING MAP //// Property in Question Highlighted 2 I w 8,000 R-2Ib.000 -2-8, � i o I I NORTN SCALE: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PLOT PLAN 91-465 - PROPOSED OCTOBER 8, 1991 DESERT HOSPITAL GENERAL. 1. The development of the property shall be generally be in conformance with the exhibits contained in the file for PP 91-465, unless amended otherwise by the following conditions. 2. The approved plot plan shall be used within one year of the final approval date; otherwise it shall become null and void and of no effect whatsoever. "Be used" means the beginning of substantial construction which is contemplated by this approval, not including grading which is begun within the one year period and is thereafter diligently pursued until completion. A one year time extension may be requested as permitted by Municipal Code. 3. Approval of this plot plan shall be subject to final approval of General Plan Amendment 91-037 and Change of Zone 91-065. 4. There shall be no outdoor storage or sales displays without specific approval of the Planning Commission. 5. All exterior lighting shall be shielded and directed so as not to shine directly on surrounding adjoining properties or public rights -of -way. All parking lot lighting plans utilizing light pole standards shall be a maximum 20 feet and shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval prior to issuance of a building permit. Light standard type with recessed light source shall also be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director. Exterior lighting shall comply with Outdoor Light Control Ordinance and off-street parking requirements. 6. Adequate trash enclosures shall be provided for all structures and provided with opaque metal doors. Plans for trash enclosures to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. Applicant shall contact local waste management company to insure that enclosure size is adequate. 7. Decorative enclosures may be required by the City around any detention basins depending on site grading requirements and the color, location, and placement of said fence shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 8. Future expansion of the property shall be subject to Planning Commission review. Parking demand shall be reviewed at that time to insure adequate parking is provided. 9. Handicapped parking spaces and facilities shall be provided per Municipal Code and State requirements. CONAPRVL.029 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 10. As required by the General Plan, Applicant shall provide noise study by qualified engineer to determine impacts on surrounding residential zones and uses. The noise study shall suggest mitigation measures which the City can require concerning the development of Phase I. 11. Screen wall height adjacent to loading areas shall be determined by required noise study. Should noise problems from use of loading areas arise, Planning Commission shall retain the right to limit the hours of loading and unloading. Surrounding property owners and residents which could be affected by noise shall be notified of Planning Commission consideration of limitations on delivery hours. 12. The project shall comply with all existing off street parking requirements including but not limited to shading of parking lot areas and bicycle parking spaces. 13. Decorative screen walls (i.e., berms with landscaping, masonry walls, etc.) provided adjacent to street shall be high enough to screen parking lot surfaces and a majority of parked cars from view of the street. Determination of height of walls shall be made after review of landscaping and grading plans by City. 14. Landscaping planters along the north, south and east property lines shall be provided at maximum width possible with all unusable areas adjacent to property lines provided in landscaping. 15. The project shall comply with applicable Arts in Public Places Ordinance. 16. 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 to archaeological studies for this site as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary result show significant materials 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. CONAPRVL.029 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 A list of the qualified archaeological monitor(s) , cultural resources management firm employees, and any assistants) / 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 divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby areas reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. Upon completion of the data recovery, the Developer shall cause three copies of the final report containing the data analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 17. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this use, the Applicant shall obtain permits or clearances from the following agencies: o City Fire Marshal o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o City of La Quinta Planning & Development Department o Coachella Valley Water District o Desert Sands Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Department at the time of application for a building permit for the proposed project. 18. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City adopted infrastructure fee program in affect at the time of issuance of building permits. 19. Final landscaping plans shall include approval stamps and signatures from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioners office and Coachella Valley Water District. 20. A bus waiting shelter shall be provided as requested by Sunline Transit on the Washington Street frontage road when street improvements are installed. 21. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire site which shall be for the purpose of wind and erosion and dust CONAPRVL.029 3 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 control. The land owner shall institute blow sand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a.) use of irrigation during construction and grading activities; b. ) areas not constructed on during first phase shall be planted in temporary ground cover or wildflowers and provided with temporary irrigation system; and c.) provision of wind breaks or wind rolls, fencing, and or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The landowner 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 being used to prevent emission of dust and blow sand. 22. Construction shall comply with all local and State Building Code requirements in affect at time of issuance of building permit as determined by the Building Official. 23. Prior to 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 which must be satisfied prior to issuance of a building permit. Prior to a final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report demonstrating compliance with all remaining conditions of approval and mitigation measures. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. 24. A parking lot striping plan including directional arrows, stop signs, no parking areas, and parking spaces shall be approved by Planning and Development and Engineering Departments prior to issuance of a building permit. All roof equipment shall be screened from view by parapet walls of building or other architecturally matching materials. 25. All compact spaces shall be clearly marked "compact cars only". 26. That all conditions of the Design Review Board shall be complied with as follows: A. A detailed complete sign program shall be approved by the Design Review Board prior to issuance of first sign permit. Sign program shall include any center identification signs. B . Cement plaster texture used on building shall be of a decorative natural and approved by the Planning Department prior to issuance of a building permit. The color scheme shall reflect the native colors of the Santa Rosa Mountain range. C. Along the street perimeters, the amount of turf utilized shall be reduced (i.e., eliminate on back sides of slopes, and between sidewalk and curb areas) . CONAPRVL.029 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 D. A preliminary landscaping plan indicating specific trees, shrubs, and ground covers, and irrigation system type shall be reviewed and approved by the Design Review Board prior to preparation of final landscaping plans. E. Water efficient irrigation system including bubblers and emitters shall be utilized wherever possible. F. Landscaping adjacent to south and east property lines shall be heavily planted to provide screening and buffering with adjacent residentially zoned properties. G . All planting materials shall be water efficient to maximum extend feasible. H. The Applicant should examine covered parking spaces for 10 percent of the proposed on -site parking spaces. The covered trellises should be either wood or metal and spaces should be interspersed throughout the site. I. All trash and loading area facilities should be located so that they cannot be seen from any public thoroughfare. The areas should be screened by using masonry wall enclosures and landscaping. J. All windows on the second and third floor should be recessed into the building envelope (approximately 6 to 18 inches) and sunshade canopies should be used to reduce the sun exposure on the areas which are susceptible to mid -afternoon heating. 27. The courtyard areas as shown on the approved site plan shall be developed into shaded lounging areas with permanent seating provided. Said plans to be approved by the City at the time of landscaping plan review. CITY FIRE MARSHAL 28. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering 3500 gpm for a 3 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the job site. 29. A combination of on -site and off -site Super fire hydrants, on a looped system (6" X 4" X 2-1 / 2" X 2-1 / 2") , will be located not less than 25 feet or more than 165 feet from any portion of the building(s) as measured along approved vehicular travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any adjacent hydrant(s) in the system. 30. Prior to issuance of building permit 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 CONAPRVL.029 5 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 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." The required water system including fire hydrants shall be installed and operational prior to start of construction. 31. 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. 32. Install portable fire extinguishers per NFPA, Pamphlet #10, but not less than 2A10BC in rating. Contact certified extinguisher company for proper placement of equipment. 33. Install Panic Hardware and Exit signs as per Chapter 33 of the Uniform Building Code. 34. Certain designated areas will be required to be maintained as fire lanes. 35. Provide fire apparatus road to within 150 feet of any portion of the exterior wall of the first floor. Such road shall have a minimum of 20 feet of unobstructed width and a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. 36. Center divider in entrance way shall be set back a minimum of 20 feet from curb line. 37. Provide valve supervision and 24 hour monitoring of the waterflow alarm at the automatic fire sprinkler system. 38. Approved building numbers or address shall be placed in such a position as to be plainly visible and legible from the street or roAd. Said numbers shall contrast with their background. 39. This project may require licensing and/or review by State agencies. Applicant should prepare a letter of intent detailing his proposed usage to facilitate case review. Contact should be made with the Office of the State Fire Marshal (818) 960-6441 for an opinion and classification of occupancy to the type. This information and a copy of the letter of intent should be submitted to the Fire Department so that property requirements may be specified during the review process. CONAPRVL.029 6 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 40. 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. Washington Street - Major Arterial, 60-foot half width between north and south project boundaries; B . Washington Street Frontage Road, 50-foot full width between north and south site boundaries. The frontage road shall be realigned to eliminate the existing direct access to Washington Street south of the church. The frontage road right of way will generally be contiguous to the Washington Street right of way where possible. The precise alignment will be determined by the City Engineer and approved by the City Council. 41. The City may elect to acquire the frontage road right of way between the south project boundary and Avenue 48. If the City does proceed with right of way acquistion, the Applicant shall be responsible for the first $25,000 of the legal and acquistion expense incurred by the City. 42. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right of way: A.) Washington Street Frontage Road, 20-feet wide (westerly side only); 43. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Washington Street Frontage Road from the project site except for two locations as proposed by the Applicant and shown on the Access Scheme #3 drawing. 44. The frontage road separation island shall have no opening in it to permit direct vehicular access to Washington Street between Avenues 47 and 48, except as otherwise permitted elsewhere in these conditions of approval on an interim basis. Access to the frontage road from Washington Street shall be via the intersections at Avenues 47 or 48. 45. 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 with landscape improvements where required by city General Plan. Street design shall take into account the soil strength, anticipated traffic loading, and design life. CONAPRVL.029 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 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. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Washington Street (limits are north and south site boundaries) Install half width Major Arterial improvements, refer to General Plan Figure VII-2; 2. Washington Street Frontage Road (north site boundary to Avenue 48) Install 32-foot wide full width street improvements, refer to Std Dwg #106. The Applicant shall landscape the frontage road separation island in the area between the project site boundaries If the City does not acquire the right of way south of the south project boundary, the Applicant is responsible for only that portion of the frontage road contiguous to the project site; in which case, the Applicant shall install an interim connection between the frontage road and Washington Street. 46. Applicant is responsible for the cost to design and construct traffic signals at the following locations. A. Washington Street at Avenue 48 - 25% fair share responsibility; 47. 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 grading permit is issued. 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. 48. 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 CONAPRVL.029 8 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 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. 49. The tract grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 50. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the difference in building pad elevations between contiguous lots that share a common street frontage does not exceed three (3.0) feet. The pad elevations of contiguous lots 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. 51. The tract shall be graded in a manner that permits storm flow in excess of the retention basin capacity to flow out off 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 at locations that has historically received flow. 52. Storm water run-off produced on -site in 24 hours by a 100-year storm shall be retained on site in landscaped retention basins designed for a maximum water depth not to exceed six feet. Off -site water that flows onto the site may outfall to the historic drainage routes provided the discharge does not encroach on the Washington Street or frontage road traveled ways. 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 City will consider and may approve other ground cover/slope stabilization plant life in lieu of grass on a case by case basis. The triburary drainage area for which the Applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street. 53. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback area and frontage road separation island. 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. CONAPRVL.029 9 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 54. 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. 55. - Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right of way between the westerly frontage road curb and property line. 56. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined westerly parkway of Washington Street and easterly parkway of the frontage road in lieu of the standard six-foot wide sidewalk. A 6-foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed adjacent to the westerly frontage road curb within the site boundaries. 57. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 58. Underground utilities that lie directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 59. 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. 60. 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, cONAPRvL.029 10 Conditions of Approval Plot Plan 91-465 October 8, 1991 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. 61. The heli-pad site and its operation are not approved pursuant to the review of Phase I. The developer shall submit a noise study for review and approval by the Planning Commission separately for this feature. 62. The project shall meet all requirements of Zone Ordinance Amendment 91-020. 63. The Environmental Fees of the State Fish and Game Department and the County of Riverside shall be paid within 24 hours after review of the proposed by the Planning Commission and/or City Council. 64. The final working drawings shall be reviewed by the Design Review Board and Planning Commission prior to building permit issuance. Said plans shall include landscaping, irrigations, signing, addressing, street, mechanical, lighting, utility plans and materials. 65. All required improvements shall be completed prior to site occupancy of the proposed development. 66. Reciprocal access agreements shall be prepared and approved by the City Engineering and Director of Planning and Development which secures common on -site access systems between the property and the abutting properties to the north and south. 67. A day-care facility of 180 children (plus infant care) shall be permitted. The Applicant shall file a separate plot plan application which shall be reviewed, as required by Chapter 9.182 of the Municipal Zoning Code. The item will be a non -hearing application. CONAPRVL.029 11 r � a O C Z eA C 5 w !L e� � ! I I � I I �P o I f D I J ° I 1 ' i 1 f � J rs , i i t ' I I f I � I I I i 1 o. I- C hoQ oil I •a I ----------------------- `.--- ------- - - - - --- -- r� 0 U !!LL �I '1 6 LL CL LLJ cm F— r —d s-- — I m x VW-TW sso n o ADS v.M CAL mopzp TDEq MHUDEZU, ORMYN9 PgEcFinasonomAL pLQ9 °. C: ili coc G O yO � G " 7 v Z .14.E r, I 1� I i I�♦ 1 i�l FORK AEA Rims owi �E-�--� FORK AREA TEE MW /� SECL N© FLC•lL R PLAN P-WI t cn►j ram o s o a -a o Lt s.1 m9ff OPL9x MEMOC AL guoLDOHRE C OO WIPOG�Q�r'OOIn� O fin° Q EL MIRADCIR M MEDICAL CENTER PC7FESSIC]NAL PLAZA BKIDIr W/ < FEW& A FA m 7- r c'31 m . rn -0OC C. J iYt 0 7 rr FWAL ff.j Z � 4bOQDD 1�L�0O OG�3 P(� �. tn� v... To W" sso n O Lt 9. NI [n�6DD OG�L�C�{ �ilC�Co70G/QL� DMOt�DD O nM6 60O aPOL��l4�Co7 nM 0 N�iDGw F � �� �������������� I 1 pl�iii � � � I � f L.. '1L--' _---- - ' I '---__T'r---= ----- I I � I I I � I ;� �� � � i •, i 'I •' I , I , i � i I ;� = � ! _,� � � ! �� �, !� �• + t � t , �, .I ;I :. i !� . � � I �� . . I I �' I� i ,- ' � � :i 'i I i �� � I , � I •i ;I �I ' �I �'. ' I � 1 li �! ;I I I � I ' �I� � W � G �� I � i. �� � c �� �r � S � J �. ,'. � r= cn y , a �1 LLLLLL.1 � ' b i� ,, r. 1 A Xv 5 IL cc 1i �I PROGRAM Space inventory Summation The following program space listing was derived from d+scussions with hospital personnel, the physician survey, the market survey, and pmfesslonal experience. it represents the total space required for Phase One. Space Description S . PL 1 Physician Interest SAace (Medical Oiticesl a. Physician Survey 23,200 NSF b. Physician 110=11mOnt 6.000 NSF c. Cancer Care Center 6.000 M Sub -total 34,200 NSF 2 Anciii ry Services Spa-0 . a Ambulatory Surgery Center 11,822 GUSF b. Diagnostic imagingAinear Accelerator 14,172M c. Clinical laboratory 650 GG" d. Pharmacy e. Urgent Care Center 2-000 GUSF Subtotal 29,413 GUSF Medical Office Building Physician interest, Physician Recruftment, 34,200 NSF Cancer Care Center M NSF Pharmacy Urgent Care CenterIc 2�000 NSF Total Gross Usable Square Feet Affected by Efficiency Factor (83%) fx37,069 divided by .83 - (GROSS MOB SO FT)�® 44,661 GUSF Ambulatory Outpatient Building LAmbulatory Surgery Center 11,822 GUSF Diagnostic imaging Center/Linear Accelerator 72 14,S50 Clinica► laboratory GGUUSF — Total Gross Usable Square Feet Affected by Efficiency Factor (83%) 2fi,544 GUSF 26,544 divided by .83 - (AMBULATORY OUTPATIENT SM GROSS SQUARE FT.) 3t ,981 GSF Total Gross Building Square Feet 76,642 GSF Optional Ancillary Services 3,240 GUSF a. Physical Therapy/Cardiac Rehab NOTE: An assumed 83% efficiency factor was used for preliminary design purposes, this could vary based on final design considerations. Rasa 4 Henningson, Durham s Richardson, Im r ..+ LL1 y -�'� '�' e Z W � � V �- .+. �..! .- � _ �' r... :� �' C Z W Q U r m 2 x u� PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND GRANTING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27267 TO ALLOW THE TWO DEVELOPMENT LOTS. CASE NO. TPM 27267 - DESERT HOSPITAL WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 24th day of September, and the 8th day of October, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the resubdivision of 30 acres into 2 lots, generally located on the west side of Washington Street at Via Marquessa, more particularly described as: PORTION OF THE SOUTH 1/2 SECTION 30, T.6.S., R.7.E., S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, said tentative map has complied with the requirements of the "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended) and adopted by City Council Resolution 83-68, in that the Planning Director conducted an initial study, and has determined that the proposed tentative parcel map 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 Parcel Map 27267 thereby retaining 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 parcel map: 1. That Tentative Parcel Map 27267, as conditionally approved, is generally consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use, circulation requirements, zoning district development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. That the subject site is vacant. The proposed circulation design and lot layouts are consistent with City standards and the project has been conducted accordingly, therefore, suitable for the proposed land division. 3. That the design of Tentative Parcel Map 27267 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 not impact the existing public sewers and water improvements, and therefore, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. RESOPC.046 5. That the design of Tentative Parcel Map 27267 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 Parcel Map 27267, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape buffer areas and provides storm water retention. 7. That general impacts from the proposed tentative 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 correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment ( Categorical Exemption 15315, Class 15) relative to the environmental concerns of this Tentative Parcel Map; 3. That it does hereby approve the subject Tentative Parcel Map 27267 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 8th day of October, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: KATIE BARROWS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California RRSOPC.046 2 ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.046 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27267 - DESERT HOSPITAL OCTOBER 8, 1991 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Parcel Map 27267, 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. Provisions for rights -of -way and frontage road to be as noted in Plot Plan 91-465. 2. This Tentative Parcel 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. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire map, 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. 4. 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. 5. 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. 6. The subdivider shall make provisions for maintenance of all landscape buffer and storm water retention areas via one. of the following methods prior to final map approval: RESOPC.046 Planning Commission Resolution 91 Conditions of Approval October 8, 1991 a. Subdivider shall consent to the formation of a maintenance district under Chapter 26 of the Improvement Act of 1911 ( Streets and Highways Code, Section 5820, et seq.) or the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22600, et seq.) to implement maintenance of all improved landscape buffer and storm water retention areas. It is understood and agreed that the Developer/Applicant shall pay all costs of maintenance for said improved areas until such time as tax revenues are received from assessment of the real property. b . The Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department a Management and Maintenance Agreement, to be entered into with the unit/lot owners of this land division, in order to insure common areas and facilities will be maintained, with an unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs. The association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. The common facilities to be maintained are as follows: (1) Storm water retention system. (2) Perimeter parkway lot along Washington Street. (3) All common area landscaping. (4) All streets, including all street medians. 7. The appropriate Planning approval shall be secured prior to establishing any of the following uses: a. Temporary construction facilities including their appurtenant signage. 8. If buried remains or artifacts are encountered during development (including grading) , work shall be stopped and a qualified archaeologist shall be contacted immediately at Applicant's expense and appropriate mitigation measures shall be taken. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT: 9. 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. Washington Street - Major Arterial, 60-foot half width between north and south project boundaries; B . Washington Street Frontage Road, 50-foot full width between north and south site boundaries. The frontage road shall be realigned to eliminate the existing direct access to Washington Street south of the church. The frontage road right of way will generally be contiguous to the Washington Street right of way where possible. The precise alignment RESOPC.046 5 Planning Commission Resolution 91-_ Conditions of Approval October 8, 1991 will be determined by the City Engineer and approved by the City Council. 10. The City may elect to acquire the frontage road right of way between the south project boundary and Avenue 48. If the City does proceed with right of way acquistion, the Applicant shall be responsible for the first $25,000 of the legal and acquistion expense incurred by the City. 11. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback area of noted minimum width adjacent to the following street right of way: A.) Washington Street Frontage Road, 20-feet wide (westerly side only); 12. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Washington Street Frontage Road from the project site except for two locations as proposed by the Applicant and shown on the Access Scheme #3 drawing. 13. The frontage road separation island shall have no opening in it to permit direct vehicular access to Washington Street between Avenues 47 and 48, except as otherwise permitted elsewhere in these conditions of approval on an interim basis. Access to the frontage road from Washington Street shall be via the intersections at Avenues 47 or 48. 14. 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 with landscape improvements where required by city General Plan. Street design shall take into account the soil strength, anticipated traffic loading, and design life. 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: kESOPC.046 6 Planning Commission Resolution 91-_ Conditions of Approval October 8, 1991 A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1. Washington Street (limits are north and south site boundaries) Install half width Major Arterial improvements, refer to General :Plan Figure VII-2; 2. Washington Street Frontage Road (north site boundary to Avenue 48) Install 32-foot wide full width street improvements, refer to Std Dwg #106. 'The Applicant shall landscape the frontage road separation island in the area between the project site boundaries If the City does not acquire the right of way south of the south project boundary, the Applicant is responsible for only that portion of the frontage road contiguous to the project site; in which case, the Applicant shall install an interim connection between the frontage road and Washington Street. 15. Applicant is responsible for the cost to design and construct traffic signals at the following locations. A. Washington Street at Avenue 48 - 25% fair share responsibility; 16. 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 grading permit is issued. 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. 17. 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. 18. The tract grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit. 19. The site shall be designed and graded in a manner so the difference in building pad elevations between contiguous lots that share a common street frontage does not exceed three (3.0) feet. The pad elevations of contiguous lots that do not share a common street shall not exceed five (5.0) feet. RESOPC.046 Planning Commission Resolution 91 Conditions of Approval October 8, 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. 20. The tract shall be graded in a manner that permits storm flow in excess of the retention basin capacity to flow out off 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 at locations that has historically received flow. 21. Storm water run-off produced on -site in 24 hours by a 100-year storm shall be retained on site in landscaped retention basins designed for a maximum water depth not to exceed six feet. Off -site water that flows onto the site may outfall to the historic drainage routes provided the discharge does not encroach on the Washington Street or frontage road traveled ways. 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 City will consider and may approve other ground cover/slope stabilization plant life in lieu of grass on a case by case basis. The triburary drainage area for which the Applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of Washington Street. 22. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped setback area and frontage road separation island. 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. 23. 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. 24. Applicant shall landscape and maintain the landscaped setback area and right of way between the westerly frontage road curb and property line. 25. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the combined westerly parkway of Washington Street and easterly parkway of the frontage road in lieu of the standard six-foot wide sidewalk. A 6-foot wide sidewalk shall be constructed adjacent to the westerly frontage road curb within the site boundaries. RESOPC.046 8 Planning Commission Resolution 91 Conditions of Approval October 8, 1991 26. All existing and proposed telecommunication, television cable, and electric power lines with 12,500 volts or less, that are adjacent to the proposed site or on -site, shall be installed in underground facilities. 27. Underground utilities that He directly under street improvements or portions thereof shall be installed, with trenches compacted to city standards, prior to installation of that portion of the street improvement. A soils engineer retained by Applicant shall provide certified reports of soil compaction tests for review by the City Engineer. 28. 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. 29. 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. GENERAL 30. Approval of this map is subject to final approval of General Plan Amendment 91-037, Change of Zone 91-065, and Plot Plan 91-465. RESOPC.046 9 1 u . s+� r 1139 C= t11 O> 4 � G � 2 ,L MEMORANDUM 5 C�. o f ��p� TO: HONORABLE CHAIRWOMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1991 SUBJECT: SPECIFIC PLAN 84-004, AMENDMENT #1 - NORTH START CORP. TENTATIVE TRACT 25154 - VALLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT The Applicant has requested that this matter be tabled due to the uncertainty of the Pyramids project. At a future date and at the request of the Applicant, this matter will be rescheduled and reaavertised for public hearing. MEMOJH.146 DATE: CASE NO: STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 8, 1991 TENTATIVE TRACT 26769, CONDITION OF APPROVAL AMENDMENT APPLICANT: QUALICO DEVELOPMENT, INC. ENGINEER: GREG SHANNON REQUEST: .APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITION OF APPROVAL #43 FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 26769 WHICH SUBDIVIDES 20 ACRES INTO 14 CUSTOM SINGLE FAMILY LOTS. LOCATION: 'WEST SIDE OF MONROE STREET +1 / 2 MILE SOUTH OF 54TH .AVENUE (ATTACHMENT #1) ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: A PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION WAS PREPARED AND ADOPTED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 26769. NO EXTENSIVE CHANGES ARE PROPOSED; THEREFORE ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS NOT WARRANTED FOR THIS CHANGE OF CONDITION REQUEST. BACKGROUND: On May 28, 1991, the Planning Commission recommended approval of Tentative Tract 26769 to the City Council. Subsequently, the City Council approved Tentative Tract 26769 on June 18, 1.991. (See Attachment #2, approved Tentative Tract Map.) The Applicant has submitted a request to change Condition of Approval #43 regarding the sidewalk along Monroe Street (see Attachment #3, Applicant's letter) . Condition #43 presently reads as follows: "Applicant shall provide a bond for the construction of an eight foot meandering bike path modification of irrigation system in the westerly parkway and landscaped setback lot along Monroe Street in -lieu of the standard six foot wide sidewalk, to the satisfaction of the Engineering Department. " The Applicant has suggested the following amended condition. "Applicant shall construct an eight foot meandering bike path in the westerly parkway and landscaped setback lot along Monroe Street in -lieu of the standard six: foot wide sidewalk." PCST.019 ANALYSIS: The La Quinta Planning Commission originally recommended approval of Tentative Tract 26769 with Condition of Approval #43 worded as now requested by the Applicant. The La Quinta City Council changed this condition on June 18, 1991, when this tract was approved to include a requirement for sidewalk bonding and not require sidewalk construction with the initial tract improvement. The Applicant wishes, for cost reasons, to construct rather than bond for the sidewalk. In addition, temporary landscaping and irrigation systems would have to be installed. The Engineering Department has commented that they do not object to the sidewalk being constructed rather than bonded at this point in time. It should also be noted that a short portion of sidewalk, built prior to the adjoining sidewalks being installed is not a traffic hazard, as would be the case for a short stretch of median island. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 91- recommending to the City Council that Condition of Approval #43 be amended as follows: "The Applicant shall construct an eight foot meandering bike path in the westerly parkway and landscaped setback lot along Monroe Street in -lieu of the standard six foot wide sidewalk. Attachments: 1. Locality plan. 2. Tentative Tract 26769 3. Letter from the Applicant dated September 23, 1991 4. Draft Planning Commission Resolution 91- PCST.019 1 e Guam R:�7Gs wEs— ' Ga.] ----------- 0 ATTACHMENT No.. 1 i Ave. 53 1 Ave. 55 Ave. 54 ..............L Ave. 58 11 SITE ORTH ATTA LAMENT No. 2 • b •'� N A.V.N. 757-130-M6 J —II-aw7�: 11 11 V I 1 I 1 1 I Q �gQjl it ti i y I fit I ►' 'T Tz .�O1 \ .70 It'p 0. 101 t y �� T _ 30UMN I 1 9 -1 PUZAa ; a H-- N i mAP9AI C Pp M VV6 0 C�a=oZ gO mummp Z r Z��i Go o Z 11 a >P N Z 2hN 2 rr i• • a : Z $$� Mm L � .. via m m F. m m vi tip = $" 4'r��b a� m Wx g "n $ � S� nyZ ai >pt PP .�iy wnpj yH 1V D SEP PtNiNIlMG1 I GAINTA CJAL: CO DEVELI�PM7:14TS , INC. 74 596 PEPPER.'REE DPT,,,r PALM DESERT. CA.. 9226C SEPTEMBER 23, 199 C'IT-: nF LA tali:INTA �8-:^5 CAL:.E ESTADC 17% C:; ; NTACA . , 922.5: A:T`. PLAti:7.11G A1.14'O _F7_ _CD_ W"i- GT :.:�A LAIN.:. -PLANNER PT . Pe: Tract # 26769 - Tentative Map C;.a'.!co Developments :nc. App:ication for change of Condition 4 43 Dear C: enda . C^ Ju: :8,.QQ:. the C:t, Counc.:, at a pun' ic hear,ng, apprc:ec the anove prc;ect ;7:th the arnencr:ent cf ccnait:cn 4 13. as fc::ows: Cr:g:n.a: Con. C.t.on 43: App: i cart sha:: construct an eight foot mneander .ng n.:e paz :n the wester y pa.<:,•731 ana anuscapea sezzacK :of one •'^rr^e Str ee` : ^ : i e- of the s`anaard six foot �,' ce s.oe• a.". po•- - spn Conn ° t . on = -43 : App. iC=-t Sn3. . pro•. ce a Dona for "^e an eight foci meancering niKe path Tod. cation of .rr:gation s•,•stem in the .ester ,, and :andscapea setnac< :ct a:cng .:onroe Street in : ieu of the st-znaar:. six foot ;;iae SiaeWa;K, `o t�,e sat'sFaCt:On of the EnclineerI712 Department.. We sLnsequent:�:• examine: the consequences of this charge 'Doming instead of constructing now) and sent a :etter to Mayor Pena outlining our reasons for req::esting the restoration of the origina: cor.dition.c:etter a.tac^ed) S:,osequently ;re reviewea our conclusions with the P : ann i ng Staff and t►:e Sesi gn ana Review Boara ana ccnc : -.ded we shcu:d sunmit a request for a change of condition. A sum,..ar, of the reasons for this change follows: :) Cost Cua:ico oullds - Oualico pays - $ I.50'sq.ft. :,a OuIn*a ouilas - Cua:Ico bcnds/pays - $ 2.�5: sq.ft. 2) La:.dscape prowl ems: - ':emporary landscaping required - additional cost - More grass area - water conservation concerns - increased expense to Homeowners Association ':he concerns about the bike path being iso:ated in this area s:^.cuia take into account that 47e own other property on Monroe t':ract # 26768) which we intend to develop immediate'.,, after this pro,;ect is completed. ': here fcre. :7e v.culc respectfu::y request a change of conaltion x 43 to restore it`s original, �,aording as fol:o*as: �r.ca:nal Cora!t.cn # 43: Appl . c5nt sha:: construct an eight foot meandering .tee path In the westerly pa.-kvay anc :ancscapec setback lot a:ong Xonroe Street in lieu of the standard six foot wide sice�7a:�:. :lours ::-uly, �1 rat Chief Financial Officer Cual.cc Developments �.^.c. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT 26769 CONDITION OF APPROVAL CHANGE AND CONCURRENCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS. CASE NO. TT 26769 - QUALICO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY 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 to consider the request of Qualico Development to subdivide 20 acres into 14 custom single family lots generally located west of Monroe Street + half mile south of 54th Avenue, more particularly described as: SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 18th day of June, 1991, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the Applicant's request and recommendation of the Planning Commission concerning Tentative Tract 26769, and made findings and approved the application; and, 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 Tract Map 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 Tentative Tract 26769, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, WHEREAS, the owners, Qualico Development Company have made a request to change Condition of Approval #43; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing on the 8th day of October, 1991, 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 Condition of Approval change for said Tentative Tract Map: RESOPC.052 1. That Tentative Tract 26769, 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-1-20,000 Zoning District development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. That the subject site is fairly level with the southeast being the lowest part of the site. The proposed circulation design and single family lot layouts, as conditioned, are, therefore, suitable for the proposed land division. 3. 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. 4. That the design of Tentative Tract 26769 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 Tentative Tract Map 26769, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape common areas. 6. That the proposed Tentative Tract 26769, as conditioned, provides storm water retention, park facilities, and noise mitigation. 7. 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 Condition of Approval change for Tentative Tract 26769, 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 Environmental Assessment 91- 192, relative to the environmental concerns of this Tentative Tract 3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of Condition of Approval change for the subject Tentative Tract 26769 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 8th day of October, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: RESOPC.052 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: KATIE BARROWS, Chairwoman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.052 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT 26769 CONDITION OF APPROVAL AMENDMENT OCTOBER 8, 1991 GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Tract Map 26769 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 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. 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 assistants) / 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. CONAPRVL.013 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 26769 October 8, 1991 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO BE FULFILLED PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAL 4. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the Applicant shall meet the parkland dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.24.030, La Quinta Municipal Code, by paying parkland fees in lieu, as may be determined in accordance with said Section. 5. 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 final map approval. 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. 6. If the tract is phased, tract phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning and Development Department and Engineering Department prior to final map approval. 7. Applicant shall submit proposed street names with alternatives to the Planning and Development Department for approval prior to final map approval. 8. Design and architectural standards for the residences shall be submitted to the Planning Commission or Design Review Board for review and approval prior to final map recordation. All approved standards shall be included in the CC&R's. A copy of the CC&R's shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review. TRACT DESIGN 9. A minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be provide on Monroe Street. Design of the setback shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. Setback shall be measure 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. b . Setback areas shall be established as a separate common lot and be maintained as set forth in Condition No. 28, unless an alternate method is approved by the Planning and Development Department. 10. The tract layout shall comply with all the R-1 zoning requirements, including minimum lot size and minimum average depth of a lot. The minimum lot size to be recorded in a final map shall be 20,000 square feet. CONAPRVL.013 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 26769 October 8, 1991 WALLS, FENCING, SCREENING, AND LANDSCAPING 11. 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 activity. b . Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded by undeveloped portions of the site. 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. 12. 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. 13. Prior to final map approval, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning Department for review and approval a plan (or plans) showing the following: a. Landscaping, including plant types, sizes, spacing, location, and irrigation system for all landscape buffer and entry areas. Desert or native plans species and drought resistant planting material shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. Lawn 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. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO BE FULFILLED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 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.013 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 26769 October 8, 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. Dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of Monroe Street shall be limited to one story, not to exceed 22 feet in height. 17. 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. 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 Environmental Assessment 91-192 and Tentative Tract 26769, 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 91-192 and Tentative Tract 26769, 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 mitigating measures of Environmental Assessment 91-192 and Tentative Tract 26769. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES 19. The Applicant shall comply with all the requirements of the City Fire Marshal as stated in the memo dated March 19, 1991. CONAPRVL.013 4 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 26769 October 8, 1991 20. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CONDITIONS: 21. 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 . Monroe Street - Primary Arterial, 55 foot half width. 22. The Applicant shall provide a separate lot or lots for private road purposes to be owned in common by owners of the residential lots in the land division. The private road(s) shall conform to the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicant Specific Plans if any, and as required by the City Engineer, as follows: A. Lot B - Local Street, 37 foot full width. 23. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Monroe Street from all abutting lots. Access to Monroe Street from this land division shall be restricted to street intersections only. 24. Applicant shall provide a fully improved landscaped setback lot of noted width adjacent to the following street right of way(s) : A. Monroe Street, 20 feet wide (minimum) . 25. The Applicant shall provide 10 foot wide public utility easements on each side of the private road lot (s) . 26. Landscape and irrigation plans for the landscaped lot(s) shall be prepared in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, and City Engineer, and approved by same officials prior to construction. 27. Applicant shall maintain the landscaped areas of the subdivision such as the landscaped setback lots and retention basins until accepted by the City Engineer for maintenance by the homeowner's association of the subdivision. 23. Applicant shall construct, or enter into agreement to construct, the tract grading and public or quasi -public improvements before the final map is recorded. Applicant shall pay cash, in lieu of and equivalent to the respective construction cost, for those improvements which involve fair -share responsibility that must be deferred until the full complement of funding is available. Payment of cash in lieu of construction may be deferred to a future date mutually agreed by Applicant and City Engineer, provided security for said future payment is posted by Applicant. CONAPRVL.013 5 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 26769 October 8, 1991 29. The tract grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to final map approval. 30. 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 insure compliance with the plans, specifications, applicable codes, and ordinances. The engineer retained or designated by Applicant and charged with the compliance responsibility shall make the following certifications upon completion of construction: a) all grading and 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) the finished building pad elevations conform with the approved grading plans. 31. 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 feet. The pad elevations of contiguous lots within the subject tract that do not share a common street shall not exceed five feet. 32. The Applicant shall maintain wind erosion control at all times in all areas disturbed by grading. The Applicant's method of erosion control shall be of his choice provided the control results comply with the La Quinta Municipal Code. The .Applicant shall post sufficient security with the City prior to receiving a grading permit to ensure compliance of this requirement. 33. Applicant shall install a trickling sand filter and leachfield 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. 34. Applicant shall provide an Executive Summary Maintenance Booklet for the street, landscape irrigation, perimeter wall, and drainage facilities installed in the subdivision. The booklet should include drawings of the facilities, recommended maintenance procedures and frequency, and a costing algorithm with fixed end variable factors to assist the homeowner's association in planning for routine and long term maintenance. 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 zero inches per hour unless Applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. Other CONAPRVL.013 6 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 26769 October 8, 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. 36. Applicant shall retain storm water run-off from Monroe Street and "B" Street in a retention basin in the landscaped setback lot not to exceed 3 feet in depth. 37. The tract shall be graded in a manner that permits storm flow in excess of the retention basin capacity, caused by a storm event greater than the 100 year 24 hours event, to flow out of the tract through a designated emergency overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. Similarly, the tract shall be graded in a manner that anticipates receiving storm flow from adjoining property at locations that has historically received flow for those occasions when a storm greater than the 100 year 24 hour event occurs. 38. 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. 39. The access turning movements from Monroe Street to "B" street shall be limited to right turn in and out only. No median opening shall be permitted at this location. 40. 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. 41. 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 CONAPRVL.013 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 26769 October 8, 1991 tapered off -site street transitions that extend beyond tract boundaries and join the widened and existing street sections. 42. The following specific street widths shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted therewith: A. ON -SITE 'STREETS 1. "B" street - full width Local Street, 36 feet wide, refer to Std. Dwg. #105; the cul-de-sac bulb shall have a 45 foot curb radius. B . OFF -SITE STREETS 2. Monroe Street (portion contiguous to tract) - Install half width Primary Arterial (86 feet width improvement option), bond for half of raised median, refer to Std. Dwg. #100 43. The Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering bike path in the westerly parkway and landscaped setback lot along Monroe Street in lieu of the standard six-foot wide sidewalk. 44. Applicant shall provide a blanket easement that covers the entire landscaped setback lots for the purpose of providing a meandering public sidewalk. 45. Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to the Coachella Valley Water District for review and comment with respect to the District's Water Management Program. 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. 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. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured prior to constructing or joining improvements. CONAPRVL.013 Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 26769 October 8, 1991 51. All existing structures that are to be removed from the property shall be removed, or an agreement secured with a performance bond has been executed between Applicant and the city to assure said removal, prior to transmitting the final map -to the City Council for approval. MISCELLANEOUS 52. The Applicant shall construct a six foot block wall around the perimeter of the property. CONAPRVL.013 9 OCT 04 191 15:52 TO 5645617 FROM VALLEY LAND DEV. CO. T-184 P.01 FA CSIIV1 ME COVER SHEET City of La Quinta DA 10/4/91 kT N: Mr. Jerry Herman lR®f; Thomas A. Thornburgh TRVM, A/'�l , AX NUNMFR: y5r64-5617 RAMER OF P,A►GIES (INCIUDING COVER. PAGE): 3 Marilyn ,Kerney OPERATOR " '.. TELEPHONECEIVM • 4i0 11 ZI%V)I1UW, Public Hearing re nest to ;)e tabied unt;l further notice, 1R 25154. Public Hearing request to be extented to November 12, 1991, Pre -Annexation Zoning 91-068 General Plan 91-039 (145-Acres . Originals to be mailed this date. IF OCT 04 191 15,53 TO 5645617 FROM UALLEY LR14D DE'). CO. T-134 P.02 October 4, 1991 City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Attn: Mr. Jerry Herman Planning Director Re: Tentative Tract No. 25154 La Quinta, CA Dear Jerry: We request the following items be tabled until farther notice: ITEM: Specific Plan 84-004, Amendment #1 Tentative Tract 251.54, Amendment #1 APPLICANT; North Star Corporation and Valley Land Development Co. LOCATIOTl4 Northeast corner of Sagebrush Drive and Date Palm Drive Intersection ± 1.,320 feet East of Washington Street Very truly yours, VALLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT CO. �L'baVdilGL:i t�. -s�caV.t�aaaau,syFa President TATJmk cc: North Star McComas Properties VOIiA-h' LA ND DEYTCOMPAW42-600 COOK ST. / SUTE 160 1 RA.LM DESERT, CA 92260 / (610) 56f October 4, 1991 City of La Quinta P. 0. Fox 1504 La Quinta, CA 926253 Attn: Mr. Jerry Herman Planning Director Re: Pre -Annexation Zoning 145-Acres La Quinta, CA Dear Jerry: We hereby request a continuance on the following items: ITEM: Pre -Annexation Zoning 91-068 General Plan 91-039 APPLICANT: Valley Land Development Co. LOCATION: Northeast of Intersection Fred Waring Dr. and Washington street Public Hearing to be extended from October 8, 1991 to November 12, 1991 at the La Quints Planning Commission. 'Very truly yours, VALLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT CO. Thomas A. Thornburgh President TAT/Mk VLANDaEIVMELOWA NT PA42-600 COOK sT / SUITE 160 / PALM DESERT, CA 92260 / (619) 568-1 20'd 178T-i '03 '03(1 QNB- ,',3-nd i WO�Id LT99b99 0i 21=-:ST T61 b0 iD0 DATE: APPLICANT: PROJECT: LOCATION: BACKGROUND: STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OCTOBER 8, 1991 QUALICO DEVELOPMENT INC. SIGN ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION 91-153 (TT 26769 - SUBDIVISION SIGNS) EAST OF MONROE STREET SOUTH OF 54TH AVENUE 1. Tentative Tract 26769 comprises 14 single family lots on a 20 acre site. 2. The Design Review Board approved the landscape plans for this tract on August 7, 1991. 3. The applicant has proposed two permanent subdivision signs, on on each side of the entry into the project on the perimeter wall. 4. Each sign will be made of wrought iron painted jet black attached to the perimeter wall of the project. The signs are 2.2 feet high and extend over a length of 7.2 feet with an area of 15.8 square feet per sign. The signs will not be illuminated. 5. The applicant has made a sign adjustment application requesting two subdivision signs instead of one as is allowed by the Sign Ordinance. The applicant states "We are requesting the additional sign in order to facilitate good design balance and to ensure visibility to traffic moving both northbound and southbound". STAFF COMMENTS: 1. The Sign Ordinance allows for a sign adjustment application for additional signs. The reasons for approval should include "to compensate for inadequate visibility or to facilitate good design balance". 2. The applicant has stated that "we are requesting the additional sign in order to facilitate good design balance and to ensure visibility to traffic moving both northbound and southbound." STAFFRpr2.056/CS '1' 3. The signs are small and conservative and together add up to less than the maximum sign area allowed (32 square feet). In addition the sign lettering is attractive and well proportioned. 4. Staff therefore recommends approval of the additional sign to the Planning Commission. DESIGN REVIEW BOARD COMMENTS: The Design Review Board at a meeting held October 2, 1991, recommended approval of the two signs proposed for Tentative Tract 26769. RECOMMENDATION: Review the sign in conjunction with Staff comments and determine if they are acceptable or if revisions are needed. If acceptable approve adjustment to allow two signs by adoption of Minute Motion. Attachments: 1. Locality Plan 2. Location of Signs 3. Elevation of wall showing sign 4. Enlargement of sign lettering 5. Photographs showing rendering of proposed entry to the project. STAFFRPT.056/CS -2- a S►"T E LOCALITY PLAN ORTH CASEW. TT 26769 A TACHMENT No. 2 Zw 0 l >o aV) r 1 zo ctOv F E- O wN ry V \ `" W w c, N W aw a f- ss W 2 A awn � z w > + z i U a Ea-• Wco i I 1NtA'COM Ql a rl m ATTACHMENT No. 3 4c 3 0 ai 4 0 w Av a. W cn 121 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1991 PROJECT: TOECONSTRUCTED VBWOF CONR76 LOTS AIN TRACT TIONS R23269 FOUR UNITS TO APPLICANT: CENTURY HOMES LOCATION: LA QUINTA HIGHLANDS, LOTS 79-94, 96-148, 245-251, SOUTHWEST CORNER OF ADAMS STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE. THESE LOTS ARE LOCATED ON LAS VISTAS DRIVE, SANITA DRIVE AROSA WAY AND LA PALMA DRIVE. BACKGROUND: 1. Tract 23269 totaling 255 lots has been developed by a number c developers including Triad (original subdivider of whole tract La Quinta Vistas and Williams Company. 2. Century Homes has now purchased 76 lots and proposes four different housing units. _"r T^ORT . This table describes the four proposed units: PLAN 1 # Sq. Footage Unit 1006 # Sq. Ft. Bonus Area 205 # Sq. Footage Garage 591 PLAN 2 PLAN 3 PLAN 4 1262 1400 1567 0 206 165 410 608 556 # Stories 1 1 1 2 # Ditterent Elevations 3 3 3 # Bedrooms 2 3 3 3 # Bathrooms 1 2 2 3 # Family Rooms 0 1 1 1 # Car Garages 2 2 2 2 The applicant has proposed seven different color scheme combinations using two different roof tile colors, red/brown with splatter of grey and brown with a splatter of golden yellow. Five different alternate colors (brown, beige & off-white) have been proposed for facia and garage doors. STAFFRPT.055/CS -1- Seven alternate stucco colors are also shown (all desert shades). Seven accent colors including muted greens, blues and browns have also 'been indicated. The Spanish/Contemporary architectural style used, is similar to that used for the surrounding tracts. STAFF COMMENTS: 1. Front elevations are attractive and well proportioned 2. Side and rear elevations need to show more architectural detail, for example popouts around windows and attic vents, the latter particularly on right side elevation Unit #4 (required by Design Review Board). 3. Some sort of additional shading needs to be provided on the sides and rear of the buildings (required by Design Review Board). REAR: Increase overhang, in most cases the additional overhang for central window can be extended across the whole of the rear side. SIDE: Provide projections above windows, tinting or shutters. UPPER FLOORS, TWO STORY HOMES: Introduce a hip roof rather than a gable roof so overhangs can be provided on the sides of the building. 4. All units are 44 to 47 feet wide and therefore will fit on the smallest lots provided (60 feet wide). 5. There are no restrictions on two story units on the proposed lots. 6. The color scheme proposed includes desert colors including muted greens and blues for accent colors. A third roof tile could be provided (required by Design Review Board). STAFFRPTa0551C5 —2 DESIGIN REVIEW BOARD MEETING: On October 1, 1991, the Design Review Board reviewed the above project and recommended approval of the unit elevations subject to the following changes: - Show more detailing on the side and rear elevations - Increase shading on the rear and side of the buildings - The applicant shall resolve the shade problem of the 2nd story units in conjunction with staff - Provide a third roof tile RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion approve the elevations for the units as presented by Century Homes for 76 lots in Tract 23269 with changes as required by Design Review Board and staff. Attachment: 1. Locality Plan 2. Tract Map 3. Architectural Plans & Elevations Full scale architectural plans attached. STAF:FRPT.055/CS -3- 111111111 m TR 23269 o u1. Is Avv" i �y4'`' i toIa 04 ATTACHMENT No. 1 r�l r- • !: INoIO- stO*Ivrf rniIiItIIi, LOCATION MAP - !Its T-* ORTH •• 14, 0� 0 1 �z06ri92](,z/6�9Z�.;� avATTACHMENT No.'A ZR h, x W � M ►. tin, �� � V 1 On ^�" ^I •LIN\ b e a 7d kvwarr� �r k a �o v 37d—VYV�/., t t U � $° `� i O% P ��CL oq 1 M \ \ fm p4 �Al OF� O nr ' I A+ h q O Vol i► o �t a : I� � , 00 0 ! o a P h a b y N N N nj - a ZI W (,Z9 98G/j 6S'y96 P'G "F61s, Wd h •`E99F� ' 6 O/V Im 9 9F PeE/� L' ON J--7.9/fr .979 81�921) ZL 'VP. 9Z ATTA:--IMENT No. 3 EXAMPLES OF HOUSE DESIGNS AND ELEVATIONS B e,'` ,�: .:t4AMMAN 7..7�-d.VMaflu�t���ii•7^.�I4'`�NJ�",�!,;� .: � � i30 Cl— it . � � � � �� t o� � ! � �� � � s � � � � =� �! � S o 5, : { S � E � � � S J { � 4 � � ° � � Y o LL ! S H. '0 A a A A a A X 14 LL W ft.� -;5 oz- 0 NJ sr aX N-1 4 f 9 Ef I 2A Tjr.TT L_1 cL o �.' O �':'"'i`:Adtl:13Q.V1NN1t)tll t_ '%:S3NOH'Xaf11N3� z O a w J w Q w ' I IIIIIIIIII� ® Z I O n< : 1 pia O Q F- eyi0.a w _ LL w w J f .O. I $ VINVl Ir', S WON Aq ffin 21 . ' I/I �\ \/ \ � Z !E'L- 2 > LLI LIJ z 11 61 m z 0 0 > ° ( } Ed (D 1. LLJ § ) 0 El LL Ld \ Fri I ?C a c, z I {:Ell f II W O 1 > � A a L 13 41,LLJ S Cl J El F 0 W 1 LU W WLL �< -- I �•. 0 m�� � i a.. DiL 0 ` ' 1 I � , s.• O — �s �li I iT LL �• eC t �T t � �.:� � W K L W O � W 04 JaIiI� o N • .: a9 u if a a s y a a s y" 9 A a a .1 94e0 44e0 o•G9 W e 4'�7 9' 9� � o ol• LL R IS I Z� a- J + a= 0 0W J a' LL k > itx v r J LL IEll W = LL I CD W �, 8 C? ya a "esu8 I Q El > w J W F- LL W J c L' •.. - • ' : 687.0E ~f :4'�." "". �-� .�Y�+ . ` � f f. 1 • � ���' • S Via'- D1 � -.:i�a �a�tt an s: <��t� �'- : j �_ S3LLINfpyl01y0� 4 3t�;1�i1 1[(1� d Talk Yl ktk ,�� �1ai �allF A 1,1 a; hi :`5 i.ri•l�1�j >)jEp :�: �O as x x i a a a x a a a x A i i raeexaxea LL a� .a �Rri so° 0.49 q•0 ' op�� cl` of d � I NI��ti O�. _ . 89Z£Z91 - 1 . �. . N co1.. -na v NM vi • ISa 1Nnwwoo S3WOH.,kwu b L I �N anti �L A�a�/rd I / �aFdPr dL L v� z \ - O- O Q H _ O LLJ J W LU F- \ z Ld I Ir LL 'a Ir I - � - w1- a - — sP o- zLLJ ED Q z Q CL a cr O LL y� 0) z z O ! o u 44 J ' f-j > J L� J a w \ WLL O W I ,A IL :3 A 31 A 9 A A 9 d A :1 w A f A 0 tl 4 $ 9 4 # 0 P , c LL IV cr - C)q A A5 7 K W(L > 9L mom -C I jI. Ln 0 Z6 LILL errs I 4f w ix F, 7z 0- t z o co < z 0 (L pl, 1 nN or a�;od bSt'S ']NI S31tlIJOSStl '8 aviin9V NimmiH ii w J w a a w )r W O Ln E— S C7 W O F LL W J �i \ t Z :'- - L i - L f,a+sae � i 1 Z q W 0 O � H Q Q > * Z W Q J J W LL c. O O W � LLLL LLN 991.) y. Or N mtwi- -V La 0 V) C) Ir A. LLJ I LU IL F- z ir 0 cr LL 0 —J ZS L-L I W LL w -jI dVIInOv NIVJVFN30 V F N Z z ui LLJ CL it 0 cr 0 —i Ln ui 4 41 IL w toyi�;�1�!iiTjrjn C9lii�ij1��I]ji! ': t c :6 d d A A 4 $1 01 4 4 it Al A pal d 0 4 4 0 4 t 9 4 w m LL wi -1 Ld 0 =! -EE3 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1991 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 24545 APPLICANT: NORTHSTAR CALIFORNIA CORPORATION REQUEST: APPROVAL OF FIRST ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT MAP WHICH ALLOWS SUBDIVISION OF 269± ACRES INTO 276 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS. LOCATION: EAST OF WASHINGTON STREET AND SOUTH OF 48TH AVENUE WITHIN THE PYRAMIDS PROJECT BACKGROUND: This tract: is located within the Pyramids project, also known as Specific Plan 84-004 . The tract creates 276 single family lots, 6 golf course lots and various other street and landscape buffer lots. The tract creates lots on the westerly half of the specific plan area. To date only the golf course that runs within this tract area has been developed. ORIGINAL APPROVAL: This tentative tract was approved by the City Council on June 6, 1989, subject to conditions. Those conditions are attached for your review. Although some work has begun on the final map recordation, it has not been completed. Therefore, the Applicant's have requested this time extension. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: A Development Agreement has been recorded on the property. This Development Agreement allows development of the property in accordance with the provisions of Specific Plan 84-004, Parcel Map 20489 (now recorded) and Change of Zone 84-014. Any new Conditions of Approval for subsequent tract maps, etc. , must be consistent with the Conditions of Approval for the specific plan and other original approvals. In return the City receives a $40,000 per year payment consideration. ANALYSIS: Staff feels that there are no required changes necessary for this tentative tract map at this time. PCST.018 FINDINGS,: Findings I''or justification of a recommendation for approval of the First One Year Extension of Time for this tentative tract map can be made and are found in the attached Planning Commission Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: By adoption of attached Planning Commission Resolution 91- , recommend to the City Council concurrence of the First One Year Time Extension for Tentative Tract 24545. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Letter of request 3. Tentative Tract 24545 (reduced copy) 4. Draft Planning Commission Resolution 91- PCST.018 4.TH A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION September 6, 1991 Mr. Jerry Herman City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 Re: Tentative Tract Map 24545 First Extension Dear Mr. Herman: RECEIVt v SEP C 6 ,on. CIl V ul- rLM VUINTA °IANNING & DEVELOPMEW DEPT. Through our conversations of last week, it came to our attention that The Pyramids Tentative Tract Map 24545 expired June 6, 1991. Please .find enclosed our application for an extension for Tentative Tract Map 24545. Mr. Tom Thornburgh applied to the City of La Quinta for a revision to his Specific Plan and Development Agreement for Tract Map 25154, to incorporate his tract into The Pyramids development. We thought that Mr. Thornburgh, at the time of his request, made application for an extension to The Pyramids tract, along with payment of the required fee. We apologize for this confusion. We trust everything is now in order. Should there be any problems, please advise. We thank the City of La Quinta in advance for its cooperation and assistance with this matter. Sincerely, NORTH SITAR CALIF OI 41'mp COP PORATIO,. Pamela L. Dekany Development Coordinator enc. cc: Mr. David W. Beaver Mr. Tom Thornburgh w/o enc. Files 78371 HIGHWAY 111 LA OUINTA. CAUF13RNIA 92253 (8193 564-2500 FAX (67 9] 564-2057 CASE Nm CASE MAP LOCATION MAP Eel dZ SCALE: NTS �i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS, CONFIRMING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS, AND RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A FIRST ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 24545 WHICH ALLOWS THE CREATION OF A 276 LOT SUBDIVISION ON A +269 ACRE SITE. CASE NO. TT 24545, EXT. #1 - NORTHSTAR CALIFORNIA CORPORATION, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California did on the 23rd day of May, 1989, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing and recommended to the City Council approval of said tentative tract request of Northstar California Corporation, Inc. , to subdivide 269+ acres into 276 single family development lots, generally located east of Washington Street, north of 50th Avenue, south of 48th Avenue, and west of Jefferson Street, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 31, AND PORTIONS OF SECTION 32, TOWNSHIPS SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, S.B.B.M. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 6th clay of June, 1989, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the Applicant's request and recommendation of the Planning Commission concerning the Environmental Analysis and Tentative Tract Map 24545 and approved said application; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of October, 1991, recommend approval of a One Year Extension of Time for Tentative Tract 24545, to the City Council; and, 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 a Negative Declaration has been certified and the proposed tentative tract Time Extension will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and, WHEREAS, at said meeting, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said tentative tract map extension: 1. That Tentative Tract 24545, as conditionally approved, is generally consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan in that the proposal complies with the requirements, R-2 zoning district development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. RESOPC.051 2. That the topography of the site is suitable for the proposed land division, circulation design, and single-family lot layouts. 3. That the design of Tentative Tract 24545 may cause substantial environmental damage or injury to the wildlife habitat of the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard, but mitigation measures in the form of fees for a new habitat area will mitigate this impact. 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 24545 will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access and for use have been provided that are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public. 6. That the Tentative Tract 24545, as conditioned, provided for adequate maintenance of the landscape buffer areas. 7. That the Tentative Tract 24545, as conditioned, provided storm water retention, park facilities, and noise mitigation. 8. That general impacts from the tentative tract were considered within the MEA prE�pared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan and the prior EIR with addendum. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map Extension, the Planning Commission has considered the effect of the contemplated action on the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing the needs against the public service rLeeds 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 Planning Commission in this matter; 2. That it does hereby confirm the environmental determination relative to the environmental concerns for this Tentative Tract Time Extension; and, 3. That it does hereby recommend approval of Tentative Tract 24545 Time Extension subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8th day of October, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: RESOPC.051 2 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: KATIE BARROWS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.051 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT 24545 OCTOBER 8, 1991 A. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. The Applicant/Developer shall comply with Exhibit "B", the Conditions of Approval for Specific Plan 84-004, and the following conditions, which conditions shall take precedent in the event of any conflict with the provisions of the Specific Plan conditions. 2. Tentative Tract Map No. 24545 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 3. This Tentative Tract 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. 4. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering a City-wide Landscape and Lighting District and, by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in the District and to offer for dedication such easements as may be required for the maintenance and operation of related facilities. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis, as required by law. 5. The Developer of this subdivision of land 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. 6. Per Condition No. 11 of the Specific Plan Conditions, the Applicant/Developer shall provide the following improvements as requested by Sunline Transit: o A bus turnout and passenger waiting shelter shall be provided on Washington Street. The shelter could be built by the Developer or the Developer may make arrangements with Frank Jones and Sunrise Media to install a shelter with advertising. Maintenance is the responsibility of the Developer. o Sunline has suggested standards for bus turnouts and passenger waiting shelters and are willing to work with the City and the Developer to create a mutually -acceptable design. MR/CONAPRVL.058 -1- Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 24545-Extension #1 October 8, 1991 7. Per Condition No. 15 of the Specific Plan, the Applicant/ Developer shall construct road lots A, F, I, L, and R with a minimum 36-foot pavement width, the rest of the private roads shall be constructed With a minimum 32-foot pavement. 8. Per Condition No. 34 of the Specific Plan, the Applicant/Developer shall comply with the Fire Marshal's requirements: a. Schedule A fire -protection -approved Super fire hydrants, (6" X 4" X 2-1/2" X 2-1/2") shall be located one at each street intersection, spaced not more than 330 feet apart in any direction, with no portion of any frontage more than 165 feet from a fire hydrant. Minimum fire flow shall be 1,000 GPM for two hours duration at 20 PSI. b. 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. 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." C. 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. d. Lots "N", "O", and "S" exceed the maximum allowable length for dead-end roads and shall be provided with a connecting through road so that cul-de-sac does not exceed 1,320 feet; or require fire sprinkler systems on those houses along the cul-de-sacs, subject to final approval by the Fire Marshal. e. Cul-de-sacs shall provide a minimum 45-foot curb -to -curb radius turnaround. f. Entry streets constructed with gates and without 24-hour guard staffing shall be power operated and equipped with a Fire Department override system. Gates shall be operable during power failures by human hands without special knowledge or force. MR/CONAPRVL.058 -2- Conditions of Approval Tentative Tract 24545-Extension #1 October 8, 1991 g. Medians constructed at entry streets shall have a minimum setback of 30 feet from the curb face of the connecting streets. h. Driveways for lots 68, 90, 92, and 127 shall be improved to withstand the loads of fire apparatus, and provide a minimum unobstructed width of 20 feet. i. A permanently mounted, illuminated address monument shall be installed adjacent to the driveway entrances for Lots 68, 90, 92 and 127. j. Requirements during phasing: The road improvements shall be constructed as required with each phase so that dead-end streets do not exceed 1,320 feet in length. k. Prior to the issuance of building permits, Applicant/Developer shall deposit a sum of $100,000 as prepayment of fire mitigation fees. 1. An emergency vehicle control override system shall be installed on each traffic signal that the Applicant/Developer is required to install or alter. Installation shall meet the specifications and approval of the Road and Fire Departments. M. if public -use -type building(s) are to be constructed, additional fire protection may be required. The fire flows and hydrant locations will be stipulated when building plans are reviewed by the Fire Department. MR/CONAPRVL.058 -3- STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1991 APPLICANT: A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION, INC. OWNER: NEWCO DEVELOPMENT COMPANY CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT 23995 PROJECT: APPROVAL OF FIRST ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION REQUEST: AREA BETWEEN WASHINGTON STREET, MILES AVENUE, ADAMS STREET, & THE WHITEWATER CHANNEL (SEE ATTACHMENT #1) E'NVIRONM:ENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE LA QUINTA PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PREVIOUSLY COMPLETED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 88-099 ON THE PROPOSED TRACT AND MITIGATION MEASURES WERE ATTACHED TO THE APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT. THE REQUEST FOR TIME EXTENSION TO THIS PROJECT WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY NEW IMPACTS NOT CONSIDERED IN THE ORIGINAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSAL IS EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT TO SECTION 1506 (B). PROJECT DESCRIPTION: TENTATIVE TRACT 23995 IS A COMMERCIAL (7.53 ACRES)/MULTI FAMILY (38 ACRES/736 UNITS) SINGLE FAMILY UNIT PROJECT (78 ACRES) ON A TOTAL OF 133 ACRES. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: G-P GENERAL COMMERCIAL; HIGH DENSITY (12-16 UNITS/ACRE) AND LOW DENSITY (4-8 UNITS/ACRE) EXISTING ZONING: GENERAL COMMERCIAL; R-3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL) AND R1 (ONE FAMILY DWELLING RESIDENTIAL) BACKGROUND: 1. The following applications have been submitted and approved for this site: - General Plan Amendment 88-021 introducing commercial and high density residential use to this area; STAFFRPT.053/CS -1- - Change of Zone 88-035 changing the zone from Single Family Residential to Commercial, high density residential and leaving the remainder as Single Family Residential; - Specific Plan 88-012 and; - Tentative Tract 23995. 2. All of the above applications were approved by City Council on September 6, 1989. 3. A Tentative Parcel Map (TPM 26860) for this project dividing the commercial multi family and single family residential areas into separate lots was approved by the Planning and Development Director on August 22, 1991. 4. This Extension of Time request is for Tentative Tract 23995. The Specific Plan for this project (SP 88-012) has a condition which states the following: "Condition #6: Specific Plan 88-012 shall expire on the same date as Tentative Tract 23995 expires. Approval of Extension of Time for Tentative Tract 23995 shall constitute Extension of Time for Specific Plan 88-012. ANALYSIS: 1. The Engineering Department has stated that they do not require any Conditions of Approval revisions for Tentative Tract 23995. 2. Comments on this Extension of Time request were received from Southern California Gas and CVWD. These were the same comments that were previously made when the Tentative Tract was originally approved. 3. Planning Department does not require any Condition of Approval changes for this Extension of Time request. 4. Stuff therefore recommends that Tentative Tract 23995, First Extension of Time, be approved with the attachment of the existing Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS: Findings for recommendation of approval of Tentative Tract 23995; First Extension of Time can be found in the attached Planning Commission Resolution. STAFFRPT.053/CS -2- RECOMMENDATION• By adoption of the attached Planning Commission Resolution 91- , recommend to the City Council concurrence with the Environmental Analysis and approval of Tentative Tract 23995, First Extension of Time subject to the attached conditions and Specific Plan 88-012, subject to the original conditions of approval. Attachments: 1. Locality Plan 2. Tentative Tract 23995 3. Letter from California Department of Transportation 4. Planning Commission Resolution 91-_ including Conditions of Approval STAFFRPT.053/CS -3- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 88-099 AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23995 FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME CASE NO. TT 23995, FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME APPLICANT: A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of A.G. Spanos Construction, Inc. to subdivide 132.5 acres into one commercial lot, three high density residential lots, and 300 single-family development lots, generally located between Washington Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash, La Quinta, excluding the small triangular area just north of the Wash and just south of the east/west Avenue 46 alignment (Westward Ho Drive), more particularly described as: THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 6th day of September 1989, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the Applicant's request and recommendation of the Planning Commission concerning Tentative Tract: 23995 and made findings to justify the approval of the application; and, 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 has 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 incorporated into the approval conditions for Tentative Tract 23995, First Extension of Time thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, WHEREAS, the applicant, A.G. Spanos Construction Inc. have applied for this first extension of time for Tract 2399:5, in accordance with Section 13.16.230 of the La Quinta Municipal Code relating to time extension on tentative maps First Extension of Time; and, RESOPC.025/CS -1- WHEREAS, at said Public meeting, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map, First Extension of Time: 1. That Tentative Tract No. 23995, 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, C-P, R-2A, and R-1 zoning district development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. That the subject site has a rolling topography because of the sand dunes, with the overall slope going from the north to the south of the property. The proposed circulation design and lot layouts, as conditioned, are, therefore, suitable for the proposed land division. 3. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 23995 may cause substantial environmental damage or injury to the wildlife habitat of the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard, but mitigation measures in the form of fees for a new habitat area will lessen this impact. 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 No. 23995 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 No. 23995, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape buffer areas. 7. That the proposed Tentative Tract No. 23995, as conditioned, provides storm water retention, park facilities, and noise mitigation. g. That general impacts from the proposed tract were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan. RESOPC.025/CS -2- WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, First Extension of Time, 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 No. 88-099 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 No. 23995, First Extension of Time and Specific Plan 88-012 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 8th day of October, 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: KATIE BARROWS, Chairperson City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California RESOPC.025/CS -3- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 91- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED TENTATIVE TRACT 23995, FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME OCTOBER 8, 1991 A. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 23995 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 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. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering a City-wide Landscape and Lighting District and, by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in the District and to offer for dedication such easements as may be required for the maintenance and operation of related facilities. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis, as required by law. 4. The City shall retain a qualified archaeologist with the developer paying all costs. The archaeologist retained shall prepare a mitigation and monitoring plan for artifact location and recovery. Prior archaeological studies for site CA-RIV-2200 such as MF-1027 and UCRARU#970, as well as other unrecorded information, shall be analyzed prior to the preparation of the plan. The plan shall be submitted to the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society (CVAS) for a two -week review and comment period. At a minimum, the plan shall: 1) identify the means for digging test pits; 2) allow sharing the information with the CVAS; and 3) provide for further testing if the preliminary results show significant materials are present. The final plan shall be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for final review and approval. BJ/CONAPRVL.010 - 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 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 divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby 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 analysis to be prepared and published and submitted to the Planning and Development Department. 5. The Developer of this subdivision of land 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. Traffic and Circulation 6. The Applicant shall construct or bond for half street improvements to the requirements of the City Engineer and the La Quinta Municipal Code, as follows: BJ/CiONAPRVL.010 - 2 - a. Washington Street shall be constructed to City standards for a 120-foot right-of-way width (Major Arterial), with a curb -to -curb width of 96 feet, with a 12-foot bike/ sidewalk, and two -percent cross slope to centerline, plus joins. b. Miles Avenue shall be constructed to City standards for a 110-foot right-of-way width (Primary Arterial), with an 18-foot raised median island, six-foot sidewalk, and two -percent cross slope to centerline, plus joins. C. The street identified as Lot S on Exhibit A (Tentative Tract Map) shall be designed for a 72-foot right-of-way. d. The Applicant shall construct all private street improvements to the requirements of the City Engineer and the La Quinta Municipal Code. e. The interior public street system shall be designed pursuant to the approved Exhibit A (tract map) for TT 23995. The cul-de-sac streets shall be designed for a 50-foot right-of-way with 36-foot width curb -to -curb. A five-foot utility easement shall be granted on each side of the 50-foot right-of-way. All other streets shall have a 60-foot right-of-way, a six-foot sidewalk, and two -percent slope. Any variations to the approved street system design sections shall be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. 7. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured prior to constructing or joining improvements (i.e., County of Riverside). 8. The Applicant shall participate in the construction or bond for the construction of Adams Street low water crossing of the Whitewater Channel, subject to the requirements of the City Engineer. BJ/CIDNAPRVL.010 - 3 - B. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO BE FULFILLED PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAL 9. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the Applicant shall submit a proposal to the Planning Commission, for recommendation to the City Council, for meeting parkland dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.24.030, La Quinta Municipal Code. The proposal for dedication, fee -in -lieu, or combination thereof shall be based upon a dedication requirement of 2.63 acres in the single-family residential area, as determined in accordance with said Section. 10. The Applicant shall provide sufficient parkland in the multi -family residential area in accordance with Government Code Section 66477 and Section 13.24.030 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 11. 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. 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 and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques so as to avoid the isolated appearance given by walled developments. A wall shall be provided around the multi -family residential area in accordance with the above study. 12. 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. 13. The subdivider shall make provisions for maintenance of all landscape buffer and storm water easements via one of the following methods prior to final map approval: a. Subdivider shall consent to the formation of a maintenance district under Chapter 26 of the Improvement Act of 1911 (Streets and Highways Code, Section 5820 et seq.) or the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22600 et seq.) to implement maintenance of all improved landscape buffer and storm water retention areas. It is understood and agreed that the BJ/CONAPRVL.010 - 4 - Developer/Applicant shall pay all costs of maintenance for said improved areas until such time as tax revenues are received from assessment of the real property. b. The Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department a Management and Maintenance Agreement, to be entered into with the unit/lot owners of this land division, in order to insure common areas and facilities will be maintained. A unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs. The association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. The common facilities to be maintained are as follows: (1) Storm water easements. (2) Twenty -foot perimeter parkway lot along Washington Street (3) Twenty -foot perimeter parkway lot along Miles Avenue. 14. Prior to recordation of a final map, 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. 15. The Applicant shall coordinate with Sunline Transit and the City to provide a future bus turnout and shelter location on Washington Street. A bus turnout shall be provided for in the approved street improvement plans, and shall either be constructed with those improvements for bonded for. Appropriate bonding shall be provided in lieu of a completed bus stop shelter, until such time as service is provided by Sunline. Grading and Drainage 16. The Applicant shall submit a grading plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer who will be required to supervise the grading and drainage improvement construction and to certify that the constructed conditions at the rough grade stage are as per the approved plans and grading permit. This is required prior to final map approval. BJ/CIONAPRVL.010 - 5 - Certification at the final grade stage and verification of pad elevations is also required prior to final approval of grading construction. 17. The Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping, and irrigation plans to Coachella Valley Water District for review and comment with respect to CVWD's water management program. 18. A thorough preliminary engineering geological and soils engineering investigation shall be done and the report submitted for review along with the grading plan. The report's 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. 19. Any earthwork on contiguous properties requires a written authorization from the owner(s) (slope easement) in a form acceptable to the City Engineer. 20. Drainage disposal facilities shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of the City Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of any drainage fees required therewith. All drainage easements must be shown on the Final Tract Map. 21. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of TT 23995 and EA 88-099, which must be satisfied prior the 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 Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of this TT 23995 and EA 88-099, 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 Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining conditions of approval and mitigation measures of this TT 23995 and EA 88-099. The Planning Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. BJ/CONAPRVL.010 - 6 - Traffic and Circulation 22. Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the Public Works Department: a. The Applicant shall dedicate all necessary public street and utility easements as required, including all corner cutbacks. b. The Applicant shall submit street improvement plans that are prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements, including traffic signs and markings and raised median islands (if required by the City General Plan), shall conform to City standards as determined by the City Engineer and adopted by the La Quinta Municipal Code (three-inch AC over four -inch Class 2 Base minimum for residential streets). C. Street name signs shall be furnished and installed by the Developer in accordance with City standards. 23. Applicant shall dedicate, with recordation of the tract map, access rights to Washington Street, Miles Avenue, and Adams Street for all individual parcels which front or back-up to those rights -of -way. Tract Design 24. A minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be required along Washington Street and Miles Avenue. Design of the setbacks shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. Setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way lines. a. The minimum setbacks may be modified to an "average" if a meandering or curvilinear wall design is used. b. Setback areas shall be established as a separate common lot and be maintained as set forth in Condition No. 13, unless an alternate method is approved by the Planning and Development Department. 25. The tract layout shall comply with all the C-P, R-3 as specified in Specific Plan No. 88-012, and R-1 zoning requirements, including for the R-1 zone minimum lot size and minimum average depth of a lot. The minimum R-1 lot size to be recorded in a final map shall be 7,200 square feet. BJ/CIDNAPRVL.010 - 7 - Walls. Fencing, Screeninq, and Landscapin 26. 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 grading and site development. These shall include, but not be limited to: a. The use of irrigation during any construction activities; b. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and/or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with the 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. 27. 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. 28. Prior to final map approval, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division for review and approval a plan (or plans) showing the following: a. Landscaping, including plant types, sizes, spacing, locations, and irrigation system for all landscape buffer areas. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting materials shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required walls. C. Exterior lighting plan, emphasizing minimization of light and glare impacts to surrounding properties. BJ/CONAPRVL.010 - 8 - 29. Prior to final map approval, the subdivider shall submit criteria to be used for landscaping of all single-family individual lot front yards. At a minimum, the criteria shall provide for two trees and an irrigation system. C. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO BE FULFILLED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 30. 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 Marshal o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o Planning and Development Department, Planning Division o Coachella Valley Water District o Desert Sands Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above -mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 31. 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. 32. The Applicant shall comply with the following: a. No buildings in the multi -family area within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of Washington Street and Miles Avenue shall be higher than one story. BJ/CONAPRVL.010 - 9 - b. Seventy-five percent of R-1 zone dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of Miles Avenue shall be limited to one story, not to exceed 20 feet in height. The Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department for approval a drawing showing the location of any single-family units higher than one story located along Miles Avenue frontage. 33. 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. 34. In the R-1 zone, if a specific dwelling product is envisioned or if groups of lots are sold to builders prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant/ Builder shall submit complete detail architectural elevations for all units. The Planning Commission will review and approve these as a Business Item. The basic architectural standards shall be included as part of the C.C. & Rs. 35. The residential plot plan for the R-3 (multi -family) zone shall show 6.45 acres (based on 736 proposed units) of private open space within the development which is usable for active recreation space in accordance with Section 13.24.030 of the La Quinta Municipal Code and Government Code Section 66477. Traffic and Circulation 36. The Applicant shall pay a 25 percent share of all fees necessary for signalization costs at the corner of Washington Street and Miles Avenue, and 50 percent of signalization costs at the multi-family/commercial area access point onto Miles Avenue and 25 percent of the signalization costs at the intersection of Miles Avenue and Adams Street. BJ/CONAPRVL.010 - 10 - Public Services and Utilities 37. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal. 38. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District, including those related to the storm water channel. Any necessary parcels for District facility expansion shall be shown on the final map and conveyed to the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. BJ/CONAPRVL.010 - 11 - /r. ATTACHMENT No. 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY LA QUINTA 0 4c W W c y c J d t � MILES AVENUE Illltlllllilllllitlllllllii •' ..... .......'.'.'..'�'"'������������'��r'r' ttt'' . Haro LOCATION MAP CASE No. GPA 88-021 CZ 88-035 SP 88-012 .-- TT 23995 FIRST- TtM6c Ex tf�tS t oN INDIO TW ORTH SCALE : NTS q :N °If Lvr� ATTACHMENT No, 2 11 f AI'Ctt, 2 Ar:.ft 8 j et 81.at x i i'+r )w , .61 e fie` , ,r - — w ram. ,°, - � _ • � , y1 .. I,!pUI'Ulul',dIL'd;uUl1P� ., � .; , % i °! ►° / ee � �' / A G >!- •1 Zset/ Jet If 'fl j 3 8s It • / ji i li IJ 1 ' A 1 • � F � y � l It / �� ' �2W,y � �.� G� •t� 'E4: �_ _ J c Il�t y f ir�t 8xi1 S33e �FVA 1ltl tl t :!t! iiti �31� %LO 11h �:s y€ ^uY�79MLai Hlu. C W W s .yy':' Co i :3 ! e ii x m a- , ':F� 8B<• �Y3 » CG Y >3"$ ge.r ` t��'Y � C _ :4 Z513JIM- s C' a' �l1 1P :Frl1 E �: ... N 1� I. i dUitlll I I plillllll ,[ rn'nrrlrms �• A I F lu.ml� uuuc � Q n W I" Imur I� W f ti •iTU1111 xty i I Y'1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, TRANSPORTATION AND HOUSING AGENCY PETE WILSON, Govem DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DISTRCT 11. P.O. BOX 854M, SAN DIEGO, 921 W606 ATTACHMENT No. 3 -� V(t(;t1WtL* '- . (619) 688-6968 SEP 0 3 1991 CITY UM LA yUINTA 1 5 Ifr^ P, f�rtl'L�PF.'�IUT nE� August 29. 11-RIV-111 Washington Street T[' 23995 City of La Quinta Planning Division 78-105 Calle Estado P. O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Attn: Ms. Glenda Lairis We have reviewed TT 23995 First Extension of Time. We offer the following comments: A traffic study should be prepared for this development which identifies impacts and appropriate mitigation. The study should include a discussion of phasing. if appropriate. to ensure that the development does not cause congestion prior to the highway improvements being put in place. It should be noted that Caltrans has studies currently underway to identify potential needs and improvements on State Route 1 I 1 (SR-111) and Interstate 10 (I-10) in this area. The proposed improvements would be funded by the local agencies. Future coordination on this project should be with Allen Kosup, Chief. Local Assistance Branch at (619) 688-3392. If you have any questions concerning our comments please contact Jim Buksa. of our staff. at (619) 688-6968. JESUS M. GARCIA District Directpr By BILL DILLON, Chief System Planning Branch cc: CRWest AKosup JBuksa T/P File STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1991 PROJECT: TENTATIVE TRACT 24890, EXTENSION #1 APPLICANT: J. M. PETERS COMPANY, INC. ENGINEEIR: MORSE CONSULTING GROUP REQUEST: APPROVAL OF FIRST ONE YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR BALANCE OF TENTATIVE TRACT WHICH DIVIDES 404+ ACRES INTO 392+ RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN THE R-2 ZONE. LOCATION: AREA GENERALLY BOUNDED BY 52ND AVENUE ON THE SOUTH, JEFFERSON STREET ON THE EAST AND CALLE RONDO ON THE WEST, WITHIN OAK TREE WEST SPECIFIC PLAN AREA. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THIS TENTATIVE TRACT MAP WAS DETERMINED TO BE PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED DURING CONSIDERATION OF SPECIFIC PLAN 85-006 (OAK TREE WEST). THEREFORE NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION IS DEEMED NECESSARY. BACKGROUND: This tentative tract which allows 377 detached custom single family units and 188 duplex units, was approved by City Council at their meeting of October 17, 1989, subje--t to a number of conditions. This tract is the northern part of the Oak Tree West Specific Plan project that was approved in 1985 as Specific Plan 85-006. The Citrus Golf Course runs through the tract with the clubhouse for this golf course located near the northeast corner of the property. The golf course and clubhouse are owned by Landmark Land Company. To date all of the tentative tract (9 phases) with the exception of a small area at the northern end of Park Avenue has been recorded. The unrecorded portion consists of three custom single family lots and two duplex lots which will eventually house 34 units. To date only the model units have been completed. ANALYSIS: Staff believes that there are no required changes necessary for this tentative tract map extension at this time. FINDINGS: :Findings for justification of a recommendation for approval of the First One Year Extension of Time for this tentative tract map can be made and are found in the attached Planning Commission Resolution. PCST.020 1 RECOMMENDATION: By adoption of attached Planning Commission Resolution 91- , recommend to the City Council concurrence of the First One Year Time Extension for Tentative Tract 24890. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Letter of request 3. Tentative Tract 24890 4. Drslft Planning Commission Resolution 91- PCST.020 2 CASE MAP CASE- No. TT 24890 VAR 89-01 LOCATION MAP i • 0 n 0 �• n i o ® • • n o • e • • 0 e • o • • D D • der` � . `:A0ATA i' • 9 ORTH SCALE: NTS 11 .,,ATE August 20, 1991 Mr. Fred Bouma The City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 :Re: Tentative Tract Map #24890 :Dear red: , On / al of the J.M. Peters Company, Inc., I would like to request an( tte Sion of Tenter a Tract Map-24890. The map expires on Oct er 1, 1991. jSialdete y, RECEIM) i "Karl KrLtzer Vice President CITY OF LA UUINTA :KK/cw 'TANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 005182 10 46695 iO-Oi-9i W CASH i TOTAL i T5.0 12526 Hiqh Elluff Dr. Suite G80 San Diego. Cahfornra 92130 (619) 481-0800 RESOLUTION NO. 91- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS AND GRANTING APPROVAL OF FIRST YEAR ONE TIME EXTENSION FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 24890 TO CREATE A 392 RESIDENTIAL LOT SUBDIVISION ON A +404 ACRE SITE. CASE NO. TT 24890, FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME J. M. PETERS COMPANY WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the city of La Quinta, California did on the 12th Day of September, 1.989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of J.M. Peters Company, Inc. to divide 404+ acres into 657 lots (564 residential units) in the R-2 and C-P-S (change of zone to R-2 under consideration) zone, generally located at the northwest intersection of 52nd Avenue and Jefferson Street, more generally described as: Portions of the south half of the north half and the south half of Section 5, T5S, R7E, SBBM. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 17th day of October, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the Applicant's request and recommendation of the Planning Commission concerning the Tentative Tract Map No. 24890; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8th day of October 1991, did consider a request for the first one year extension of time; and, WHEREAS, said Tentative Map Time Extension 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 that this Tentative Tract Map has previously been assessed during consideration of Specific Plan No. 85-006; and WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Tentative Tract No. 24890 and Specific Plan NO. 85-006, 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 recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map, Time Extension: CS/RESOPC.026 - 1 - 1. That Tentative Tract No. 24890, as conditionally approved, is consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use density, circulation requirements, proposed zoning district development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance and the La Quinta Municipal Code. 2. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 24890 will not cause substantial environmental damage or injury to the wildlife habitat. 3. That the proposed subdivision, as conditionally approved, will be developed with adequate sewer, water, drainage, and other utility systems, and, therefore, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 4. That the proposed Tentative Tract No. 24890, as conditioned, will provide for adequate maintenance of all common areas and facilities, including the internal private street system, stormwater retention areas, and common landscaped areas. 5. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 24890 will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through the project, since alternate easements for access and for use will be provided, which are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public. 6. That general impacts from the proposed tract were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan, and were further considered during preparation of Environmental Assessment for Specific Plan No. 85-006. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map Time Extension, the Planning Commission has considered the effect of the contemplated action of the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing the needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with 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 Planning Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the subject Tentative Tract Map No. 24890, Time Extension for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. CS/RESOPC.026 - 2 - PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a of the La Quinta City Council, held on this 8th 1991, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California regular meeting day of October, KATIE BARROWS, Chairperson City of La Quinta, California CS/RESOPC.026 - 3 - RESOLUTION NO. 91- COND:ITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE TRACT 24890, OCT013ER 8, 1991 - PROPOSED FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME GENERAL 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 24890 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. Design and improvement of Tentative Tract 24890 shall be in substantial conformance with Exhibit A, except where there are conflicts between these conditions and said Exhibit, these condition(s) shall take precedence. 3. This Tentative Tract 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. 4. All applicable requirements and conditions of Specific Plan No., 85-006, as amended shall be met as stipulated in City Council Resolution NO. 89-76 (or current resolution). 5. Existing power poles shall be undergrounded as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code Section 13.28.090. 6. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the appropriate Planning approval shall be secured prior to establishing any of the following uses: a. Temporary construction facilities. b. Sales facilities and/or model homes, including their appurtenant signage. (Model home unit permits will not be issued until the final map has been recorded.) C. Access gates and/or guardhouses. d. On -site advertising/construction signs. 7. Prior to final map approval, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division 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 and common areas including gates. Desert or native plant species and drought -resistant planting materials shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. CS/C:ONAPRVL.022 - 1 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required walls. C. Exterior lighting plan, in conformance with any future "Dark Sky" Ordinance emphasizing minimization of light and glare impacts to surrounding properties. 8. Prior to building permit approval(s), the subdivider shall submit criteria to be used for landscaping of all individual lot front yards. At a minimum, the criteria shall provide for three 15-gallon trees on interior lots and five 15-gallon trees on corner lots, as well as an irrigation system and suitable ground cover. 9. The subdivider shall make provisions for maintenance of all landscape buffer common areas, recreation areas, and storm water retention areas via one of the following methods prior to final map approval: a. Subdivider shall consent to the formation of a maintenance district under Chapter 26 of the Improvement Act of 1911 (Streets and Highways Code, Section 5820 et seq.) or the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22600 et seq.) to implement maintenance of all improved landscape buffer and storm water retention areas. It is understood and agreed that the Developer/Applicant shall pay all costs of maintenance for said improved areas until such time as tax revenues are received from assessment of the real property. b. The Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department a Management and Maintenance Agreement, to be entered into with the unit/lot owners of this land division, in order to insure common areas and facilities will be maintained. A unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs. The association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. 10. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit/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 Marshal o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o Planning and Development Department, Planning Division o Coachella Valley Water District CS/CONAPRVL.022 - 2 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 o Desert Sands Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above -mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for any permit for any use contemplated by this approval. 11. Prior to the issuance of any grading, building, or other development permit or final inspection, 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 24890 which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of any permits/final inspections. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. Said inspection or monitoring may be accomplished by consultant(s) at the discretion of the Planning Director, and all costs associated shall be borne by the Applicant/Developer. 12. Lots that exceed 2-1/2 depth times width ratio, shall be provided with 25-foot front yard setback. **13. Approval of this Tentative Tract Map shall be subject to approval of GPA No. 89-026, SP No. 85-006 (Amendment), and CZ No. 89-045, by the City Council. 14. Street name proposals shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning and Development Department prior to recordation of any portion of the final map. Street name signs shall be furnished and installed by the developer in accordance with standards of the City Engineer. Signage type and design shall be subject to review and approval of the Planning and Development Department and the Public Works Department. 15. Minimum landscaped setbacks adjacent to public streets as stipulated in Specific Plan No. 85-006 (amended), shall be required. Design of the setbacks shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. Setback shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way lines. a. The minimum setback may be modified to an "average" if a meandering or curvilinear wall design is used. b. The parkway setback area(s) shall be established as (a) separate common lot(s) and be maintained as set forth in Condition No. 9, unless an alternate method is approved by the Planning and Development Department. CS/C:ONAPRVL.022 - 3 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 16. Exceptions to La Quinta'Subdivision Ordinance Sections 13.12.050, Street Alignment and 13.12.080(c) lots, is hereby approved. PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES: 17. Applicant shall comply with following Conditions of the City Fire Marshal: A. Schedule A fire protection approved Super fire hydrants, (6" X 4" X 2-1/2" X 2-1/211) shall be located one 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 2500 gpm for two hours duration at 20 psi. B. The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow of 2500 gpm and an actual fire flow available from any one hydrant shall be 1500 gpm for two hours duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. C. Prior to recordation of the final map, Applicant/Developer shall furnish one blueline coy of the water system plans to the Fire Department for review. 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". D. 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. E. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the Applicant/Developer shall provide alternate accesses as approved by the County Fire Department. 1.) Exterior accesses issues. 2.) Cul de sac secondary access issue. F. Whenever access into private property is controlled through use of gates, barriers, guard houses or similar means, provision shall be made to facilitate access by emergency vehicles in a manner approved by the Fire Department. All controlled access devices that are power operated shall have a radio -controlled over -ride system capable of opening the gate when activated, by a special CS/C:ONAPRVL.022 - 4 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 transmitter located in emergency vehicles. Devices shall be equipped with backup power facilities to operate in the event of power failure. All controlled access devices that are not power operated shall also be approved by the Fire Department. Minimum opening width shall be 12-feet, with a minimum vertical clearance of 13-feet 6-inches. G. Medians and islands may require additional setbacks to allow Fire Department access. 18. All requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District shall be met. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 19. Prior to transmittal of the final map to the City Council by the City Engineering Department, any existing structures which are to be removed from the property shall have been removed or there shall be an agreement for the removal which shall be secured by a faithful performance bond in a form satisfactory to the City and granting the City the right to cause any such structures to be removed. 20. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured prior to constructing or joining improvements. 21. The Applicant shall pay the required processing, plan checking and inspection fees as are current at the time the work is being accomplished by City personnel or subcontractors for the Planning, Building or Engineering Divisions. 22. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering a City-wide Landscaping and Lighting District and by recording a subdivision map agrees to be included in the district. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis as required by law. 23. All traffic, circulation, and drainage conditions placed on Specific Plan No. 85-006 shall apply except where specifically modified by the conditions for this tentative subdivision map. 24. Applicant shall post security for street improvements in the right-of-way contiguous to the subdivision as follows: Jefferson Street Avenue 52 Calle Rondo Calle Tampico Park Avenue CS/C:ONAPRVL . 022 - 1/2 width plus 1 land + raised landscaped median - 1/2 width plus 1 land + raised landscaped median - 1/2 width - 1/2 width - 1/2 width - 5 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 25. The Applicant shall have prepared street improvement plans (for public and private streets) that are prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements, including traffic signs and markings, and raised median islands (if required by the City General Plan) shall conform to City standards as determined by the City Engineer and adopted by the La Quinta Municipal Code (3-inch AC over 4-inch Class 2 base minimum, for residential streets). Street design shall take into account the subgrade soil strength, the anticipated traffic loading, and street design life. 26. A common area lot shall be established for that area between the tract perimeter wall and street right-of-way for Jefferson street, Avenue 52, Calle Rondo, Calle Tampico, and Park Avenue streets. Landscaped maintenance responsibility of the total common lot and street landscape parkway shall be the responsibility of the development. 27. The Applicant shall have a grading plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer, who will be required to certify that the constructed conditions at the rough grade stage are as per the approved plans and grading permit. This is required prior to issuance of building permits. Certification at the final grade stage and verification of pad elevations is also required prior to final approval of grading construction. 28. The Developer of this subdivision shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping and irrigation plans to Coachella Valley Water District for review and comment with respect to CVWD's water management program. 29. A thorough preliminary engineering geological and soils engineering investigation shall be done and the report submitted for review along with the grading plan. The reports 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. Pursuant to Section 11568 of the Business and Professions Code, the soils report certification shall be indicated on the final subdivision map. 30. The Developer of this subdivision of land 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. 31. Drainage disposal facilities shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of the City Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of any drainage fees required therewith. CS/CONAPRVL.022 - 6 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 32. All utilities will be installed and trenches compacted to City standards prior to construction of any streets. The soils engineer shall provide the necessary compaction test reports for review by the City Engineer. 33. The Applicant shall post security equivalent to the proportional share designated, and may obtain some reimbursement from the City in a manner approved by the City Council for traffics signals, in accordance with the following table. Initial Portion Eligible Posting for Requirement Reimbursement Jefferson @ Avenue 50 50% 37.5% Jefferson @ Project Entrance 100% None Jefferson @ Avenue 52 50% 25% Avenue 52 @ Project Entrance 100% 50% 34. Applicant shall dedicate all necessary public street right-of-way and utility easements for the following streets: Jefferson 60' half width Avenue 52 120' full -width (see note) Calle Rondo 30' half -width and suitable conforms Calle Tampico 30' half -width and suitable conforms Park Avenue 30' half -width and suitable conforms NOTE: The 120' figure may be reduced to 110' pending outcome of proposed General Plan Amendment. 35. Applicant shall record permanent public access easement on all lots created in the subdivision for private streets. **36. In order to improve access between Washington Street and this subdivision for traffic with trip ends in the subdivision, and to provide for orderly development along Avenue 52 east of Washington Street to the eastern edge of Tract Map #24889, the Applicant shall make every effort to obtain a 60-foot*** wide easement for public street purposes from the adjoining property owner to the west. As a minimum, an interim two-lane paved facility shall be concurrently constructed in the easement that joins Washington Street when the other Avenue 52 improvements are installed. The interim facility shall be constructed in a manner that will permit incorporation into the ultimate street improvement with minimal adaptation. The Applicant may seek reimbursement for the improvements for that section of Avenue 52 east of Washington Street to the western edge of Tract # 24890 in the following manner. CS/C:ONAPRVL.022 - 7 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 1. Prior to January 1, 1992, the Applicant shall seek direct reimbursement, from the developer of the property that provides the easement. 2. After January 1, 1992, the Applicant may seek reimbursement from the City consistent with any policy or program in existence at that time. It shall be understood by all parties involved in providing the easement and subsequent interim improvement that the City intends to condition the future development of the property adjoining Tract #24890 to affect reimbursement for costs relevant to same incurred by the Applicant or City whichever is carrying the cost at the time. If the Applicant is unable to obtain the easement, the following condition shall apply: A. The intersection of "new" Avenue 52 with "old" Avenue 52 shall be configured in a manner that the two intersect at 90 degree angles. The curve on "new" Avenue 52 that leads into the intersection shall have a minimum radius. B. In addition to the right-of-way required for the ultimate alignment of Avenue 52, the Applicant shall dedicate additional right-of-way as needed, to accommodate the interim intersection configuration. C. Traffic signals shall be installed when traffic counts warrant the need, as determined in accordance with the collective conditions of approval for this tract. The Applicant shall be 100% responsible for the cost of the signals; the City will administer the design and installation. D. Although "new" Avenue 52 shall be offered for dedication, it will not be accepted as a public street until the link to Washington Street is completed, and the other link which is constructed under these collective conditions of approval has been determined by the City Engineer to be in a state of good repair. 37. The Applicant shall enter into a license agreement with the City to provide for maintenance, liability insurance coverage, and other relevant concerns that may be identified, and as needed, for the tunnel that is proposed for placement under the pavement in the Jefferson Street right-of-way. The agreement, which will be subject to approval of appropriate City officials, will be prepared by the City at the Applicant's expense prior to issuance of permits to construct tunnel. CS/C:ONAPRVL.022 - 8 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 38. Applicant shall provide street grades that are 0.35 percent or greater unless demonstrated by engineering design, and approved by the City Engineer, that drainage is adequate and the minimum gradient cannot be satisfactorily obtained. 39. Security posting requirements for the traffic signals may be staged in proportional increments commensurate with, and based on, the number of dwelling units in each successive development phase. The Applicant shall provide traffic signal improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer, and install the signals when warranted pursuant to an annual warrant study of the intersections identified in Condition #33. The study shall be conducted by a qualified traffic engineer at the Applicant's expense and submitted for review and approval by the City Engineer. 40. The Applicant shall post security for private street improvements in the subdivision in amounts commensurate with, and as needed, to meet circulation and access requirements for each proposed phase of the subdivision development. The security shall be posted prior to recording of the subject phase of the final map. Installation of the secured improvements by the Applicant shall occur prior to issuance of Occupancy Permits. 41. The Applicant shall post security for all public street improvements prior to recording of the final subdivision map. 42. Installation of the secured public street improvements by the Applicant shall occur and may be staged in a manner commensurate with the development phasing of this subdivision, adjoining subdivisions and traffic needs, all as determined by the City Engineer. As a minimum, an interim two-lane paved facility shall be constructed concurrently with Phase I of the development in the Avenue 52 right-of-way, and the easement required in Condition No. 38 from Jefferson to Washington Streets. The interim improvement shall be constructed in a manner that will permit incorporation into the ultimate street improvement with minimal adaption. 43. The Applicant may obtain some reimbursement from the City in a manner approved by City Council for the segment of Avenue 52 constructed in the 60-foot wide easement between Washington Street and the westerly most boundary of Tract No. 24890. 44. The Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to all public streets except for selected private streets that may intersect Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street at locations, and in a manner approved by the City Engineer. CS/CONAPRVL.022 - 9 - Conditions of Approval - TT 24890 45. Additional exceptions where vehicle access rights to public streets may be retained are as follows: 1) the golf course maintenance facility located adjacent to Avenue 52 and Calle Rondo may enjoy direct access to Avenue 52 and Calle Rondo (temporarily only, see Condition #50, but the Avenue 52 access shall be right -turn -in/ right -turn -out only; 2) the C.V.W.D. well site located adjacent to Calle Rondo and Calle Tampico may enjoy direct access to either street, but not both; 3) gated emergency access to interior private streets from Jefferson Street and Park Avenue shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the City Engineer and City Fire Marshal. 46. The Applicant shall aesthetically enhance the outward appearance of the C.V.W.D. well site located adjacent to Calle Rondo and Calle Tampico, and the golf course maintenance facility located adjacent to Calle Rondo and Avenue 52. Specific improvements shall include: 1) continuation of the sound wall and landscaping in the setback area along the Calle Rondo, Calle Tampico, and Avenue 52 frontages; 2) a paved driveway at the access point; 3) an aesthetically attractive sight restricted gate. 47. The Applicant shall provide a 20-foot wide and a 10-foot wide landscaped setback lot respectively, on the Avenue 52 and Calle Rondo frontages adjacent to the golf course maintenance facility. 48. Along Jefferson Street where golf course abuts proposed perimeter wall, decorative wrought iron or steel tube fencing shall be used to allow views into project, if in conformance with acoustical study (as required by Specific Plan No. 850996, as amended). *49. Custom home lots Numbers 487-505 and 530-554 shall be permitted to be a maximum 28-feet in height within one story. *50. Existing maintenance building access to Calle Rondo shall be permanently eliminated at the time 52nd Avenue is realigned, as required by Condition No. 11 of Plot Plan No. 86-285. * Added by City Council on October 17, 1989. ** Amended by City Council on October 17, 1989. *** The 60-foot dimension may be reduced to 55-feet pending the outcome of proposed General Plan Amendment. CS/CONAPRVL.022 - 10 - STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1991 SUBJECT: STREET VACATION 91-018 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA REQUEST: GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY PORTIONS OF CALLE TAMPICO AND EISENHOWER DRIVE. BACKGROUND: TO ALLOW VACATION OF BETWEEN AVENIDA BERMUDAS Pursuant to Government State Code Section 65402, and prior to any street vacation by the City Council, the Planning Commission shall make a finding that the vacation or elimination of said street is consistent with the City's General Plan Circulation Element. The City Engineering Department has prepared an alignment plan for Calle Tampico from Avenida Bermudas to Eisenhower Drive to correct the existing traffic safety problem the City has with the abrupt curvature of Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas. If Calle rCampico was a local street with limited traffic potential, this problem would not be as necessary for the City to fix because the street could be a four-way stop intersection or two-way with Calle Tampico being a through street. However, since the General Plan has designated Calle Tampico as a primary arterial (100-foot right-of-way) and traffic volumes are designed for 20,000 to 24,000 vehicles per day (with travel speeds over 45 mph), it is necessary to restructure the alignment of the street to reduce traffic hazards. The new plan would straighten the pronounced curve on Calle Tampico. Based on the existing alignment plan of the General Plan and City prepared improvements plan, the City has been actively negotiating with abutting landowner's to the north of Calle Tampico to acquire the necessary additional right-of-way to shift the street (i.e. Fritz Burns Property). These negotiations are nearing completion. Property owner's to the south will benefit from this realignment since the new public centerline and right-of-way will be north of its present location. STAFFRPT.052/CS -1- A. Recent Plot Plan Review: (La Quinta Pharmacy) The City approved Plot Plan 91-464 and Variance 91-016 in September, 1991. The approval granted the applicant development rights to build a +4,300 square foot commercial building on 0.3 acres at the southwest corner of Calle Tampico and Avenida Navarro (southwest corner). The development approval requires the applicant to acquire title to the excess right-of-way in order to build his project prior to the issuance of a building permit. Mr. Campagna's property will benefit from this realignment in that he will be reconveyed public right-of-way land for private usage. B. Village Specific Plan The Village Specific Plan for the downtown area examined the necessity to realign Calle Tampico, and after lengthy review of the area (traffic date and accident history), specific recommendations were adopted concerning this problem in 1988. The Specific Plan states in Exhibit A of Resolution 88-7, that "... softening of the curve on Calle Tampico at Avenida Bermudas should occur". The Engineering Departments street improvement plans meet this provision. Findings 1. The vacation of existing street right-of-way along Calle Tampico will not adversely affect the City or impact the City's General Plan. 2. The excess right-of-way on the south side of Calle Tampico is not needed by the City because additional right-of-way is being acquired on the north side of Calle Tampico in order to straighten the alignment of Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas. 3. Traffic warrants indicate a need to reduce traffic conflicts along Calle Tampico between Eisenhower Drive and Washington Street. 4. The vacation of portions of Calle Tampico will not adversely affect the Downtown Village Specific Plan. STAFFRPT.052/CS -2- RECOMMENDATION: By Minute Motion adopt the findings that the vacation of portions of Calle Tampico between Eisenhower Drive and Washington Street are in compliance with the Circulation Element of the La Quinta General Plan. Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Exhibit showing proposed Street Vacation (large map) 3. Problem Intersection and Street Map STAFFRPT.052/CS -3- S IATF t W.) IWAY I 11 DEEP CAqYON 0 j cr l< f 25 MAJOR ARTERIAL el ..j 120 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY PRIMARY ARTERIAL 100- 110 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY SECONDARY ARTERIAL 88 FOOT RKIHT-OF-WAY BCOLLECTOR �l n..:..�� " ;y.. 64-72 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY 0 000 r K )6 Y . . . . . . . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . r LU uj 7 111w .......... Ld f v 3r I / %' CD ........ ........ . cz L' CALLE TAMPICO .......... -17 0 r J. T- 11, "T "FT r AVE'�UE 52 CASE M A P o 0 ,. '': 1 wHi! ..� U OC a F z I Y eedvLvno 3TWO I 6 pnwaag egtuar I ` VTiN YQW3AV _ �1 x•i-C_i^ _ -n � �r-r_ ^ V70ac3w 7 I�va"vl--T-i ' Z3IIjyVM 1 1 I VWM3AV aALap aaMOgU@SL3 I. I l ; !• y N Co C yc V C m[ N N lyil L .0.. C L " C L C C �.y.. ., u LU m L t; m ^[cu n « •u [ E c c vi c E > ° 67 '>'" u O ; O O H 7 47 .• V m « _ o In ; V E C C u v d Q E uw w E > o '0 m « C � C o y n o rn `y o t w c w y «�" d o cc E °� �c m m> ON Cam« v�pl o n Oy L > —� c 'o male �m 3 L o m C « >cc c ox n mm > > d— m'^t vl W 30> o «.y 3y ,�� cm Nw �� c;� n�• y w � Lvl �Q va > .=c m cyE3 �a -01y > y 3 N c N L U L ICO 0 w 0[1 6C7 > N m 4 y C«= N a 01 m y 7 m ;; y C > > Q L c U m O y 7 0C1 U' O mC� Cy « u u« cQ dL««� LCL vIN m L• > C y O •61 a1 C L m [ an N 3 3 ^� '� G a 0! y :+ m y m 7 0 c a N y y C 01 m m 1.:. [ m , U �.- �, m w[ m m -L cu� > �o �o �c coot' EMa �� c 0 % dEC E aE o iv> >v 01E Ev0M ymV L� a vo �w m w Sw o a wU U 0 Ww W W M:� n.wm �O 3 w cru. :E mD m m ma m m.0 ma u m m m.0 m m ti N F- w w N a Z Q 7 tn y O O > N a M C O O p U w N U C .L.+ CL '.' O U a O V m _a dU u L L uo C._ c Liv1 L m > �m «a/ myul « W«4. L ZO..y+� �yL oms�. a[i c m LU �o cm E4' Uc Ec w>>z y muy vc �m o 0>�0 o ,O dvi , �,a m m o "� Lv uw C - c o «u cc N O C U VI O to m7 O N m— V y� m O O O O L O O mL .y+ L C 80 O- M C « C Oy ��, Om C OLNO •Cyy p0 O Ocr IA IA 14 > �3 c >� vE S. ujc° =C�w L� uu m O mL m 7 > t p1 y 0 3 lyilt tT 3 lyil ^' 7Q t4 ° Ov N• m— ... [ y cl y 1 L C 7 1 L .�+ C1 L. L« y y m y y L L L O > N 01L. N[ L w N«y«„ N «a•Y a` u [iu cry ii c CL u°c E IA> c [ c m m L L w 3 i y E y c �' m A °' y > w W > .L y L L L C L C m ':3 C < S. , U m « m « m o m E o c E o . m E N c U - c Q o A toc Og c >g >'—° Luc, LLLO L. ny c Lo L o m m— y•a7 y a mayO1 ,; .0EO �«O y� y� Zm Zj m Em co-i E mU au mo v m -Fm-m ow e c m m- m m m m m m � m m— m C U m U o O t o L y a 'O y •6 aa ►- a -a uj a y m= U o « ?1 a_ �, y LL CC C> C C> —C —C CyC CC QI .y+ Cipyy 0 V t`,1m*C y i0 d cl y yQ y yQ cr y y= y an y= C 40u== — L. Ou y $AU — N> N > > >> > m> >> m O > m m m m y > y m J I1J< Ww Q Qw QQ QUQ QQU:E Qwuu Um 014< nou rw w .- . M t0 Oi ry S ry• ry w w ri a v1 as o �+ r fV S IA W c9 O� .- .• r• .- ry ry /V