Loading...
1992 03 24 PC'13�•0■ ♦�s# �. P AhWING COMMX S,SION r T M [ f 1 T T 0 I ..a intd 11- 1991 Ten Carat Decade AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California March 24, 1992 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 92-011 Beginning Minute Motion 92-012 CAT-.L TO 01213E R — Flag Salute ROg.L CALL PUBLIC HEARINGS 1. Item ................ TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27131 Applicant .......... Valley Land Development Location ............ Northeast corner of Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive. Request ............. Appeal of Planning Director approval of Tentative Parcel Map which subdivides 104+ net acres into four parcels and remainder parcel. Action .............. Minute Motion 92- 2. Item ................ TENTATIVE TRACT 23519, MINOR CHANGE #1, SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME Applicant ........... Santa Rosa Developers Location ............ Southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street. Request ............. One year extension of time. Action .............. Resolution 92- PC/AGENDA 1 PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for citizens to address the Planning Commission on matters relating to City planning and zoning which are not Agenda items. Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission should use the form provided. Please complete a form and submit the form to the Recording Secretary prior to the beginning of the meeting. Your name will be called at the appropriate time. When addressing the Planning Commission, please state your name and address. The proceedings of the Planning Commission meeting are recorded on tape and comments of each person shall be limited to three minutes. BUSINESS SESSION 1. Item ................ SPECIFIC PLAN 84-003 (AMENDMENT #2) Applicant ........... Cusack Radaker Development Company, Inc. Location ............ South side of 50th Avenue approximately 1 /4 mile west of Jefferson Street. Request ............. Approval of a one year extension of time for a specific plan which allows an 86 room hotel (The Orchard) on 37.5+ acres. Action .............. Minute Motion 92- CONSENT CALENDAR Approval of the Minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting held March 10, 1992. OTHER ADJOURNMENT -------------------------------------------------------------------------- STUDY SESSION MONDAY, MARCH 23, 1992 City Council Chambers DISCUSSION ONLY 4:00 P.M. 1. All Agenda items. PC/AGENDA 2 PH-1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: MARCH 24, 1992 PROJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27131 APPLICANT: VALLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER: ADVANCED ENGINEERING GROUP REQUEST: APPEAL OF PLANNING DIRECTOR APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP WHICH SUBDIVIDES 104+ NET ACRES INTO FOUR PARCELS AND REMAINDER PARCEL. LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE EXISTING ZONING: R-1, R-2, AND CP (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: LOW AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, GENERAL COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: THE PROPOSED PARCEL MAP HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15315 (CLASS 15). THEREFORE, NO FURTHER DOCUMENTATION IS DEEMED NECESSARY. BACKGROUND: This parcel map was approved at a Planning Director's Hearing on February 13, 1992, subject to conditions. The action on this date was after a continuation from a Planning Director's Hearing held on January 30, 1992. The continuation was granted because of a concern from nearby residents and property owners. (See attached Director's Hearing Minutes of January 30, 1992.) Subsequent to the approval on February 13, 1992, Staff received an appeal of the approval action from Mr. John Megay of the Committee for Environmental Preservation of Bermuda Dunes, California, and Mr. Frank R. Goodman of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council. Based on the written appeal submitted by the appellants, it appears that their concern deals primarily with the legality of submitting a parcel map rather than a subdivision or tract map. The appeals are attached for your review. Also attached is the Planning Director's staff report for the meeting of February 13, 1992. This Staff report provides details on the parcel map proposal. PCST.046 1 FINDINGS: The attached Staff report provides findings to support the previous approval by the Planning Director. RECOMMENDATION: The Planning Commission should review the proposal and appeal, and determine whether to uphold or deny the appeal. Action may be taken by minute motion. Findings should be made should the Planning Commission approve the appeal. Attachments: 1. Staff report for Planning Director's Hearing of February 13, 1992. 2. Minutes from Director's Hearings held on January 30th and February 13, 1992. 3. Parcel Map 27131 exhibit. 4. Approved Conditions of Approval. 5. Appeal letter. PCST.046 El DIRECTOR'S HEARING DATE: FEBRUARY 13, 1992 (CONTINUED FROM JANUARY 30, 1992) CASE NO.: TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27131 APPLICANT: VALLEY LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER: ADVANCED ENGINEERING GROUP REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO SUBDIVIDE 104.85 ACRES INTO FOUR PARCELS AND REMAINDER PARCEL. LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE (SEE ATTACHMENT #1) EXISTING ZONING: R1, R2 & CP (GENERAL COMMERCIAL) (SEE ATTACHMENT #3) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: LOW AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, GENERAL COMMERCIAL (SEE ATTACHMENT #4) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE PROPOSED PARCEL MAP IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPTED FROM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) PURSUANT TO SECTION 15315 (CLASS 15) PROVIDED THE FOLLOWING FINDINGS CAN BE MADE: 1. THE DIVISION OF LAND MUST BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING - THE PARCEL MAP AS PROPOSED IS IN GENERAL CONFORMANCE WITH EXISTING ZONING AND THE GENERAL PLAN. THE PARCELS AS PROPOSED CAN BE DEVELOPED BASED ON THE EXISTING ZONING. 2. NO VARIANCES OR EXCEPTIONS ARE REQUIRED - THE PROPOSED PARCEL MAP CONFORMS WITH ALL APPLICABLE CITY AND STATE SUBDIVISION MAP ACT REQUIREMENTS NECESSITATING NO EXCEPTIONS OR VARIANCES. 3. ALL SERVICES AND ACCESS TO THE PROPOSED PARCELS TO LOCAL STANDARDS ARE AVAILABLE - ALL LOCAL UTILITIES APPLICABLE TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAVE INDICATED THAT SERVICES ARE AVAILABLE OR CAN BE READILY PROVIDED FOR THIS PROPOSED MAP. STAFFRPT.074/CS -1- 4. THE PARCEL WAS NOT INVOLVED IN A DIVISION OF A LARGER PARCEL WITHIN THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS - A REVIEW OF THE ASSESSORS MAPS INDICATES THAT THE PROPERTY HAS NOT BEEN INVOLVED IN ANY DIVISIONS WITHIN THE PREVIOUS TWO YEARS. 5. THE PARCEL DOES NOT HAVE AN AVERAGE SLOPE GREATER THAN 20 PERCENT - THE PROPERTY IS RELATIVELY FLAT AND DOES NOT HAVE A SLOPE AVERAGE GREATER THAN 20 PERCENT. OFF -SITE CIRCULATION: WASHINGTON STREET - 120 FEET RIGHT OF WAY FRED WARING DRIVE - 120 FEET RIGHT OF WAY SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: APARTMENTS, RESIDENTIAL LOTS, WHOLESALE NURSERY EAST: STARLIGHT DUNES (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL) WEST: DESERT BREEZES (SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL), FIRST INTERSTATE BANK, OFFICES NOTE: THIS PARCEL MAP SURROUNDS AN EXISTING MEDICAL COMPLEX WHICH IS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS PROJECT. DESCRIPTION OF SITE: VACANT ON -SITE CIRCULATION: PALM ROYALE DRIVE LINKING WASHINGTON STREET AND FRED WARING DRIVE THE APPLICANT INTENDS TO RELOCATE THE EXISTING FIRST 1,200 FEET OF DARBY ROAD TO CONFORM WITH THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT OF PALM ROYALE DRIVE, PALM ROYALE DRIVE WILL ALIGN WITH MOUNTAIN VIEW ROAD ON THE WEST SIDE OF WASHINGTON STREET. BACKGROUND: This parcel map encompasses most of the area designated as Annexation Area #E6. Approvals to date for this area are as follows: 1. November 20, 1991, City Council approved preannexation zoning 90-016 and preannexation General Plan Land Use , Designation 91-033. 2. Annexation Area #6 (LAFCO #91-19-4) approved by LAFCO October 24, 1991. 3. The City Council of La Quinta accepted Annexation #6 into its boundaries November 5, 1991. 4. Annexation #6 was recorded December 17, 1991. ZONING & GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: It should be noted that Valley Land Development has submitted GPA 91-039 and CZ 91-068 on August 14, 1991, requesting a change to the General Plan Land Use Designation and zoning of the annexation area excluding 2.86 acres located east of Washington Street and 776 feet north of Fred Waring Drive. these applications have now been tabled at the Applicant's request. (See Attachments 3 & 4) The existing zoning and General Plan designation approved by City Council November 20, 1991, therefore apply to this project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: (See Attachment #2) The Applicant intends to subdivide the +140 acre parcel into four parcels plus a remainder parcel. A road linking Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive providing access to the proposed parcels is also proposed. The existing Darby Road (private road) will be realigned to link into the new Palm Royale Drive. The 2.86 acre parcel east of Washington Street sandwiched between parcels 1 & 2 of Parcel Map 27131 is not part of this project. ANALYSIS OF PROJECT: 1. It should be noted that the applicant would be required to submit a commercial or residential plot plan or tentative tract map (depending on the proposed land use and approved use designation) prior to any development taking place on the site. The City would then have an opportunity to evaluate each parcel and the detailed design proposal. 2. Comments from CVWD: (See Attachment #5) A copy of the comments from the above agency is attached. The development is in Zone C which indicates minimal flooding in this area. 3. Comments from Riverside County Fire & Sheriff Dept.: 0 Both of the above agencies do not object to the overall concept of the proposal and will make further comments and requirements when more detailed submittals are made on the individual parcels of this project. 4. Comments from Sunline Transit: (See Attachment #6) Sunline Transit requests that the applicant provide a bus turnout and passenger waiting shelter on Washington Street just north of Fred Waring Drive. It would be appropriate to attach the above item as a condition of approval for the commercial plot plan for Parcel 1 of this Parcel Map when submitted. 5. Comments from Caltrans: (See Attachment #7) Caltrans requests a traffic study be done for this project. It should be noted that this project is categorically exempt from CEQA and therefore no environmental documentation is required for this project. It should be noted that Caltrans has no jurisdiction over any of the streets in or adjacent to this project site. 6. Comments from Desert Sands Unified School District: Comments from the School District are attached. (See Attachment #8) 7. Comments from Southern California Gas Company: A copy of comments from the above agency are attached. These are standard comments made for most projects. (See Attachment #9) 8. Comments from City Engineering Department: The Engineering Department has attached a number of Conditions of Approval to this project. The Applicant is requested to make right-of-way street dedications. Street improvement plans must be submitted and approved plus certain off- and on -site improvements done prior to the issuance of grading plans. Turning movements onto Fred Waring Drive from Palm Royale Drive have been restricted. Please see the attached conditions for further information. 9. Comments from members of the public: John Megay and the Committee for the Environmental Preservation of Bermuda Dunes have objected to this project (See Attachment #10). HEARING HELD JANUARY 30, 1992: At this meeting the Planning Director elected to continue the above matter until February 13, 1992, to allow Mr. Megay and his committee time to study and comment on the subject parcel map. STAFFRPT.074/CS -4- (FINDINGS: 1. As conditioned, the proposed Parcel Map 27131 is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan and Washington Street Specific Plan and the standards of the Municipal Zoning and Land Division Ordinances. 2. The subject site is physically suitable for development in accordance with the land division design, zoning standards, and the La Quinta General Plan. 3. Approval of Parcel Map 27131, subject to conditions, will allow for orderly expansion of the adjacent public street system. 4. The design of the land division will not cause public health problems and will not conflict with existing public easements. 5. As conditioned, this proposed Parcel Map is not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or injury to fish or wildlife or their habitat. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Director approve Tentative Parcel Map 27131 as set forth in the above findings and subject to the attached conditions. Attachments: 1. Location Map 2. Parcel Map 27131 3. Zoning 4. General Plan Land Use Map 5. Comments from CVWD 6. Comments from Sunline Transit 7. Comments from Caltrans 8. Comments from DSUSD 9. Comments from Southern California Gas 10. Letters from John Megay & the Committee for Environmental Preservation ATTACHMENT No. 1 DARBY ROAD FRED WARING DRIVE MILES AVENUE BPI CASE Na TPM 27131 �-E 0 N AT-' ACNMENT No. 2 G ha n9e, ®f Zme p-041 � Aauso s ATTACHMENT No. 3 tit 11rf1,Il0® N- y0tff AO'4•t ^Iwo f IC ill! A I ; 1i4171 u / / , 0 4oC-NaAc. t--IIAv 90-033 It M awn I E.1 ATTACHMENT No. 4 J �e. -4 113 �c N 4 L0, Lao ana ,9 i0'sN � I d t I J� d d0•.t140 • ,� LMidM JO ��� *ATg" ATTACHMENT No. 5 ESUBUSHED IN IVI 'ot8 T 1 COACHELLA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT POST OFFICE BOX lose • COACHELLA, CALIFORNIA 92236 • TELEPHONE (51913*MI DIRECTORS TELL IS 000E KAS. PRESIDENT RAYMONDR RUMMONDS. VICE PRESIDENT JOHN W McFADDEN DOROTHY M DELAY THEODORE J FISH Planning Commission City of La Quanta Post Office Box 1504 La Quinta, California 92253 Gentlemen: December 26, 1991 THOMASE LEVY. GENERAL ►�ANAGERCHIEF E►+GINEER BERNAROINESV"0% SECRETARY OWE MCCOOK. ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER REDWINE AND SHERRIu ATTORNEYS File: 0163.1 J A N 0 7 1992 Subject: Tentative Parcel Map 27131, Portion of South Half, Section 18, Township 5 South, Range 7 East, San Bernardino Meridian This area is protected from stormwater flows- by the Coachella Valley Stormwater Channel and may be considered safe from stormwater flows except in rare instances. This area is designated Zone C on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are in effect at this time. The district will furnish 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 Nos. 58 and 81 of Coachella Valley Water District for sanitation service. Plans for grading, landscaping, and irrigation systems shall be submitted to Coachella Valley Water District for review. This review is for ensuring efficient water management. If you have any questions please call Bob Meleg, stormwater engineer, extension 264. ours very truly Tom Levy RF:sv/e12 General Manager -Chi Engineer cc: Don Park Riverside County Department of Public Health, 79-733 Country Club Drive, Suite D Bermuda Dunes, California 92201 TRUE CONSERVATION USE WATER WISELY TranSit* ATTACHMENT No. 6 SunL Ule ` JAN 0 3 1991 MEMBER AGENCIES Cathedral City Coachella y Desert Hot Springs • •. Indian Wells Indio La Ouinta Palm Desert Palm Springs January 1, 199JC Rancho Mirage Riverside County Ms. Glenda Lainis, Associate Planner Planning and Development Division City of La Quinta P. 0. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: TPM 27131 Dear Glenda: Thank you for allowing SunLine Transit Agency to review the parcel map referenced. As you know, SunLine Transit Agency operates Line 4 on Washington Street in the vicinity of this project. At this time, the route operates on a 60 minute headway. As this project moves from the tentative parcel map to a specific plan and on into con- struction, the need for transit services will increase due to this project. Therefore, we would like to take this opportunity to request the developer to include in his plans a bus turnout and passenger waiting shelter. The turnout should be located on Washington Street just north of Fred Waring Drive. SunLine Transit Agency will be happy to work with the City of La Quinta and with the developers to design a mutual acceptable sight. Please feel free to call me regarding these comments. Yours very truly, S LINE TRANSIT NC Debra Astin Director of Planning DA/n cc: File STATE Of CALFOFM - KM ESS. TRANSrvgTATION AND HOUSANG AGENCY PETE WILSON.G~ DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ATTACHMENT N ®. 7 DISTRICT 11. P.O. Box >�. SAN DIEGO. 424654 6 (619) 688-6968 January 13, 1992 11-RIV-10 P.M. 50.0/51.0 Washington Street TPM 27131 City of La Quinta Planning and Development Department JAN 16 1992 P. 0. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 Attention: Ms. Glenda Lainis We have reviewed the Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131 proposing the subdivision of a 140.85 acre parcel into four parcels and a remainder parcel located in the City of La Quinta and have the following comments: On March 14, 1991, a Project Study Report/Project Report (PSR/PR) proposing improvements to State Route 111 (SR-111) at Washington Street was approved by the District. The improvements proposed in that project will accommodate projected traffic and traffic generated by a proposed commercial development north of SR-111 between Adams Street and Washington Street. As part of that project SR-111 will be widened from four lanes to six lanes between Adams Street and Washington Street and channelization at the Washington Street intersection. The District also has plans to study improvements at the Interstate 10 (1- 10)/Washington Street interchange. The environmental document for the development should include a traffic study based on Year 2015 traffic. Any traffic impacts to I-10 and SR-111 generated by development of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131 will need to be addressed in that environmental document. This development should be coordinated with the development of the proposed State highway improvements and improvements to the existing local street system in order to minimize potential congestion and safety concerns. That environmental document should also propose appropriate mitigations for any traffic impacts. Close coordination with Caltrans is encouraged. Future coordination on this project should be with Dan Martin, Local Assistance Branch, at (619) 688-3211. If you have any questions concerning our comments please contact Jim Buksa, of our staff, at (619) 688-6968. JESUS M. GARCIA District Director D BILL DILLON, Chief% Planning Studies Branch oa CRWest DMartin Ja�itEp + o �//z ATTACHMENT No. 8 'r + �0 Desert Sands Unified school District s� � �° PALMmom 82-879 Highway i l l • Indio. California 9=1.5678 • (6191347.8631 6 FAX# 342.1265 0 LA OUiNTA 1� BOARD OF EDUCA71ON SVPpN-1'ff NMe4TOFSCHOas Gilbert L Andwon Dr. Etperanza Zendeju Rene' L Garcia William R. Kroorm BUSNESS SERVICES DIVISION Mau Monica Amy Swan•Driper January 7,1992 City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Subject: Tentative Parcel Map La Quinta Case No. TPM 2731 Attn: Glenda Lanis Associate Planner Dear Ms. Lanis: J AN 16 199 This is in response to your request for input on the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the above referenced project and its effect on public schools. All actions toward residential development will potentially result in an impact on our school system. School overcrowding is a District -wide concern for Desert Sands. The District's ability to meet the educational needs of the public with new schools has been seriously unpaired in recent years by local, state and federal budget cuts that have had a devastating impact on the financing of new schools. As you are aware there is a school mitigation fee that is collected on all new development at the time building permits are issued. Please feel free to call me if you have further questions. Thank you. Sincerely, Marcia Ewart, Acting Director Facilities Planning and Development ME:ke ATTACHMENT No. 9 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA „ 22Js COMPANY 1961 LUGONIA AVENUE REDLANDS CALIFORNIA MAILING ADDRESS v0 BOX 30M REDLANDS CALIFORNIA 97373-03M December 30, 1991 City of La Quinta P.O. Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 ATTENTION: Glenda Lainis RE: T.P.M. 27131 JAH This letter is to inform you that Southern California Gas company has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service to the project could be provided from 4" gas main in Fred Waring Dr. without any significant impact on the environment. The service would be in accordance with the Company's policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Commission at the time contractural arrangements are made. You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a contractural commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an informational service. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Typical demand use for: a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Ye_ arly Single Family 799 therms/year dwelling unit Hulti-Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit Multi -Family 5 or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units served by Southern California Gas Company, and it should not be implied that any particular home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of energy. b. Commercial Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and equipment used, a typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction. Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed. z To insure the existing facilities are adequate to accommodate the new development, an engineering study will be required. Detailed information including tract maps and plot plans must be submitted to the Gas Company Market Services Representa- tive, 1-800-624-2497, six months prior to the actual construction of the natural gas pipeline. We have developed several programs which are available, upon request, to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. If you desire further information on any of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Building Services Department, P.O. Box 3003, Redlands, CA 92373-0306, phone 1-800-624-2497. Sincerely, X zz_ , Kevin Flum Technical Supervisor RIB: me cc: Pnviron Affairs - ML209B 01/29/1992 10:41 TO 16195645617 P.01 LAW OFFICES OF DE CAb"I7tO, WEST, CHODOROW & BURNS, INC. EGHTEEM FLOOR 10960 wILsiIU BOULEVARD Las ANCE:.ES, CALWMU 9007A-304 TONE 010) 471.2541 TBLECOPMA ()10) 47"143 TELECOPIER COVER SHEET THE M M MIATTOK CVN'TADMD Lv TIO FACSWLE MESSAGE U MVnMED AN'D CO%(FIDE%'lUL DMO MA :TON NTVMED GNLY POR M LIE Of THE L''DIVtTn,'AL OR E'nM TO WHOM IT IS ADDRESSED. IF THE READER OF T= MEMCE IS var n a INTER-DFID RECDW:. YOC AM ITT' NOMW TRAT ANY =5Dol :;AI1QN. DIS :7 M11ON OR Cor MG OF 'IMS COMMt; V;CATION II STRICTLY KOM= ff YOU HAVE XWE NIM M C W-N1CATT0%IN EMIL PLWE rWEDIATELY NO"RPY L'I SY TEL.E7 o.%E A.Nm R,FTtjL%j M OitTrNAL SAGE 7V LS AT rAZ MONT ADDFMS VIA 11M C 1 POSTAL SERVICE January 29, 1992 Teiecopier Phone Number-. (60) S"5617 THE FOLLOWING PAGES ARE FOR: Namme of Ludiriduab Jerry Herman, Director Firm Name: Dep tment of City Planning & Development Address: 78105 CaUe Estado, La Quinta, California 92253 FVVW: Richard S. Zeilenga, N. RE: January 30, 1992 Hearing on Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131 Total Number of Pages Including this Cover Sheet: Tune: ,K O .X __ _ __Y.M. IF YOU DO NOT RECEIVE ALL OF THE PAGES, PLEASE CALL BACK A.S.A.P. Switchboard: (310) 478.2541 Telecopier: (310) 473-0123 Tdwop,er Operator Retum to: Amy -for RSZZ Original Seat by Mail: _ XX GCe6fieb Original Not Seat by Mail: i , Billing No. 65930100 A- 01i49/1992 10:41 FFU1 TO 16195645617 P.#32 -,,00 a :• tat••o t11 owe a lease. . ...wt.a a •tl. . foLCL 1 .. •c.: .aVti • : +i..�6 �t�•sc-: � .olt S.:.•Ll ...r► : •r ::s or DE CASTRO•WEST. CHODOROW $ BCR.N3. INC. C Gd'ttv*- r.Opq v �..•, • .. •r ,•..•male .t.,. ,...,.� • ar ...C. .apt• •rrr at. • .,•� . •'.:. ..-tom .• .. a•a1�.• UseC., .ro•:sw for 190V6CvALg0 -Os •1410C.C9. C�►�'►Oe� n �e+0:�•9a0� -C.:0••0•+c T2'CCO• tdR '= C1 a�J•O•t? most*: •t0 .ve.•C.a , .••t:• 7 a. ♦• 'f. January 29, . •1992 • - . .... - - (310) 445-7645 .... 1 �. , �r'3 � �.e •t +tuft• s ; b 65930100 Jerry merman, Director Dept. of Planning 6 Development 78105 Calle Estado La Quint&, California 92253 Dawn Ca Honeywell, Esq. City Attorney - City of La Quinta Stradlinj, Yocca, Carlson i Rauth Post Office Box 7680 660 Newport Center Drive, Suite 1600 Newport Beach, California 92660 t 'I U• •t. Dear Mr. Herman and Ms. Honeywell: FM (619) S94-5417 FAX (714) 725-4109 We represent Xr. John Megay and the Committee For The Environmental Preservation of Bermuda Dunes (the *Committee*). The Committee is comprised of residents and property owners in Bermuda Dunes affected by the City of La Quint&,,s (*City") consideration of Tentative Parcel Map 27131. On January 13, 1992, Glenda X. Lainis, Associate Planner for the City, transmitted a letter on behalf of pCr. Herman to Mr. Megay, stating that the City's consideration of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131 was exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act(*CEQA*) on a §tatutox•v e. g,�aot on, CEQA Cuideline S15315 (see attachedel etter addressed to Mr. Megay dated January 13992). This statement was a misleading and I , 1 Incorrect statemmemt of the lam. CEQA Guideline S15315 is a Qo�°ical ex_ ti®n and not a statutory exemption. The difference is of great significance. Categorical exemptions are subject to exceptions pursuant to CEQA Cuideline $15300.21 which requires the City to find that no exception applies to a claimed exemption, such as 515315. A *fair argument* can be made that Cityfs recent actions with respect to Tentative Parcel Map No. 271310 including the recent annexation 01/29/1992 10:47 7RCf1 T 1619%45617 P.03 DE CASTRO. \%'EST CHCpCROW 6 I R,\S. IvC Jerry Heraan, Director MA Davn C. Noneyvell, Esq. January 29, 1992 Page -2- and approval of a tentative parcel map, scheduled for consideration on January 30, 1992, have dative envi o jMWzW (CEQA Guideline S15300.21 subsection (b)) and that there is a "reasonable possibility that the activity undertaken by the applicant as a result of the City's approvals will have a significant effect on the environment due to the unusual circumstances* (CEQA Guideline $15300.2, subsection (c)). The Committee has only recently discovered that the City's letter of January 13, 1992, contained misleading information with respect to this project, exemption from CEQA. Having previously assumed that the project was subject to a s atuto�Y� P 'on, as asserted in the City's letter in response to Mr. Megay's request for information, the Committee did not pursue efforts togather evidence, data and information on potential cumulative impacts and potential significant effects due to the unusual circumstances created by this particular project site. The Committee is now engaged in that process. We formally request that the City r, 2nti M its consideration of this matter for at least sixty (60) days to provide our clients sufficient time to complete their review and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the Cityts actions. The City's failure to provide the notice required under the California Environmental Quality Act to adjacent property owners concerning the annexation of this property to the City, the City's failure to provide adequate notice on its current consideration of Tentative Map No. 27131 to adjacent property owners, and now the City'e issuance of a misleading and inaccurate notice to Mr. Megay, claiming that this project is statutorily exempt from CEQA -- when in fact it is not, all require that the City continue this matter for a sufficient period of time to permit Mr. Megay, and other interested property avners in Bermuda Dunes, to assess the potential environmental consequences of this project. Failure to do so violates our clients procedural due process rights and constitutes a prejudicial abuse of discretion. see ILUXI&y, Cou>ztr,pt iversU (9th Cir. 1990) 904 F.2d 4970, 503-504; Scptt v. CiLv�of_ 1WiW W is (1977) 6 C.3d 541, 548--550; and KqN 9 OfreCtoY9 (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 11360 1190-1151. We are transmitting this letter by facsimile on Wednesday morning, January 29, 1992. If ve have not beard from You within the next few hours, we will assume that you plan to proceed with the City Council hearing as scheduled on January 3o, 1992. We will be preparing and submitting more detailed objections pursuant to CEQA, and pursuant to State Planning, Zoning and Subdivision Map Act statutes prior to the City Council hearing tomorrow morning. 01/29i1992 10:42 FR0M TO 1619564561i PAM DE CA57RO VEST. CI10DCROW 6 &;RLN3. IsC JwM Berman, Director AM Dawn C. Honeywell, Esq. January 29, 1292 Page -s- We request iemediate notification frog you on the status of this matter. Vary truly y9nrs, kichard S. Zeil a For the Firm R.SZ : ar Enclosure cc: La Quint& City council (w/encl.) Q40 OYM 00 'LrJens&wyl r�, 01i29/1992 18:43 FROM is . J VIA 0 TO 16195645617 F.05 rJ 78.105 CALLE ESTA00 -- LA QVINTA. CALIFORNIA 92253 - 15t91 C.54-2246 FAX (6:9) 564.5e 1 January 13, 1992 Mr. John Megay 78-661 Avenue 42 Bermuda Dunes, CA 92201 SUBJECT: TENTATIVE PARCEL 27131 Dear Mr. Megay: Tentative Parcel :dap 27A31 is currently being processed by the Planning and Development Department. The decision to approve or not approve this protect x.11 be made at a Planning Director's hearing on January 30th at IC:00 A.ti1. This hearing Will be :geld at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers and th ere NiE be an opportu :ity for the public to state their concerns at this meeting. Please note parcel maps with four or fewer parcels are exempt from the requirements of the Califorwa Envirormen!al Quality Act (Section 15315, CIass 15-statutory exemption) . Therefore, the City carrot require an Environmental Impact Study for this project. The City, at the request of the 3ev elopers of the project have tabled their rezoning and general plan amendment request for this site. Therefore, the change of zone and general plan amendment applicaton will have to be readvertised before the Plann-ne Commission and City Council can consider these matters at a public hearing. The ori&al general play: desigwaticn and zoning as approved at the time o: annexation therefore, still applies to Tentative Parcel Map 27131. Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please contact this office. Very truly yours, JERRY HERMAN PLANING & DEVELOPISEN T DIRECTOR GLENDA M. LAINIS Associate Planner GINIL: bja cc: Ernie Dunlevie Jonathon Landau Charles Lester James Harasta Pete Lussier 81/29/1992 15:25 FROM g0 '" C•• C[fi p• DE CAMO. WI$T. CHODOROW 4 BURNS, '��CCti•M �:t%O� rAwC l ., 11 A •. . i . C.C. .Os • VAS.L i. : �: • CO[s ,7A� �'rCt 4 .•eC. e. -e•..a Z.C.7• cot 3-7•73•2 23 Ve .�•,•: - -•�. . •:t.•.�• January 29, 1992 � Celt. � ►rC•f .•.� • •: •tc..•.. Bx Fn r? -L-z _ AND _ z' AL M"88 City Council - City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 jr.1495E45617 P.82 '•� �� •. "' •ram. �. • is •� .t ; :, •, 1� • •,.J I. JAN 2 9 199Z v v►A's1• i :1 -c:• A A, gpry (310) 445-7645 1.0 v .t %.-* v 65930200 PAS (619) 564-5617 Re: Entitlement Approvals for Tentative P a I ge IJI"-VA- 27131 Dear Council Members: We represent Mr. John Megay and the other Members of the committee for the Environmental preservation of Bermuda Dunes (the "Committee"). The Committee is composed of interested residents and property owners in Bermuda Dunes, who object to the City Council's recent annexation of property to the City of La Quinta ("City") and pending action on Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131. This letter is submitted for the express purpose of exhausting our client's administrative remedies (P_ubl_ic Resources ;oft 521177) prior to commencinq an action in the Riverside County Superior Court. �ailure_to_Prov'de .eaal Notice: Members of the Committee own and/or reside in property immediately adjacent to Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131• we are informed that the Council has taken action in the past several months with respect to this property, specifically annexing it to the City, without making any effort to provide actual notice to adjacent property owners whose property interests are substantially effected and whose names and addresses were reasonably ascertainable by the City. Procedural due process requires that a public Agency give "notice by mail or other means as is certain in ensure •_ctuai notice where the proceeding will adversely effect the property interests of any party if its name and address are reasonably ascertainable." See T-gla p"o�ess-oaia_1_Collection Se, twice. Inc.y. Pooe (1988) 108 Sup.Ct. 01/29/1992 15:26 01 TO 1619564561? P.03 DE CASTAO W ST C110DOROw 6 R:ILNS I%C Members of the La Quint& City Council January 29, 1992 Page -2- 1340, 1344-1348; 11AUDODite BoArd 2f J Mi~ons v. Adams (1983) 462 U.S. 792, 103 Sup.Ct. 2706; ane v. _Central Hanover -Bank & Tnst Cos (1950) 339 U.S. 3060 70 Sup.Ct. 652; Harris v._C4Unty 0 RtV si a (9th Circ. - tray 30, 1990) 904 F.2d 497, 503-504; Sjr�zaiz and Valentine Cy. O my of Los Angeles (1988) 201 Ca1.App.3d 1021, 1026-1027; Scott v. City pf Indian 19e11g (1972) 6 C.3d 541, 548-550; and Morn-v. County of Yentura (1979) 24 Ca1.App.3d 605, 615. These federal and state authorities all stand for the proposition that constructive notice by newspaper publication is inadequate where the names and addresses of persons, whose property rights are substantially effected by the government agency's action, are reasonably ascertainable. Here, the City is enraged in an apparent plan to annex large sections of the Bermuda Dunes area to the City and is carrying out this plan by granting significant and unusual land use entitlement concessions to property owners effected by the aanexation, as a heans of obtaining their acquiescence. These unusual land use concessions and entitlements will create significant land use impacts and planning and zoning inconsistencies, including, but not limited to, traffic impacts; noise impacts; air emission impacts; water supply, quality and drainage impacts; and a whole host of other potential impacts, including adverse impacts to rare and endangered species which may inhabit the area in and around the subject property. Nevertheless, the City has not engaged in any effort whatsoever to review County tax records or other regional documents to determine the names and addresses of adjacent property owners that may be effected by the City's actions in order to provide actual notj,pg of the City's hearings and actions. Meatbers of the Committee, had they been provided proper notice, mould have appeared at any and all proceedings conducted by the City to annex property to the City and to grant special and unusual land use entitlements to those effected by the annexation. The Comnittee would have specifically raised objection pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") based on potential planning and zoning land use impacts on adjacent properties which are zoned and planned for less Intensive land uses; traffic impacts; noise impacts; air emissions; water quality, drainage and supply impacts; and various impacts associated with the natural environment, specifically, the need to preserve open space and the need to protect rare and endangered species in the area. The Committee, had it been provided with proper Notice, would have specifically objected to the City's failure to prepare a full and complete Environmental impact Report on the annexation of land to the city. The City is apparently embarked on a plan to annex a 01/29/1992 15-r `Wi 7C% 16195645617 P.04 DE CASTRO. WOT CHODOROW 6 81:RNS. INC Members of the La Quinta City Council January 22, 1992 Page -3- substantial amount of land to the City from the area. These piecemeal actions by the City will have a cumu atiye environmental impact which is being considered as the City gobbles up bits and Bermuda Dunes most certainly currently not pieces of land. The city's most recent letter to one of our clients, dated January 13, 1992, a copy of which is appended hereto as Exhibit A, is but additional evidence of the City's provision of misleading and inaccurate notice with respect to the subject property. As indicated in our letter to the City Attorney and City Planning and Development Director, a copy of which is also appended hereto as Exhibit 8, the City's letter of January 13, 1992 misleadingly and inaccurately states that this project is statutoriLy exer►a from CEQA. In fact, if the City's approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131 is exempt from CEQA, which the Committee denies, it is only based on a catgctorical ex mvtaan in CEQA Guideline S15315. The distinction is of critical significance in that Categorical exemptions are subject to exceptions in CEQA Guideline S15300.2(b) and (c), which require the City to make findings that there are no cumulative impacts from the City's actions with respect to the property, and that there are no unusual circumstances creating the possibility of significant environmental impacts. Under such circumstances where notice has been inadequate and misleading, the California courts have held there is no bar of exhaustion of administrative remedies requiring that objectors to a project state their objections before the public agency, at the time of project approval, prior to commencing a legal action. See McQueen v Board of Oires"o�$ (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 1136, 1150-1151• Accordingly, our clients now state their objections to the City's annexation of this property on the grounds set forth herein, and specifically call upon the City to cease and desist from carrying out any activities with respect to the annexation of the subject property and with respect to entitlement approvals on the subject property, until a full and complete Environmental Impact Report is prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA, public Resoutcgs g S21000, M. If the City chooses not to exceed to our clients' request to prepare an Environmental Impact Report, we specifically request that the City continue its consideration of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131 for sixty (60) days, to provide our clients sufficient time to gather information and evidence on the existcnce of applicable exceptions, pursuant to CEQA Guideline $15300.2, to any claim of a categorical exemption under CEQA Guideline S15315. The City's failure or refusal to continue this public hearing to provide our clients sufficient time to analyze these issues, in light of the city's failure to provide notice and failure to provide accurate notice, will constitute a 01,29/1992 15:27 tat TO 1619°.64561? P.05 DE CAM0. TUT CHC►�, ROB' 6 SCIM. 1`C Members of the La Quint& City Council January 291 1992 Page -4 - prejudicial abuse of discretion requiring that the City's action be set aside by the Superior Court. e City Has Improper y ppl led A Cateuoarical xempt1Q-.--aoA 'della 5153 ., To Its Cons' de at ' on Of Tentative Parcel Nar, Rio. 277L31: CEQA Guideline $15315 [minor land divisions] provide a categorical exemption on the following basis: "Class i5 consists of the division of property in urbanized areas zoned for residential, commercial, or industrial use into four or fewer parcels when the division is in conformance with the general plan and zoning, no variances are exceptions are required, all service and access to the proposed parcels to local standards are available, the parcel was not involved in a division of a larger parcel within the previous two years, and the parcel does not have an average slope greater than 204." Our clients, specifically Kr. Megay, have repeatedly requested that the City provide its Staff Reports demonstrating that each of these requirements for application of S15315 is satisfied. In each instance, our clients have been informed that such Staff Reports are not available prior to the public hearing. Given this failure to provide information upon request, and given the City's failure to provide adequate and accurate notice of its actions, our clients renew their objections herein based on procedural due process grounds and based on violations of CEQA's requirement to provide adequate notice. The failure to provide adequate notice and information requested makes the City's claim of categorical exemption under S15315 a prejudicial abuse of discretion. Although our clients have not been provided adequate tine to completely analyze these issues, it appears that S15315 does not apply in this case for the following reasons: 1. CEQA Guideline $15300.2(b) (Cumulative Impact) creates an exception to a categorical exemption whenever successive projects of the same type create a =u_- tiye„ly significant impact. The Committee is informed that the city is engaged in a plan to annex various parcels in the Bermuda Dunes area to the City of La Quinta. The Committee is also informed, that the city has promised those subject to annexation certain d land use entitlement benefits that will create a much higher 91/z9/1992 15:26, -CM TO 16195645617 P,06 ,AN C►►':Ls 28 DE CASTRO. WEST. CNOOOROW 9 IRAUNS INC. Members of the La Quint& City Council January 29, 1992 Page -3- level and intensity of development on these properties annexed to the City than mould otherwise be the case, and would thus result in substantial and significant environmental impacts, including, but not limited to, land use impacts on surrounding properties that are zoned and planned for less intensive development, traffic impacts, noise impacts, air quality impacts, water supply, quality and drainage impacts, and potential environmental issues with respect to the preservation of natural open space for rare and endangered plant and animal species. The failure of the City to consider the c-uiaulative impact of its approvals with respect to annexed properties and the impact of its specific entitlement approvals for those properties, constitutes a prejudicial abuse of discretion. 2. CEQA Guideline $15300.2(c) (Significant Effect) provides that a categorical exemption shall not be used for an activity where there is a r,e sonabJ e pose l v that the activity will have a significant effect on the environment due to unusual circumstances. The City's plan to annex properties adjacent to its borders in exchange for the grant of inappropriate land use entitlements, involving more intense commercial and residential uses than are otherwise permitted in the area, creates an unusual circumstance and a reasonable possibility that significant environmental effects will occur. This "reasonable possibility" prohibits the application of any categorical exemption. 3. The City's approval of Tentative Parcel Nap No. 271310 and its other actions with respect to that parcel, are inconsistent with Riverside County Planning Documents and the City of La Quintals planning and zoning documents, thereby prohibiting the application of CEQA Guideline S15315, which specifically rewires that any action under its provisions be in conformance with the general plan and zoning applicable to the area. 4. The City has not demonstrated that "all service and access to the proposed parcels is available and conforms to local standards", thereby prohibiting the application of a categorical exemption under CEQA Guideline §1531S. 5. The City has also failed to demonstrate that the other provisions of CEQA Guideline 515315 have been met, specifically, that the parcel was not involved in the division of a larger parcel within the previous two years and that the parcel does not have an average slope greater than 204. An EIR Must Ee Prepared For Tentative PArce1_1&ap No. 7121 and The Annexat ioA ® Land Tq}Q City: &. 01/29/1592 15:29 FPW -.A.* 0./• aiu ^.. DE CASTRO. %15T. CHODOROW 6 SURNs. Pic Members of the La Quints Clay Council January 29, 1992 Page -6- T® 161956456:7 P.07 An EIR is required whenever there is substantial evidence supporting "a fair argument" that the proposed project might have significant environmental effects. see public Resources Code 521092.2; No oil. I cMggles (1974) 13 Ca1.3d 68, 75. our clients' experience as property owners and residents in dais area lead them to the inevitable conclusion that the City's annexation of land and approval of land use entitlements will substantially change the nature of the area in terms of use and intensity of land development, land use conflicts, traffic, and other associated impacts. Concerns expressed by local property owners and residents constitutes substantial evideace in support of "a fair argument* that an EIR is required. See Cit-izeDs Assn. for Sensible Dev�eof 5 shop Area v. County of invo (1985) 172 Ca1.App.3d, 151, 173; and VT-,__ ..d-- -- - - -- - - - (199a) Daily The Committee specifically incorporates into this statement of objection any and all testi>zony that may be offered at the public hearing by residents and property owners surrounding the parcel that are adversely effected by the City Council's action. We also incorporate by this reference all documents in City files concerning the annexation of this parcel, and other parcels in the Bermuda Dunes area, to the City of La Quinta, and land use entitlements that have been granted to property owners in connection therewith. These documents constitute substantial evidence in support of "a fair argument" that the City's activities with respect to annexation and land use approvals for the subject property may have a potentially significant cumulative environmental impact upon land use consistency, traffic, air emissions, eater drainage, quality and supply, and the preservation of natural open space for the protection of rare and endangered plant and animal species. We specifically request that these documents be made a part of this administrative record in support of our clients' request for preparation of an Environmental Impact Report. Inc r1s's1 tc?n W th General Plan: The City'Council's*actions in annexing property from the Bermuda Dunes area to the City of La Quinta, including the area covered by Tentative Parcel Map No. 271310 and approval of parcel taps for these properties, is inconsistent with the City's General Plan and also the applicable Riverside County planning and zoning documents. These planning documents provide for less intensive development than those now being sanctioned by the City for these areas, and require preservation of open space areas and 01/29i1992 15:29 09 tD 1619564561? P.09 `Aw coo .C9 Cr DE CASIRO. WEST CHODOR9& 6 R:Rv3 ixc: Members of the La Quinta City Council January 29, 1992 Paqe •7- the protection of natural habitats to preserve rare and endangered plant and animal species. The City's annexation of property Prom the Bermuda Dunes area to the City of L% Quint& and its approval of intense land use development of these parcels, as a quid pro quo for that annexation, is inconsistent and in violation of these provisions of City and County planning and zoning documents. As such, the actions constitute prejudicial abuses of discretion by the City. See Govempen& Q&e SS65566, 65567 and Sin Setrnaxdino valley Audubon Society Inc. v county of San Bern rdim (1984) 155 Cal.App.3d at 738, 753. failure To Comply Wit SubQ�vssion Mac An,: The Committee specifically objects to the City Council's approval of Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131, in that the City has failed to comply with the Subdivision Map Act, Goverment Code S6644A.0. We urge the City Council to cease and desist from the approval of any further land use entitlements for Parcel Map No. 27131, while it co=ences preparation of an Environmental Impact Report analyzing the annexation of this parcel, and potentially other parcels, to the City of La Quinta, and the potentially significant environmental impacts that may result from more intensive land use development of these properties. In the alternative, we specifically request that the City continue any consideration or action on Tentative Parcel Map No. 27131 for sixty (60) days, to provide the Committee with sufficient time to gather information and evidence on the issues set forth in this letter. We specifically request that the City providt th Un§ers1aned wr_ith formal written ncltka of any public hearings, or ministerial action without public nearing, to approve land use entitlements for Parcel Map No. 27131. We also specifically request that tha City provide the undersigned with formal written e1/29/1992 15:30 01 TO 16195645617 F.09 ;., se::P DE CAS;RO. %VF%',. CHU0CR0%' 6 6l'R.%5 IvC. Members of the La Quinta City Council January 29, 1992 Page .-$- notice of any planned annexations to the City of La Quint&, and any proposed general plan and/or zoninq code amendments. Vary truly y s, 00 Richard 9(. Zei n For the Firm i" RSZ:ar Enclosure cc: Dawn C. Honeywell, Esq. (City Attorney) Jerry Hernan, Director Q:40 65mloo •C-gC0ALnr 01,29/ 09? 15:31 FR01 TO 16195645617 P.13 nE CASTRO.WEST. CHODOROu• G BURNS. INC. O-'tt%•- •.::• ••� :.-.� .... v •.:•.S.ra .. .��.. rot—. y ...9, - it .- •• :: ' . .. ' (310) 445-7645 .[•..,:.t •. •.. /=:., January 29, 1992 65930100 .Terry Herman, Director nX (619) 564-S617 Dept. of Planning i Development 79105 Call* Estado Ira Quinta, California 92253 Dawn C. Noneyvell, Eaq. TU (714) 723-4100 City Attorney - City of La Quint& Stradling, Yocca, Carlson & Rauth Post Office Box 7680 660 Newport Center Drive, suite 160o Newport Beach, California 92660 t • . t t �.*10 Dear Mr. Herman and Ms. Honeywell: He represent Hr. John Kerley and the Committee For The Environmental Preselriation of Bermuda Dunes (the "Committee•) . The Committee is comprised of residents and property owners in Bermuda Dunes affected by the City of L& Quintars ('City") consideration of Tentative Parcel Map 27131. On January 13, 1992, Glenda K. Lainis, Associate Planner for the. City, transmitted a letter on behalf of xr. Herman to Xr. Kegay, stating that the City•® consideration of Tentative Parcel Hap No. 27231 was exempt iron the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act MEW) based on a 2tatu oly a ti2n# CEQA Guideline S15315 (see attached letter addressed to Mr. Megay dated January 13, 1992). This statement was a misleading and incorrect statement of the lay. CEQA Guideline 515315 is a o ig�et4'iom and not a statutory exemption. The difference is of great significance. Categorical exemptions are subject to exceptions pursuant to CEQA Cmideline S15300.2, which requires the City to find that no exception applies to a claimed exemption, such an $15325. A "fair argument" can be made that Cityts recent actions vith resoect to 01/29i1992 15:36 FROM ;"..9, ;. Dt C.1)1-10. W1 iT ('NODOROt. 6 gl'R�t. IBC Jar" Herman, Director and Dawn C. Honeywell, Esq. January 29, 1992 Page -2- TO 16195645617 P.14 and approval of a tentative parcel nap, scheduled for consideration on January 30, 1992, have Cumulative gvironaen�al 1;,A= (CEQA Guideline 115300.2, subsection (b)) and that there is a "reasonable possibility that the activity uMortaken by the applicant as a result of the City's approvals will have a significant effect on the environment due to the unusual circumstances" (CEQA Guideline 515300.2, subsection (c))• The Committee has only recently discovered that the City's letter of January 13, 1992, contained misleading information with respect to this project• exemption from CEQA. Having previously assured that the project was subject to a 9-tat-AM eXe eat ion, as asserted in the City's letter in rasponse to Mr. Kegay's request for information, the Coittee did not pursue efforts to gather evidence, data and information on potential cumulative iarpacts and potential significant affects due to the unusual circumstances created by this particular project site. TAe Committee is now angagod in that process. We formally request that the City 99n%1M its consideration of this natter for at least sixty (60) days to provide our clients sufficient time to complete their reviev and analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the City's actions. The City's failure to provide the notice required under the California Environmental Quality Act to adjacent property owners concerning the annexation of this property to the City, the City's failure to provide adequate notice on its current consideration of Tentative Map No. 27131 to adjacent property ovnors, and now the City's issuance of a misleading and inaccurate notice to Mr. Megay, claiainq that this project is statutorily exempt from CZQA -- when in fact it is not, all require that the City continue this &attar for a sufficient period of time to permit Mr. Megay, and other interested property owners in Bermuda Dunes, to assess the potential environmental consequences of this project. Failure to do so violates out clients procedural due process rights and constitutes a prejudicial abuse of discretion. See iversid® (9th Cir. 1990) 904 P.2d 097i=50l3-5t04scoy v. ; ftt_City J n Tells (1577) 6 C.3d 5410 548-550; and K g1L (1988) 202 Cal.App.3d 11361 1190-1151. We are transmitting this letter by facsimile on Wednesda morning, January 29, 1992. if ve have not heard from �� you within the next fev hours, ve will assume that you plan to 1. proceed with the City Council hearing as scheduled on January 30, 1992. We will be preparing and submitting more detailed objections pursuant to CEQA, and pursuant to State Planning, is..—A�—A e•..u:..e—e_— .e-- •—s—AL _a..A.-- --.0--- ., — •- 01 r29i1992 15:33 FROM Dt CA). sc .ROA 3t �t� • arc Berry Herman, Director and Dawn CHoneywell, Esq. i January 29, 992 Page -l- TO 1619`..64%. I'^ P.15 We rummest immediate notification from you on the status of this matter. vary truly yours, . Richard Zen a For the Firm RSZ:ar Enclosure CC: La Quintal City Council (w/encl.) as a IOO . „g. 01 /29/ 1992 m n_- FROM a 0 TO I � 16195(A5617 P.16 72•;C5 Ca;`c eS7aCp _ LA CVNTA. CALSOAtira 922S3 . (6;91 Sda. 2; FAX (6191 January 13, 1992 Mr. John Niegav 78-661 Avenue 42 Bermuda Dunes, CA 52201 SUBJECT: TF_NTA'=;VG PARCEL 27131 Dear ,Mr. Megay: Tentative Pa. eel Map 27131 is currentlybeing � g processed by the Planning and Development De-artm �at. The decision to approve or not approve this project will be made at a Planning Director's Hearing on January 30th at 10:00 A.M. This hearing will be held at the La Q;iinta City Hall Council Chambers and there will be an oppor wnity for the public to state their concerns at this meeting. Please note parcel maps with four or fewer parcels are exempt from the requirements of the Califorr.:a S ovironmental ualit Act Sean exemption). Therefore, the City cannot require dreaa Envfroameatal Class IS -statutory this project. pact Study for The City, at the request of the developers of the proj+et rave tab:ed them rezoning and '*neral plan aMerdment request for th:s site. Therefore, the change of tone and general plan. an. e: dment application will have to be re advertised before the Pi3nni.^.g Corrnission and City Council can cots, der these matters at a pubL`c hearing. The origir�sI general plan designation and Zoning as approved at the time Of arAnQxation *.erefore, still applies to Tentative Parcel Map 27131. Should yoo have any questions concerting the above Wormation, please con:act this offico. Very truly yours, JERRY MERMAN PLANNING 8 DEVE;,WMENT DIRECTOR C-i tiQC4U#eU•S GLENDA M. LAINtS Associate Planner GML: bs cc: Ernie Dunlevie miwTiT ES DIRECTOR'S HEARING - CITY OF LA QUINTA A hearing held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California January 30, 1992 10 : 00 A.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting was called to order at 10 : 05 P.M. by Planning Director Jerry Herman who went on to explain the order of the meeting. II. HEARINGS: A. Tentative Parcel Map 27131; a request of Valley Land Development for approval of a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide 104.85 acres into four parcels and a remainder parcel. DH1-30 1. Associate Planner Glenda Lainis presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department . 2. Planning Director Jerry Herman having no questions of Staff opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Tom Thornburgh, applicant, expressed his concern regarding questions about the CEQA process. He further stated that the parcel map is only a way of identifying the properties in order to deal with the traffic circulation by bringing the streets in through the rear of the property and allowing them to bring the engineers in to design the streets, signalization, and improvements. The parcel map will allow this process to be completed. The parcel map will not make any changes to the Tract Map, density, traffic, or any environmental concerns. 3. Mr. Frank Goodman, resident of Bermuda Dunes, stated his home is within 400 feet of the property in question, he is a majority owner of the Washington Street apartments within 300 feet of the property, and in addition Chairman of Bermuda Dunes Community Council who had asked him to represent them at this meeting. Mr. Goodman stated the parcel map is not in compliance with the Map Act. In addition, the parcel map shows the pre - zoning and general plan amendment which were done prior to the annexation of the land. Mr. Goodman stated that he had not received any notice of this pre -zoning taking place and does not feel the City has the right to pre -zone any property prior to annexation. In addition the prior zoning was R-1 and R-2 and to change it to the density shown is a tremendous change. He 1 Planning Commission Minutes January 30, 1992 stated he did not feel the property could legally be separated into the requested parcels. He further stated that this size of a project should not be approved without an Environmental Impact Report being required. He went on to discuss the commercial zoning that had been approved and the number of apartment complexes that were already existing in close proximity to the project. Mr. Goodman stated he realized that all these statements did not pertain to this Hearing, but he understood that he needed to state them in case this matter went to court. 4. Planning Director Jerry Herman asked Mr. Goodman if he was familiar with the annexation process. Mr. Goodman stated he was. Mr. Herman asked if Mr. Goodman understood that the City must pre -zone any property before the City can submit an annexation application to LAFCO for consideration. In addition, that LAFCO authorized the City to be the Conducting Authority and allowed the City to annex the property without a public hearing. Mr. Herman then pointed out that the matter before this Hearing was the subdividing of this property only. Mr. Goodman stated he understood, but he was instructed to present these issues in case the matter went on to court. 5. Mr. John Megay, Bermuda Dunes resident, questioned the Staff report in regard to the project having no environmental impact. Mr. Megay stated that any change would create an environmental impact on the neighborhood. Concerned also with the parceling of the property. He asked if the remainder parcel could be the same size as the parcels in questioned. He asked that the Director continue this Hearing in order to allow them and their counsel to further investigate the matters in questions. 6. Ms. Jeanne Tillison, spoke on behalf of the Palm Royale property Owners Association, expressing their concern and objection to allowing a commercial project in this area. 7. Planning Director Jerry Herman made a correction in the Staff report. He further stated this Hearing dealt only with the issue of the parcel map as the zoning of this property had already been determined in previous hearings. In regard to the request for a continuance by the Bermuda Dunes Community Council to allow them time to consider any environmental impacts, this Hearing was continued until February 13, 1992, at 10:00 A.M. B. Parcel Map 27331; a request of Sunrise Company to revert 1 5 acres into acreage for property inside PGA West Country Club zon d R-2 Multiple Family Residential. The parcels abut Southern Hills and 'nged Foot (private streets) . DHl-30 2 ` r Planning Commission Minutes January 30, 1992 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Planning Director Jerry Herman having no questions of Staff opened the Public Hearing. 3. Mr. Allan Levin, representing the applicant, stated the request before the City. Planning Director Jerry Herman asked Mr. Levin if they anticipated re -subdividing or filing maps anytime in the near future. Mr. Levin stated that sometime in the future they would like to refile the appropriate applications, but they have no date at present. 4. Planning Director Jerry Herman asked if all the improvements were in. Mr. Levin stated that almost all the perimeter streets were complete. 5. Mr. John Richards, resident of PGA West, asked if this land will continue to be watered if no construction will be taking place. Mr. Levin stated this was coincidental and was being done for dust control. Discussion followed as to who the legal owner is and whose responsibility the dust control would be. 6. There being no further comment, Planning Director Jerry Herman closed the Public Hearing. After hearing the testimonies and Staff report the Planning Director approved by Minute Motion 92-001 Tentative Parcel Map 27331 subject to the findings and conditions noted in the Staff report. There being no further issues to be heard, this Planning Director's Hearing is adjourned at 10: 37 A.M. on January 30, 1992. DHl-30 3 MIWLJT ES DIRECTOR'S HEARING - CITY OF LA QUINTA A hearing held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California February 13, 1992 10:00 A.M. I. CALL TO ORDER A. The meeting was called to order at 10:04 P.M. by Planning Director Jerry Herman who went on to explain the order of the meeting. II. HEARINGS: A. Continued Tentative Parcel Map 27131; a request of Valley Land Development for approval of a Tentative Parcel Map to subdivide 104.85 acres into four parcels and a remainder parcel. 1. Associate Planner Glenda Lainis presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Planning Director Jerry Herman having no questions of Staff opened the Public Hearing and reiterated that this is a Parcel Map and has nothing to do with zoning. Mr. Tom Thornburgh, applicant, stated his concern for the delay of his project because of problems between the Bermuda Dunes Committee and the City. He stated that these delays were hurting his project financially. 3. Mr. Pete Lussier, real estate broker, stated that he is for good orderly development but felt an environmental study should be done as this development would have an impact on the community. In addition he questioned the Darby Road improvements and the traffic problems that could be created. Planning Director Jerry Herman questioned Mr. Lussier's concern for egress/ingress of Darby Road. 4. Mr. Charles Lester, Bermuda Dunes resident, questioned what will happen to Darby Road and felt another access should be opened possibly at Starlight Dunes. He also felt that an EIR should be done because of the amount of land involved to insure that no detrimental affect will happen to the surrounding property from so much commercial. 5. Mr. Frank Goodman, Bermuda Dunes Council member and property owner, asked Mr. Herman where the remainder parcel is located. Staff showed Mr. Goodman where the remainder DH2-13 t Director's Hearing Minutes February 13, 1992 parcel was located. Mr. Goodman again stated he believed this was an illegal subdivision and not a parcel map. His concern that with such a change in use and density on such a large parcel and due to the impact an EIR should be done. Also the change in zoning to allow commercial and apartments in an area that does not need it was against the Bermuda Dunes residents. He also asked if this matter would go before the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Planning Director Jerry Herman stated the decision of the Planning Director is final unless appealed. Upon appeal it will then go to the Planning Commission and if appealed again the City Council. Mr. Goodman asked who could make an appeal. Mr. Herman stated the appeal process. 6. Ms. Maurine Hammond, Bermuda Dunes resident, felt this development should not continue without an EIR report. 7. Mr. John Megay, Bermuda Dunes Committee, stated in talking to their attorney, it is their understanding that the remaining parcel is to the advantage of the subdividers to have a parcel map as it is much simpler and less extensive than a tentative tract. He further stated that a subdivider cannot evade tentative and final map requirements by making successive divisions of four or fewer parcels. He stated this was an act to try and evade the actual parcel map and if it is approved the parcel would remain undeveloped for a long period of time. He would like to therefore ask for a an extension of time to allow them more time to study the matter. Planning Director Jerry Herman stated that in order to resubdivided this parcel map a full tract map would be required. In addition, if full development is to occur on one of these parcels it is subject to other process of the City. 8. There being no further comments Planning Director Jerry Herman closed the public hearing. He further stated that this is in deed a parcel map and it categorically exempt from CEQA. Based on the findings of the Staff report and the conditions as attached, the Parcel Map was approved. There being no further issues to be heard, this Planning Director's Bearing is adjourned at 10:57 A.M. on February 13, 1992. DH2-13 2 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 27131 - APPROVED FEBRUARY 13, 1992 1. Tentative Parcel Map 27131 shall comply with the standards and requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance and Washington Street Specific Plan unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. This Tentative Parcel Map approval shall expire two years after the maps first approval date on January 30, 1992 (by the Planning Director) , unless approved for extension as provided for by the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance. 3. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) as stated in the letter dated December 26, 1991. 4. Commercial or residential plot plans or tentative tract maps shall be submitted and approved by the City of La Quinta in accordance with the La Quinta Zoning and Subdivision Ordinance before any grading permits are issued or any development takes place on the above Parcel Map. More detailed Conditions of Approval will be added on Tentative Parcel Map 27131 at that point in time. 5. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, anywhere on Tentative Parcel Map 27131, 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. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT 6. Applicant shall dedicate public street right of way and utility easements in conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific plans if any, and as required by the City Engineer, as follows: A. Washington Street - Major Arterial, 60-foot half width; B . Fred Waring Drive - Major Arterial, 60-foot half width; C . Palm Royale Drive - Collector Street, 72-foot full width; D . Darby Road - Local Street, 60-foot full width; E. Right of way geometry for corner cut -backs at intersections shall conform with Riverside County Standard Drawing #805 unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. 7. Applicant shall provide a landscaped setback lots of noted width adjacent to the following street right of way (s) : CONAPRVL.045 1 Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 27131 February 13, 1992 A. Washington Street, 20-feet wide; R . Fred Waring Drive, 20-feet wide; C. Palm Royale Drive, 10-feet wide. 8. Applicant shall vacate vehicle access rights to Washington Street and Fred Waring Drive from all abutting lots. Access to these streets from this land division shall be restricted to Palm Royale Drive intersections only. Access from the abutting lots to Washington Street or Fred Waring Drive may be permitted in the future as approved by the City. 9. Applicant shall provide a blanket easement that covers the entire landscaped setback lots for the purpose of a meandering public sidewalk. 10. 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. 11. Applicant shall pay all fees charged by the City as required for processing, plan checking and construction inspection. The fee amount (s) shall be those which are in effect at the time the work is undertaken and accomplished by the City. 12. Applicant shall construct an eight -foot wide meandering sidewalk in the easterly parkway of Washington Street and a six-foot wide meandering sidewalk in the northerly parkway Fred Waring Drive. 13. Turning movements of traffic accessing the subject land division from adjoining public streets shall be as follows: Washington Street A. Palm Royale Drive: left and right turns in and out are allowed; Fred Warine Drive A. Palm Royale Drive: right turns in and out only unless otherwise approved by the City Council. The median island on Fred Waring Drive shall have no opening in it to permit vehicular left turn movements into or out of the land division where Palm Royale Drive intersects Fred Waring Drive unless otherwise approved by the City Council. CONAPRVL.045 2 A� t Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 27131 February 13, 1992 14. The Applicant, owner, successor or assignee of land in this land division shall install, or agree to install, street improvements, on - site grading and drainage improvements in accordance with the Conditions of Approval for this land division prior to issuance of a grading permit for any of the parcels in this land division. Installation of the improvements and grading may occur in phases to some degree subject to City approval, however, notice is hereby given that development of any given parcel may require a substantially greater portion of the improvements required by these Conditions of Approval than what is considered to be the fair share for that particular parcel. Therefore, it is recommended that a prospective developer of any of the lots within this land division submit its development plans to the City for review prior to closing a land purchase transaction. In order to ensure that all potential owners or developers of land within this land division are apprised of the requirement to install improvements required by these Conditions of Approval, the following statement shall be placed on the parcel map of record in a manner that clearly indicates the statement applies to all parcels in the land divsion. "NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that prior to issuance of a grading permit for any parcel of land created by this parcel map, certain off -site and on -site improvements must be installed, or agreed to be installed. Therefore, prior to closing any land purchase transaction it is recommended that the prospective new land owner check the Conditions of Approval imposed by the City Council when this land division was approved. " 15. Prior to issuance of any building permit for Parcels 3, 4 or the remainder parcel, Darby Road and Palm Royale Drive shall be constructed. 16. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any of the parcels in this land division, Applicant shall have street improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements shall be designed 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 the City's General Plan. Street design shall take into account the soil strength, anticipated traffic loading, and design life. The minimum structural section for residential streets shall be 3" AC over 4" Class 2 Base. CONAPRVL.045 3 Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 27131 February 13, 1992 Miscellaneous incidental improvements and enhancements to existing improvements where joined by the newly required improvements shall be designed and constructed as required by the City Engineer to assure the new and existing improvements are appropriately integrated to provide a finished product that conforms with City standards and practices. This includes tapered off -site street transitions that extend beyond tract boundaries and join the widened and existing street sections. The following specific street widths shall be constructed to conform with the General Plan street type noted therewith: A. ON -SITE STREETS 1. Palm Royale Drive - full width Collector Street, 48 feet wide, refer to General Plan Figure VII-2. 2. Darby Road - full width Local Street, 36 feet wide. B . OFF -SITE STREETS - The City is contemplating adoption of a major thoroughfare improvement ordinance which is intended to distribute the improvement cost of major thoroughfare construction evenly and fairly on undeveloped land. If the ordinance is adopted, all land division maps prepared pursuant to this Specific Plan shall be subject to payment of fees, or construction of improvements in lieu of, as setforth in the ordinance, provided the ordinance is adopted 60 days prior to recordation of the map. The fees shall be paid, or agreed to be paid, prior to recordation of the map. If in the event, the major thoroughfare improvement ordinance is not adopted, the off -site street improvement responsibility, including design and construction, shall be as follows: 1. Washington Street (from north boundary of map to Fred Waring Drive, including segment that is not a part of map) install half width Major Arterial (three of six travel lanes) , plus full width raised landscaped median, refer to General Plan Figure VII-2. 2. Fred Waring Drive (portion contiguous to land division) install half width Major Arterial ( three of six travel lanes) , plus full width raised landscaped median, refer to General Plan Figure VII-2. 3. Applicant is responsible for the cost to design and construct traffic signals at the following locations. CONAPRVL.045 4 M conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 27131 February 13, 1992 a. Fred Waring Drive; (1) Washington Street: 100% responsibility for modification of northeast corner; (2) Palm Royale Drive: 100% responsibility; b. Washington Street; (1) Palm Royale Drive: 100% responsibility. The signals will be installed by the City when warranted by traffic conditions. 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. 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. 18. A grading plan for all five (5) parcels of this land division shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit for any of the parcels within this land division. 19. The tract shall be designed and graded in a manner so the difference in building pad elevations between contiguous lots that share a common street frontage or join lots with adjoining existing tracts or approved tentative tracts does not exceed three (3.0) feet. The pad elevations of contiguous lots within the subject tract that do not share a common street shall not exceed five (5.0) feet. If Applicant is unable to comply with the pad elevation differential requirement, the City will consider and may approve other alternatives that satisfy the City's intent to promote and ensure community acceptance and buyer satisfaction with the proposed development. 20. The tract shall be graded in a manner that permits storm flow in excess of the retention basin capacity to flow out of the tract through a designated emergency overflow outlet and into the historic drainage relief route. Similarly, the tract shall be graded in a manner that anticipates receiving storm flow from adjoining property at locations that has historically received flow. CONAPRVL.045 5 Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 27131 February 13, 1992 21. Storm water run-off produced in 24 hours by a 100-year storm shall be retained on site in landscaped retention basin(s) designed for a maximum water depth not to exceed six feet. The basin slopes shall not exceed 3:1. The percolation rate shall be considered to be zero inches per hour unless Applicant provides site -specific data that indicates otherwise. Other requirements include, but are not limited to, a grassed ground surface with permanent irrigation improvements, and appurtenant structural drainage amenities all of which shall be designed and constructed in accordance with requirements deemed necessary by the City Engineer. The triburary drainage area for which the Applicant is responsible shall extend to the centerline of any public street contiguous to the site. 22. A trickling sand filter and leachfield shall be installed in the retention basin to percolate nuisance water in conformance with requirements of the City Engineer. The sand filter and leach field shall be sized to percolate 22 gallons per 1000 square feet of lot area per day. 23. Landscape and irrigation plans shall be prepared by a licensed landscape architect for the landscaped lots. The plans and proposed landscaping improvements shall be in conformance with requirements of the Planning Director, City Engineer, and Coachella Valley Water District and the plans shall be signed these officials prior to construction. 24. 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. 25. 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. 26. 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. 27. 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 CONAPRVL.045 Conditions of Approval Tentative Parcel Map 27131 February 13, 1992 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. 28. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured prior to constructing or joining improvements. CONAPRVL.045 7 V • n of Bermuda Dunes Ca. Date Feb 26._l9°� Committee for the Environments Appellant's Name Preservatio Mailing Address 78661 Ave. 42 Suite B Bermuda Dunes Ca. 92201 Phone: �_61�34-7116 RE: Case No. Parcel Map No. 27131 Type of Appeal: Conditional Use Permit Variance Change of Zone Public Use Permit Surface Mining & g Parcel Map outdoor A�diert i� inQ .-,- -----Consistency with General Plate X Environmentustmentssment Setback AdU Temporary Use Permit �rPlot Plan "�-Reclamation Permit ortive evidence. If eal and include any supP which is being indicate f the number of the specific condition -Please state basis for aPP applicable, protested. _ ^ of approximately 11 acres. under no According to state law the remainder of the parcel map split may subdivider may p arcel be tempted to use the to avoid tenative and final r arcels are subdivided=or'.in. the remainder parcel (either when the other P 11 of the remainder p In that case, later conveyanceag-A and would not qualify. uire compli Violation. Reference- (Future intent to sell sufficent to req 2. heets if necessary. Use additional s Ernie Landau John MegayPete er Jonathon Charles Lester James Harasta nn1 /rq Sig?nure Trani R. ood'man February 26, 1992 LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION CITY OF LA QUINTA 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 RE: Parcel Map No. 27131 Gentlemen: As Chairman of the Bermuda Dunes Community Council, we wish to express our objection to the approval of subject Parcel Map No. 27131. We believe it represents an illegal subdivision in that it is obviously a 5 Parcel Map. In addition, we object to the division of approximatelv 150 acres of "pre -zoned" commercial, office, high density residential and other residential from previously zoned low density residential with out an appropriate Environmental Impact Report. We respectfully request that this application be turned down. BERMUDA DUNES COMMUNITY COUNCIL *Fra.00dman FRG:paw EXECUTIVE OFFICES: 77-900 AVENUE OF THE STATES PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA 92260 PHONE (619) 345-262E PH-2 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: MARCH 24, 1992 CASE NO.: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 23519; MINOR CHANGE #1, 2ND EXTENSION OF TIME APPLICANT/ OWNER: SANTA ROSA DEVELOPERS ENGINEER: COMMUNITY ENGINEERING SERVICES, INC. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: SUBDIVISION OF +30 ACRE SITE INTO 111 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS WITH A PUBLIC STREET SYSTEM LOCATION: SOUTHEAST CORNER OF MILES AVENUE & ADAMS ST. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: 10 ACRES - MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4-8 DU/AC) AND 20 ACRES LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (2-4 DU/AC) TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS ALLOWED: 60. EXISTING ZONING: R-1 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WAS PREPARED AND ADOPTED FOR TENTATIVE TRACT 23519. NO CHANGES ARE PROPOSED. THEREFORE ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS NOT WARRANTED FOR THIS EXTENSION OF TIME REQUEST. NET DENSITY: 4.4 UNITS PER ACRE (NET ACREAGE + 27.5 ACRES) LOT SIZES: MINIMUM LOT SIZE + +7,200 SQUARE FEET AVERAGE LOT SIZE = 7,643 MAXIMUM LOT SIZE = 11,360 DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: AGREEMENT HAS BEEN MADE WITH ADJOINING TRACT TO ACCEPT AND RETAIN ALL 100-YEAR STORM FLOW FROM TENTATIVE TRACT 23519 ON -SITE CIRCULATION: THE ROAD SYSTEM ALLOWS FOR FOUR ACCESS LINKS TO FUTURE DEVELOPMENT EAST OF THIS PROJECT. INTERNAL CIRCULATION CONSISTS OF CUL-DE-SAC STREETS SERVED BY A COLLECTOR STREET. STAFFRPT.088/CS -1- OFF -SITE CIRCULATION: MILES AVENUE - DESIGNATED AS A PRIMARY ARTERIAL AT 110 FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY WITH AN 18 FOOT WIDE RAISED LANDSCAPED MEDIAN. CONTIGUOUS OWNERSHIP: SANTA ROSA DEVELOPERS INC. ALSO OWN TENTATIVE TRACT 23935 TO THE EAST OF THE SUBJECT TRACT AND THE TEN ACRE PARCEL (TT 26188) TO THE NORTH OF TENTATIVE TRACT 25363. BACKGROUND: 1. The original application for Tentative Tract 23519 by a previous owner was approved on November 15, 1988 by the City Council. 2. Tentative Tract 23519 Minor Change #1 was approved by City Council on June 19, 1990. 3. Time Extension #1 for one year was approved on December 18, 1990, by the City Council. The current owner of this tract is requesting a time extension of one year in which to record the final map. If approved, the new expiration date would be November 15, 1992. Although this map's expiration date has passed, application for extension was made in October, 1991. ANALYSIS: On May 8, 1990, and June 19, 1990, the Planning Commission and City Council, respectively, held hearings and approved a minor change for this tentative tract. Changes were made at that time to update and streamline the Conditions of Approval. No further changes are proposed at this stage, and City Departments and agencies have requested none. Staff therefore, feels that the Conditions of Approval approved for Tentative Tract 23519 Minor Change #1 are acceptable and should be attached to the approval of this Second One Year Extension of Time. FINDINGS: Findings for recommendation of approval of Tentative Tract 23519 Minor Change #1, Second Extension of Time can be found in the attached Planning Commission Resolution 92- 04' _ STAFFRPT.088/CS -2- RECOMMENDATION: By adoption of attached recommend to the environmental analysis, Minor Change #1, Second attached conditions. ATTACHMENTS: Planning Commission Resolution 92- , City Council concurrence with the and approval of Tentative Tract 23519 Extension of Time subject to the 1. Locality plan 2. Tentative Tract 23519 3. Map of surrounding tracts 4. Comments from various agencies 5. Draft Planning Commission Resolution STAFFRPT.088/CS -3- ATTACHMENT No. 1 RIVERSIDE COUNTY LA QUINTA AR c 0 cc J < d W 2 Q THUD= MILES AVENUE Lu ►' �'C'Ss'''''','0'���� ','/'/�////////b// z', /////'I„IIII jyN Net 3 cAsE No. TT 23519 INDIO WESTWARD M nulnunu►►►e►►a`'► ORTH SCALE: NTS F� # C ;n ,Y fifillfiitfiiiifsi'7iiFFFFIIIEfiiiffill Dw b� n D N �t_v lifitiE7ilfitlifiiiiillfilliliiiiiifi O 8 09 r:L:ass.sctcsrtasrstr:erssi:ast:::sss MILES �AiF rJ7VE •,�� r�� t=iifiiifbit if Eiffifitf ssitiiff[lilt F*\IHEEJ fy d 'y Gi �BYiiEEiiifilits:t:s:sit:tee::rt:aL:: iti$88E11111118iifi'EiffiiIMEIN ................ ::..........::... �)?:tFtiitiiittttitiiEFtiaEtilfiiif �—a--_-- _ _en _ O . r � e .� rr b � YW X X Y C , 1 ` '9i U � g' !• R 8 ! C �. • , � � fir,:. •._. r 'Y N D u�i � aw-rIIi it A yzi A rC(A��ee AA a �22 0�• N t, 0 m ww L N Ak D 7W Oro bk an ss !m NO 0° �N Oy q Am tN tar An n! p ,Ov! rar "= td Dq'< D O 4 AYS S[A [I W4 0 Y� b `r1Y ra i21 e.. N rN<Gi C2i1 A� rI Ca r� 22r 'w NNNA "I OaY• �QrpO w 7 ee3f f51 . , b rrl "1 O„ ; i ► ti� r N m b • \ , it 7 F P kittk qO`rram W� L NO t204 L �it i! �M2`I .421. O�O:D ro AU LiY. QN MENT V-4 393 • • Lp • ft f • X/Lrt t•-�, REM .� s w f • f f f , f a+ .fin APR 7 CITY OF L � I ' ,'�, � 'E. ,"�, "� � � ."fi y :� I,'if. ;� � � � w • J Y v �(iYIh1GDEYI ZZ _ I,__�___�—'bj � "' Sf. Ci ii :.� ' QS I „S ! $ ,� , `� � �•vr' ••f , � , y � I � � � • • jM 1 V � yy tt' �•. � x.�. � '>s .', �;A�� � • 2 y qq �` y � b • l a i� �/ JU I L Y JU Z -qua D low I is me edw !/ t r I~ Icy i Y Aw 8 y w N `• Val a 113 413 010 VACS ®MPCSITE TENTQ TI VE TRACT `� TRACTS ,23519, ?5363 � 618 FOR: �26188 6 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA W COMPANY 1981 WGONIA AVENUE • REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA MAILING ADDRESS: BOX 3003, REDLANDS, CALIFORNIA 92373-9982 February 24, 1992 City of Ia Quinta Planning & Development Division 78-105 Calle Fztado La Quinta, CA 92253 AZTENTICN: Stan Sawa RE: TT 23519-Request For Second Extentin of Time This letter is to inform you that Southern California Gas ccaTpany has facilities in the area where the above named project is proposed. Gas service to the project Could be provided from 301 main at I/S Miles Avenue & Adams Street without any significant impact on the environment. the service would be in accordance with the Cmpanyls policies and extension rules on file with the California Public Utilities Ommiission at the time contractural arrangements are made. You should be aware that this letter is not to be interpreted as a oontractural commitment to serve the proposed project, but only as an informational service. The availability of natural gas service, as set forth in this letter, is based upon present conditions of gas supply and regulatory policies. As a public utility, the Southern California Gas Company is under the jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission. We can also be affected by actions of federal regulatory agencies. Should these agencies take any action which affects gas supply or the conditions under which service is available, gas service will be provided in accordance with revised conditions. Typical demand use for: a. Residential (System Area Average/Use Per Meter) Yearlv Single Family 799 therms/year dwelling unit Multi -Family 4 or less units 482 therms/year dwelling unit Multi -Family 5 or more units 483 therms/year dwelling unit These averages are based on total gas consumption in residential units served by Southern California Gas Coanpany, and it should not be implied that any particular home, apartment or tract of homes will use these amounts of eneray. b. Cmwercial Due to the fact that construction varies so widely (a glass building vs. a heavily insulated building) and there is such a wide variation in types of materials and equipment used, a typical demand figure is not available for this type of construction. Calculations would need to be made after the building has been designed. To insure the existing facilities are adequate to accommodate the new development, an engineering study will be required. Detailed information including tract maps and plot plans must be submitted to the Gas Company Market Services Representa-tive, 1-800-624-2497, six months prior to the actual construction of the natural gas pipeline. We have developed several programs which are available, upon request,to provide assistance in selecting the most effective applications of energy conservation techniques for a particular project. If you desire further information on any of our energy conservation programs, please contact our Building Services Department, P.O. Box 3003, Redlands, CA 92373-0306, phone 1-800-624-2497. Sincerely, Kevin Flum Technical Supervisor KF:blh cc: Environ Affairs - ML209B V *V• CS - FROM: PLANNING & 78-105 OUINTA, 'CAUFORNIA 92253 - (619) 564-2246 FAX (619) 664-5617 'DATE': %_ City ManagerWaste- Management Public Works/Engine r my:;µ Geneya3f'Telephone Fire Marshal a+r'P:X p'a'a-,Vable, vision Buildin & Safet r12a_ � g Y unTi:Tzansit Chamber of Commerce `6�'t '�-"-"" stc c�;--�._aa�s (District II) ImWerial Irrigation -A ultur_al. •Commission -X- P g f -i' Wel is 1�Southern California s City of Z Desert Sands School st. X US Postal Coachella Valley School Dist. CV Archaeological Society Property Owner's Association Principal Planners) Associate Planner(s) Assistant Planner Planning Director Service Riverside County: Planning Department Environmental Health Sheriff's Department LA QUINTA CASE NO (S) : -M 2 Fes'- SC=CCDN� L1 (ram d�30f­ T-i tit f= PROJECT DESCRIPTION: I II Slh1(--V 4- ?—^ Ati v rT-v-a 1 1c GUI fi- 3� 5-rh_2•0- MWUM �=► S95.11 IF, The City of La Quinta Development Review Committee is conducting an initial environmental study pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) for the above referenced project(s). Attached ic *gym submitted by the project proponent. 0t_+t1R_C_a gn-t (ro MQ eAt-ctlt 5ta�t1�S Your comments are requested with respect to:' o,r- was p raj cC_L 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 _;:p 1(9 (!2a and return the maps/plans if not needed for your ice. You are invited to attend the DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE meeting at La Quinta City Hall scheduled for: Date: _ dy �i4 Time: AJ ( A - Contact Person:_ S7F4< J S Title: Comments made by: a o 4 �n� /l Title: Date: 2 2 Phone: 31B-2451_ Agency/Division (,7. �. !i PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 92- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23519 MINOR CHANGE #1, SECOND TIME EXTENSION. CASE NO. TT 23519, MINOR CHANGE #1, SECOND TIME EXTENSION - SANTA ROSA DEVELOPERS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 25th day of October 1988, and the 8th day of May, hold duly -noticed Public Hearings to consider the request of Santa Rosa Developers to approve and amend Tentative Tract 23519 respectively, generally located at the southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Adams Street, more particularly described as: THE SOUTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE -QUARTER AND THE NORTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. U007 THE NORTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST ONE -QUARTER OF SECTION 20, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 15th day of November 1988 and the 19th day of June 1990, hold duly -noticed Public Hearings to consider the Applicant's request and recommendation of the Planning Commission concerning Tentative Tract 23519 and Tentative Tract Minor Change #1, respectively and on both occasions made findings to justify the approval of the applications; 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 conducted an initial study, and has determined that the proposed tentative tract will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and, CS/RESOPC.035 WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Tentative Tract 23519 Minor Change #1, First Time Extension, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, WHEREAS, the new owners, Santa Rosa Developers, have applied for this first Extension of Time for Tentative Tract 23519 Minor Change #1, in accordance with Section 13.16.230 of the La Quinta Municipal Ccde relating to time extension on tentative maps; and, WHEREAS, the City Council at their meeting of December 18, 1990, approved said extension of time for Tentative Tract 23519, Minor Change #1, First Extension of Time; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered a second extension of time at their meeting of March 24, 1992; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts to justify the recommendation for approval of Tentative Tract 23519, Minor Change #1, Second Extension of Time: 1. That Tentative Tract No. 23519, as amended, and conditionally approved, is generally consistent with the goals, policies and .intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use density, unit type, circulation requirements, R-1 zoning district development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. That the subject site has a rolling topography because of the sand dunes, with the overall slope going from the western to the eastern side of the property. The proposed circulation design and single-family lot layouts, as conditioned, are, therefore, suitable for the proposed land division. 3. That the design of amended Tentative Tract Map No. 23519 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 amended 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. CS/RESOPC.035 5. That the amended design of Tentative Tract Map No. 23519 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 amended Tentative Tract No. 23519, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape buffer areas. 7. That the proposed amended Tentative Tract No. 23519, as conditioned, provides storm water retention, park facilities, and noise mitigation. 8. That general impacts from the amended proposed tract were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan. WHEREAS, in the review of the second time extension of this amended Tentative Tract Map, the Planning Commission has considered the effect of the contemplated action of the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing the needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion that a new Environmental Assessment is not needed and Environmental Assessment 88-098 approved with the initial Tentative Tract is adequate. 3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of Tentative Tract Map 23519, Minor Change #1, Second Time Extension for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 24th day of March, 1992, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CS/RESOPC.035 KATIE BARROWS, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: JERRY HERMAN, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California CS/RESOPC.035 BI-1 STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: MARCH 24, 1992 CASE NO. SPECIFIC PLAN 84-003 (AMENDMENT #2) APPLICANT: CUSACK RADAKER DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, INC. REQUEST: APPROVAL OF A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR A SPECIFIC PLAN WHICH ALLOWS A 86 ROOM HOTEL (THE ORCHARD) ON 37.5 ± ACRES. LOCATION: SOUTH SIDE OF 50TH AVENUE APPROXIMATELY 1/4-MILE WEST OF JEFFERSON STREET. EXISTING ZONING: C-T (TOURIST COMMERCIAL) GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: SPECIAL COMMERCIAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT: A PRIOR ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION WAS PREPARED AND ADOPTED FOR THE SPECIFIC PLAN. NO SUBSEQUENT CHANGES ARE PROPOSED. THEREFORE, ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW IS NOT WARRANTED FOR THIS TIME EXTENSION REQUEST. BACKGROUND: Previous to this year, the applicant had been Rufus Associates. During the last two years the applicant had been in bankruptcy. On February 28, 1992, the new owners obtained title at a foreclosure sale on the property. The original Specific Plan approved by the City Council on February 7, 1984, was for the construction of a 60-unit hotel on 28.8 acres. An amendment was processed in 1986 to increase the acreage to 37.5 acres (increase of 8.7 acres) and increase the hotel units to 86 (increase of 26 units). This amendment was considered by the Planning Commission on January 28, 1986. The Commission recommended approval subject to conditions. The City Council concurred with the Commission on February 18, 1986, and adopted Council Resolution No. 86-11, subject to conditions. Condition #4 limited the approval to two years (February 18, 1986, to February 18, 1988). The Applicant requested an amendment in February, 1988, to Condition #4 to permit the approval for one more year. The Commission considered the request on February 9, 1988. The Commission recommended approval of the one-year extension. The City Council considered the request and granted the extension on February 16, 1988. CS/STAFFRPT.089 - 1 - The Applicant, in February of 1989, requested that Condition #4 be eliminated, or a one-year time extension be granted. State law does not address the issue of time extension limits for Specific Plans, nor do City Ordinances. Upon recommendation of the Planning Commission, the City Council at their meeting of April 8, 1989, approved a further one-year extension and amended Condition #4 to require the Applicant to justify to the Planning Commission further time extension requests. The Planning Commission at their meeting of February 13, 1990, approved an additional one year extension at Mr. Diamant's request. In February, 1990, the property wass in Bankruptcy proceedings under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. The appointed trustee requested a time extension because they were negotiating with a party for purchase of the property and subsequent development of the hotel. The potential buyer was Mr. Chuck Strother, the Applicant for the tract and parcel map immediately to the west. On February 12, 1990, the Planning Commission granted a further one year extension to February 18, 1992. CURRENT REQUEST: The new owners are requesting a further one year extension of time for the Specific Plan. ANALYSIS: To date, other than clearing of some citrus trees, little has been done on the site. With a new owner and adequate financing the project could be built soon if the time extension is approved. A portion of the west end of this property was sold to Mr. Strother and incorporated into his tract and Parcel Map to the west. This will necessitate provisions for emergency access to the west side of the Hotel. The Engineering and Planning and Development Departments have not recommended modifications or new conditions. At this time the Fire Marshal reitterated that current Fire Department standards need to be met. This was considered and added in 1990, as Condition #27. RECOMMENDATION: The Specific Plan requires that the Applicant demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the approval prior to any further time extensions. The appointed trustee for the previous applicant and attorney for the new applicants have submitted letters requesting the extension. The Commission may wish to obtain additional justification at the meeting. CS/STAFFRPT.089 - 2 - Staff recommends that approval of this extension by adoption of Minute Motion 92- subject to the conditions as noted in the attached conditions Attachments: 1. Location map 2. Letters from Lawrence Diamant & Genise Reiter 3. Draft Conditions of Approval 4. Plans & exhibits (reduced) 5. Minutes of Planning Commission meeting February 12, 199i CS/STAFFRPT.089 - 3 - 0 cnsE No. �,� 84' �O�31 aQM6NDMlNT �Z -THE L*G+-IARO AT LA 4tji#4-rA NORTH SCALE: �,loncG -fee, 4t00Z� LAWRENCE A. DIAMANT MARTIN J. BRILL EDWARD M. WOLKOWITZ GARY E. KLAUSNER ELLIOTT LISNEK IRVING M. GROSS DOUGLAS D. KAPPLER PHILIP A. GASTEIER KARL E. BLOCK UZZELL S. BRANSON III MICHAEL D. WARNER DAVID T. COHEN FRANKLIN MICHAELS, JR. JUDITH E. SEEDS GREGG D. LUNDBERG MICHAEL P. WEISBERG LAW OFFICES ROBINSON, DIAMANT, BRILL 9 KLAUSNER A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 1888 CENTURY PARK EAST. SUITE 1500 GILBERT ROBINSON n9zs-re9u CENTURY CITY LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90067 TELEPHONE (213) 277-7400 OUR FILL NUMBER TELECOPIER (213) 277-7584 14098.01 January 31, 1992 Jerry Herman, Planning Director City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Specific Plan 84-003 The Orchard Dear Mr. Herman: EE8 0 3 bey 0102C�g 8 i4 1D 3-0 -92 i00 The purchase of the property which is the subject of the above - referenced Specific Plan by La Quinta Joint Ventures was not completed last year. I believe that current economic conditions affected the outcome of that sale. As you know, on February 12, 1992 the one year extension of the subject Specific Plan expires. On February 28, 1992 the property will be transferred to another party as required by a settlement agreement approved by the Bankruptcy Court. I believe it to be in the best interests of all concerned that the new owner have the opportunity to continue forward with the Orchard Hotel plans and development. I therefore request a continuance to April 30, 1992, allowing 60 days for the new owner to request and process an extension so that development of the property may continue. Please let me know if there is a fee required for this continuance. Thank you for your previous assistance and for your consideration of this matter. Please contact me at your convenience if you have any questions or need any additional information. Very truly yours LAWRENCE A. DIAMANT ` LAD:mb 013001.1tr cc: Gary Lohman r Peter A. Davidson, Esq. LAW OFFICES OF p A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS 1096C WILSHIRE BOULEVARD TENTH FLOOR LOS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90024 DAVID L. RAY BYRON Z. MOLOO TELEPHONE HENLEY L. SALTZBURG JOHN D. MONTE (310) 444-6400 ALAN M. BERGMAN NORMAN A. FAGIN GENISE R. REITER* ROBERT HARRISON WOODROW R. COSSEY TAMARA J. WINTER W. GARY KURTZ EFREN A. COMPEAN PETER A. DAVIDSON SARA T. HARRIS JENNIFER WASHBURN SHAW DEIRDRE H. HILL ERIC F. EDMUNDS. JR. STEVEN N. RUBY SANDRA L. STEVENS DAVID A. GREENE March 2, 1992 C. GEOFFREY MITCHELL KARRIN FEEMSTER PAUL T. DYE DARIA A. DUB OF COUNSEL LEE J. COHEN. PAUTA REDDISH ZINNEMANN JONATHAN A. TILLMAN 'A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION CERTAIN ATTORNEYS ALSO ADMITTED TO PRACTICE IN NEW JERSEY, N CAROLINA. TEXAS AND THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA Stan B. Sawa Principal Planner The City of La Quinta P. O. Box 1504 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, CA 92253 Re: Specific Plan 84-003 The Orchard Dear Mr. Sawa: NEWPORT BEACH OFFICE 1301 DOVE STREET. SUITE 900 NEWPORT BEACH. CALIFORNIA 92E40 (714) 731.6521 4 1112PLYnR r TO: TELECOPIER (310) 444-6420 WRITERS DIRECT DIAL NUMBER: 7Z l r. < .- r 1 • Z �.4 MAR 04 199, This letter is in response to yours written February 24, 1992, regarding Specific Plan 84-003, The Orchard. As you may be aware, the foreclosure sale on the property was held on February 28, 1992. The property is now owned by Cusack Radaker Development Company, Inc. This firm represents Cusack Radaker, Inc. with respect to the Orchard property. Per your request in your letter, enclosed please find the filing fee for $100 for the purpose of processing the application in the above -referenced matter. If there is anything else we need to do prior to March 24, 1992, I would appreciate your informing me of any necessary activity. LAW OFFICES OF A PARTNERSHIP INCLUDING PROFESSIONAL CORPORATIONS March 2, 1992 Page 2 I can be reached at the above -referenced number. Thank you for your help and cooperation. Very truly yours, SALT BURG, RAY 7GMAN G ISE R. REITER GRR:tm Encls. 4112.001\Sawa.1 cc: Byron Radaker CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - PROPOSED SPECIFIC PLAN 84-003, AMENDMENT #2 "THE ORCHARD AT LA QUINTA" March 24, 1992 * Modified by Planning Commissioner 2-12-91 ** Added by Planning Commission 2-12-91 1. The development of the resort hotel as approved by Specific Plan 84-003, Amendment No. 2 shall comply with the policies and provisions of the La Quinta General Plan. 2. Development of the site shall comply with the standards and requirements of the La Quinta Land Use Ordinance unless otherwise modified by these Conditions of Approval. 3. Specific Plan 84-003, Amendment No. 2 shall comply with the applicable provision of Tentative Parcel Map 19834, Revised No. 1, as approved by the Community Development Department. 4. The Planning Commission shall conduct annual reviews of this Specific Plan starting on or before February 18, 1990. During each periodic review by the Planning Commission, "The Orchard" Developer/Applicant shall be required to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Specific Plan. The Applicant/Developer of The Orchard shall furnish such evidence of The Orchard's compliance as the city in the exercise of its reasonable discretion may require. Evidence of good faith compliance may include, but shall not necessarily be limited to, good faith compliance with the requirements of the Specific Plan. Upon conclusion of the annual review, the Commission may extend the approval period for twelve months at a time. (Amended by City Council Resolution #89-46, April 18, 1989.) 5. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any use contemplated by this approval, the Applicant shall first obtain permits and or clearances from the following public agencies: o City Engineer o City Fire Marshal o Planning & Development Department o Riverside County Environmental Health Department o Coachella Valley Water 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. CS/CONAPRVL.031 - 1 - Conditions of Approval - Specific Plan 84-003, Amd. #2 - 3/24/92 6. Project phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department. BUILDING AND PROJECT DESIGN *7. The development of the buildings and site shall comply with the approved Exhibits A, B, C, and D as contained in the Community Development Department file for Specific Plan 84-003, Amendment No. 2 and the following conditions which conditions shall take precedence in the event of any conflicts with the provisions of the specific plan. 8. The Applicant shall submit plans for the location and design of any maintenance facilities for the hotel and its grounds to the Community Development Department for review and approval. 9. All mechanical equipment, heating and cooling equipment shall be ground mounted or screened from view by the buildings roof structure. 10. The location and design of trash enclosures shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. STREETS, DRAINAGE, AND GRADING 11. The Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the City Engineer: a. The Applicant shall dedicate all necessary public street and utility easements as required by the city Engineer and in accordance with the La Quinta General Plan. b. The Applicant shall construct half width street improvements for Avenue 50 in accordance with the requirements of the City Engineer and the La Quinta General Plan. C. The Applicant shall be responsible for the construction of a landscaped median on Avenue 50, subject to compliance with City policies and procedures in effect at the time of the development. *d. In conjunction with the Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map 19834, Revised No. 1 and prior to the issuance of grading or building permits for Specific Plan 84-003, Amendment No. 2, the Applicant shall submit an access/traffic circulation analysis prepared by a Registered Civil or Traffic Engineer for the hotel and parcel map site. This analysis shall address access from 0, CS/CONAPRVL.031 - 2 - Conditions of Approval - Specific Plan 84-003, Amd. #2 - 3/24/92 public roads and on -site circulation. This report shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review and approval; and (if necessary) revised site and improvement plans conforming with the approved circulation analysis shall be submitted for review and approval. e. That 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 LQMC. (3" AC over 4" Class Base minimum. for residential streets). Street design shall take into account the subgrade soil strength, the anticipated traffic loading, and street design life. f. The grading plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer and approved by the City Engineer prior to grading plan approval. *g. The Applicant shall retain a California registered civil engineer,, or designate one who is on the 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 the Applicant and charged with the compliance responsibility shall make the following certifications upon completion of construction: 1. All grading work was properly monitored by qualified personnel during construction for compliance with the grading plans, specifications, and applicable codes and ordinances and thereby certify the grading to be in full compliance with those documents. 2. The finished building pad elevations conform with the approved grading plans. h. A thorough preliminary engineering geological and soil engineering investigation shall be done and therefore submitted for review along with the grading plan. The reports recommendations shall be incorporated into 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 CS/CONAPRVL.031 - 3 - Conditions of Approval - Specific Plan 84-003, Amd. #2 - 3/24/92 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. i. A detailed hydrology and hydraulic study of the site shall be required prior to the issuance of grading or building permits. All structures shall be protected from 100-year storm flooding. j. 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. k. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured prior to construction on joining improvements. *1. The Applicant acknowledges that the City has formed a City-wide Landscape and Lighting District and the Applicant agrees to be included in the district. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis as required by law. 12. In order to facilitate mitigation of cumulative traffic impacts of this and other area projects, the City shall establish a traffic improvement needs monitoring program.This program will undertake biannual traffic count studies that determine if warrants are met for major roadway improvements and traffic signalization. Upon determination of needs, the City may initiate projects to meet those needs. Funding of this program may be by fee programs that assess new development and/or users on a pro-rata or fair -share basis, formation of assessment districts, acquisition of State or Federal road funds, or other means that fairly allocate costs to those generating the need. The Applicant shall agree to pay the designated pro-rata share that the City may establish to fund off -site roadway improvements and traffic signalization on an "as warranted" basis. *13. The Applicant shall comply with the Community Development and Engineering Department's requirements for dust control during and after grading and construction. 14. Parking shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the Municipal Land Use Ordinance and the City Engineer. M CS/CONAPRVL.031 - 4 - Conditions of Approval - Specific Plan 84-003, Amd. #2 - 3/24/92 15. The Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the City Fire Marshal: a. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the City of La Quintals adopted codes and ordinances in effect at the time of construction and the requirements of the City Fire Marshal. The City Fire Marshal may approve alternative means of compliance where deemed equivalent or superior to these standards. b. Provide a water system capable of delivering 2500 gpm fire flow for a two hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure. The required fire flow may be adjusted at a later date in the permit process to reflect changes in design, construction type, area separations, or built-in fire protection measures. C. A combination of on -site and off -site super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2 1/2" x 2 1/2") will be required and located not less than 25 feet nor more than 165 feet from any portion of the buildings as measured along approved travelways. The required fire flow shall be available from any two adjacent hydrants in the system. d. All buildings must be sprinklered. Complete fire sprinkler systems shall be installed in accordance with NFPA 13. Plan review and approval by Factory Mutual or Insurance Services Office will be required. Post indicator valves and fire department connections shall be located at building fronts, not less than 25 feet from the building and within 50 feet of an approved hydrant. e. Install fire alarms (waterflow) and tamper alarms on the water supply system to the sprinkler system(s). f. Install fire alarms, panic hardware, exit signs, portable fire extinguishers and other fire control devices as required by the City's adopted codes, NFPA, Pamphlet No. 10, and the Fire Marshal. g. Buildings more than 150' from approved vehicular access must have Class III hose cabinets and standpipes. h. Fire department connections must be provided at approved locations on the perimeter access road. Certain designated areas will be required to be designated as fire lanes. M CS/C©NAPRVL.031 - 5 - Conditions of Approval - Specific Plan 84-003, Amd. #2 - 3/24/92 i. The applicant shall furnish water system plans to the City Fire Marshal for review and approval. Said plans shall comply with all the Fire Marshal's requirements. Plans shall be signed/approved by a Registered Civil Engineer and Coachella Valley Water District 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." j. A fire flow of 500 gpm for a 2 hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure must be available before any combustible material related to construction is placed at the site. k. Staff emergency personnel shall have carts capable of carrying gurneys and litters. 16. The Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District: a. The domestic water system shall be installed in accordance with the District and City requirements at the time of development. b. The Applicant shall provide and dedicate to the District, any land needed for the provision of additional facilities, including but not limited to sites for wells, reservoirs, and booster pumping stations. C. The site shall be annexed to CVWD Improvement District No. 55 for sanitation service. 17. The Applicant shall provide all necessary easements for public utilities. All on -site utilities shall be placed underground. The overhead telephone cable along the south side of Avenue 50 shall be undergrounded. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Imperial Irrigation District. MISCELLANEOUS: *18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a noise study prepared by a licensed acoustical engineer. The study shall focus on the noise generated by this nonresidential use (including traffic noise) as it could affect residential uses within 1000 feet of the site and traffic noise from 50th Avenue. Rased upon the study as approved by the Community Development Department, mitigation measures shall be incorporated into the design as required. CS/CONAPRVL.031 - 6 - Conditions of Approval - Specific Plan 84-003, Amd. #2 - 3/24/92 19. Perimeter walls or fences shall be subject to the following requirements: a. Walls shall be setback a minimum of twenty (20) feet from the Avenue 50 right-of-way. b. Portions of the wall along Avenue 50 may use wrought iron or similar open fencing to allow views into the project where appropriate. C. View of the parking lots shall be screened from Avenue 50 and adjoining parcels by the use of walls or combination walls/berms. d. The walls along the interior property lines may be placed on the property line. e. The design of the walls shall take into consideration any noise abatement considerations as required by Condition No. 18. f. All fencing designs, including location, materials and construction, shall be submitted to the Community Development Department for review and approval. g. A modification of these standards may be permitted dependent upon the overall design and location of the walls and site conditions. 20. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit plans to the Community Development Department, Planning Division, for review and approval which shall indicate the following: a. Landscaping material, including plant type, species, size, spacing and location. b. Landscape Irrigation system incorporating water conservation measures where feasible. C. Locations of exterior walkways. d. Exterior lighting plan with details of proposed lighting fixtures. e. Design and location of trash enclosures in accordance with the requirements of the City and Palm Desert Disposal Service. *21. Prior to the issuance of certificates of occupancy, the Applicant shall submit a master signage plan to the Planning and Development Department, for review and approval by the Design Review Board. The plan shall indicate the following: 5 CS/CONAPRVL.031 - 7 - Conditions of Approval - Specific Plan 84-003, Amd. #2 - 3/24/92 a. Location, size and design of project signs. b. Directory signs at major entrances and appropriate points to direct emergency personnel. C. Location, size and design of on -site directional and informational signs. 22. Existing trees on the site shall be retained in general accordance with Exhibit "D". The Applicant is encouraged to maintain the trees in agricultural production, provided that it is economically feasible. 23. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Applicant shall submit an archaeological survey on the site to the Community Development Department for review and approval. Mitigation measures recommended in the approved survey shall be completed prior to commencement of grading. 24. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's adopted infrastructure fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. This fee may include drainage fees. 25. A minimum 20-foot deep landscape setback shall be provided along 50th Avenue. Design of the setback shall be approved by Planning and Development Department. Setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way lines. Setback to be maintained by the Applicant and/or operator of the hotel, unless alternate methods are approved by the Planning and Development Department. (Added by Minute Motion 90-008, February 13, 1990.) 26. 75% of all structures within 150-feet of 50th Avenue right-of-way shall not exceed one story in height (maximum 20-feet), as approved by the Planning and Development Department. (Added by Minute Motion 90-008, February 13, 1990.) 27. All current Fire Department conditions and requirements shall be met, including upgrading of Condition of Approval #15 (City Fire Marshal conditions) of Specific Plan 84-003, Amendment #2. (Added by Minute Motion 90-008, February 13, 1990.) **28. Design Review Board shall review plans pertaining to buildings signage and landscaping as determined necessary by the Planning and Development Department. **29. Prior to issuance of grading permit, Applicant shall obtain and record permanent easement for emergency access along west side of property. Access shall be reviewed and approved by the City and Fire Marshall prior to recordation. This easement is to replace access to 50th Avenue which was eliminated with Lot Line Adjustments 90-117 and 118. 1 -8- �- '�L� LM3 W4 W� W;K L IW. 0 m IHVM31S VN?13'P r Mw**,o`H:5A;q_;w, W PAT, wi- :jo q, 3 Gaf NE)ISM: ldvm3ls YIN lnlVi IV (3llVH*aO 3HL*. '1V'-GaVHOZIO MI.-% I r oc, 2. 66mmissioner Dowd inquired if Staff felt a facility was needed for theaintenance workers who would be required to maintain the commho ,areas, due to the number of houses being planned for this a Principal Planner Stan Sawa stated that the normal procedu for this type of project was for the homeowner's association contract with a landscaping company to maintain the common a as and they would bring their equipment with them and not bE in need of a building to store their equipment. 3. It was noted by StaX that for Condition 8A (1) , the street width should be changed f 36 feet to 40 feet. 4. Brian Esgate, Communit `engineering Services, spoke on behalf of the Applicant. He stat t3.,they had no objections to any of the conditions that were sugge ted by Staff and that the Applicant had plans for forming a lands 'ing and lighting district for this tract as well as the adjoining acts they owned. 5. Chairperson Steding inquired of e"accesses onto Miles Avenue. Staff explained there would be no r4ffic lights or stop signs, but at least one full turning access w be provided due to the distance from Jefferson Street. \X 6. There being no further questions, it was m v d by Commissioner Barrows and seconded by Commissioner Do adopt Planning Commission Resolution 91-002 recommending t e City Council approval of Tentative Tract 26188 subject he attached Conditions of Approval, amending Condition 8 as noted above. icALL-VflT E :- - - -AV ES - - sio_ners Ladner I _ arrow;_-. Q -_ air..pe son Steding. NOES: None. ABSES;: None. ABSTAINING: None. IV. PUBLIC COST - None V. BUSINESS SESSION --� A. Specific Plan 84-003 - The Orchard; a request of Lawrence A. Diamant (Chapter 11 Trustee) for Rufus Associates for approval of a one year extension of time for a specific plan. 1. Principal Planner Stan Sawa presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Planning Director Jerry Herman clarified Condition #2 regarding access to the project off of 50th Avenue. PCMIN2-12.. AI 1 2 3. Commissioner Ladner inquired if there was a limit to the number of extensions that could be granted. Planning Director Jerry Herman stated that it was at the discretion of the Planning Commission. 4. Commissioner Mosher and Chairperson Steding inquired if Mr. Diamant knew if the proposed buyer of the project was planning to build the project as it was approved. Mr. Diamant stated he did not know if the proposed buyer planned to build the approved project. 5. Chairperson Steding asked Staff what the Specific Plan allowed. Planning Director Jerry Herman gave an explanation of the approved project. 6. Discussion followed as to the original concept of the project and the ownership of the four original parcels of land and how they had been divided up. 7. Following the discussion, Commissioner Mosher moved and Commissioner Barrows seconded the motion to adopt Minute Motion 91-005, approving a one year extension of time. Unanimously approved. Th a being no corrections to the Minutes of January 22, 1991, it ,was moved by Comm' sioner Barrows and seconded by Commissioner Dowd to apProve the Minutes as sub 'tted . Unanimously approved. VII. OTH A. PiARliminary review and discussion of proposed modification to office buiNng at northeast corner of Calle Cadi and Avenida Bermudas. 1. Punning Director Jerry Herman presented the information coat ed in the Staff report %a copy of which is on file in the Planni and Development partment . 2. Commission Ladner in uired if Staff knew what the ratio of parking spat for the 'ew addition would be. Planning Director .ferry Herman, a . that when the present building was approved, the ApWcant was required to pay an in -lieu fee for parking becausey t ere were not enough parking spaces provided. Comissier Ladner asked Staff to explain the in - lieu fee process. Planning Director Jerry Herman explained the process for,the Commissioners and further stated that at present the City had granted two variances for in -lieu fees for parking. Commissioner Ladner expres d her concern of establishing a precedent for future develop s and eventually not having enough parking for the downtown rea. { PCMIN2-12 3 MI1\TUTES PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California March 10, 1992 I. CALL TO ORDER II. 7:00 P.M. A. The meeting was called to order at 7:04 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows. The Flag Salute was led by Commissioner Ellson. ROLL CALL A. Chairwoman Barrows requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Ellson, Marrs, and Chairwoman Barrows. Commissioner Marrs moved to excuse Commissioners Mosher and Ladner. Commissioner Ellson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. B . Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, Associate Planner Greg Trousdell, and Department Secretary Betty Anthony. PUBLIC HEARINGS A. General Plan Amendment 91-040, Change of Zone 91-069, and Tentative Tract 26768. A request of BESTCO Investments, Limited, to amend the City's Land Use Element. from Riverside County Agricultural to Very Low Density Residential for approximately 44 acres; change of zone from R-1 10 acres to R-1 20,000 single family residential for approximately 44 acres; and a tentative tract to subdivide +20 acres into 21 single family lots . 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. There being no questions of Staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Greg Shannon, representing the applicant, stated they had no objections to the Conditions of Approval but had questions concerning the bus easement, concern that the equestrian trail would go somewhere, the paleontological and noise study, and the school mitigation fees. 3. As no one else wished to speak, Chairwoman Barrows closed the Public Hearing and asked Staff to address Mr. Shannon's questions. PC3-10 Planning commission Minutes March 10, 1992 4. Regarding the bus easement, Steve Speer, Assistant City Engineer, stated that Sunline Transit had asked for the easement for a future bus turnout. He did not feel this was the best location and would not require the developer to develop it at this time. The City only wanted the easement for future use if necessary. 5. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell stated regarding the noise study that the Applicant could update the study that was done for their earlier project (Qualico) to the north. The paleontological study is required of all projects in this area. 6. Planning Director Jerry Herman stated that the equestrian trail will be linked all the way to 58th Avenue as the projects are developed. In addition, the school mitigation fees condition is the same condition attached to all recent projects in the area. 7. Commissioner Marrs asked if the Landmark project to the south was required to have a bus turnout. Staff stated they were conditioned the same and went on to explain how Sunline determines the distance between turnouts. Discussion followed as to which site was more appropriate. 8. Commissioner Marrs asked when the noise study was completed. Staff stated the report was completed in 1991. 9. There being no further questions, it was moved by Commissioner Ellson and seconded by Commissioner Marrs to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92-007 recommending to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment 91-040 and confirmation of the Environmental Determination. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Ellson, Marrs, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Mosher & Ladner. ABSTAINING: None. 10. It was moved by Commissioner Ellson and seconded by Commissioner Marrs to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92- 008 recommending to the City Council approval of Change of Zone 91-069, from R-1 1.0 acres to R-1 20, 000 single family residential. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Ellson, Marrs, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Mosher & Ladner. ABSTAINING: None. PC3-10 2 Planning Commission Minutes March 10, 1992 11. It was moved by Commissioner Ellson and seconded by Commissioner Marrs to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92- 009 recommending to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 26768, subject to the attached conditions. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Ellson, Marrs, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Mosher & Ladner. ABSTAINING: None. B . Tentative Tract 27332; a request of Sunrise Desert Partners for approval of a tentative tract to divide 7 acres into 5 residential lots for development of 42 condominium units. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. There being no questions of Staff, Chairwoman Barrows opened the Public Hearing. Mr. Allan Levin, Sunrise Company, addressed the Commission regarding questions on Conditions of Approval #5, #9, and #13. There being no further comment, Chairwoman Barrows closed the Public Hearing. 3. Assistant City Engineer Steve Speer amended the Conditions of Approval as follows: #5. Add the following sentence: "Developer may amend the grading plan prepared for Tentative Tract 25499 in lieu of preparing a new plan." V . Add the following sentence: "Developer may submit a copy of the report prepared for Tentative Tract 25499." #9 . Delete "prior to construction of any streets". #10. Delete. #13. Delete. #14.a. Delete. #15. Delete. #19.b. Delete. #20. Delete. PC3-10 Planning Commission Minutes March 10, 1992 4. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Marrs and seconded by Commissioner Ellson to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 92-010 recommending to the City Council that the project will not impact the environment pursuant to the past adoption of FEIR 83-009 and approval of Tentative Tract 27332, subject to the amended conditions. ROLL CALL VOTE: AYES: Commissioners Ellson, Marrs, & Chairwoman Barrows. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Mosher & Ladner. ABSTAINING: None. V . PUBLIC COMMENT: - None VI. BUSINESS SESSION A. Plot Plan 92-479; a request of Sunrise Company to establish a new model type and a new home complex within PGA West. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Mr. Allan Levin, Sunrise Company, addressed the Commission regarding the Design Review Board recommendation. He stressed the cost involved in meeting the recommendation for an 18-inch eave. 3. Mr. Ken Rover, Sunrise Company, addressed the same problem as it related to the State of California Title 24 requirements. 4. Commissioner Ellson asked if the C C & R's restrict what type of shading homeowners can construct. Mr. Levin stated they would need approval from the Homeowners Association's Architectural Review Committee. 5. Chairwoman Barrows stated the recommendation was not a strict requirement, but only that shading be provided. 6. Commissioner Marrs stated that he had attended the Design Review Board meeting and they all felt the overhangs were not the solution to the problem. Most felt that a window tinting would be a better solution. 7. Commissioner Ellson asked if trees could be used. Discussion followed as to the alternatives that were available. 8. Mr. Levin stated his concern that if the condition remains it could cause a problem for them in the future as to interpretation. PC3-10 4 Planning Commission Minutes March 10, 1992 9. Chairwoman Barrows directed Staff to prepare policies regarding the Commissions request for shading. 10. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Ellson and seconded by Commissioner Marrs to adopt Minute Motion 92-010 approving the new Trophy units (Plan #2 through #5) as presented. Unanimously approved. B . Setback Adjustment 92-099; a request of Gerald Shea to adjust the rear yard setback of ten feet to one foot for a portable gazebo structure and to adjust the rear yard setback of 5 feet to 1-1/2 feet for a portable spa. 1. Associate Planner Greg Trousdell presented the information contained in the Staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning and Development Department. 2. Commissioner Marrs asked if a permit would be required if this was a portable spa. Staff explained the Building and Zoning Code. Discussion followed as to how the City could prevent the problem from re -occurring. 3. Mr. Gerald Shea addressed the Commission stating he had no objections to the Staff recommendation. 4. There being no further discussion, it was moved by Commissioner Marrs and seconded by Commissioner Ellson to adopt Minute Motion 92-011 approving Setback Adjustment 92- 099 . Unanimously approved. VII. CONSENT CALENDAR A. There being no corrections, Commissioner Marrs move and Commissioner Ellson seconded a motion to approve the Minutes of the regular meeting of February 25, 1992, as submitted. Unanimously approved. VIII. OTHER - None IX. ADJOURNMENT A motion was made by Commissioner Marrs and seconded by Commissioner Ellson to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a regular meeting on March 24, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers. This meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at 8: 25 P.M. , March 10, 1992. PC3-10