1992 09 28 PC■a
P
••i■
•'%'• L.A.11iNlrNG C®1�1I,5,5I ®N
AL •
'inta AGENDA
- 1992 Ten Carat Decade
A Special Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta YMCA Child Care Development Center
49-955 Park Avenue
La Quinta, California
September 28, 1992
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT COMIVIISSION MEETING
Beginning Resolution 92-032
Beginning Minute Motion 92-033
CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute
ROLL CALL
PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Item ............... CONTINUED DRAFT
CRAL T(D SAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IlVPATREPORFE
Applicant .......... City of La Quints
Location ........... City Wide
Request ............ Approval of FEIR and General Plan for La Quints General
Plan
Action ............. Resolution 92-
OTHER
ADJOURNMENT
PC/AGENDA 1
i
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRWOMAN & PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 28, 1992
SUBJECT: CONTINUANCE OF DRAFT GENERAL PLAN AND FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
As you requested at the General Plan public hearing of September 22,
1992, which was continued to tonight's special meeting, maps &
information regarding properties identified by individuals that made
public comment have been compiled to assist you in the decision
making process.
The individuals were:
o Forrest Haag - Landmark Land
o Mary Francis Fenady/Mr. Sadd
o Hank Hohenstein - City of Indio
o Michael Bangerter
o Ray Hanes - A.G. Spanos
Forrest Haag - Landmark Land:
The proposed General Plan does not eliminate commercial uses at the
northwest corner of Avenue 50 and Jefferson Street. This corner has
been designated Neighborhood Commercial on the Land Use Policy
Diagram. The Neighborhood Commercial designation is intended to
provide areas in La Quinta which serve the retail and service needs
of an immediate neighborhood trade area. The primary tenants of such
areas would typically include grocery stores, drug stores, eating and
drinking establishments, automobile service stations and personal
services, such as dry cleaners, and hair salons. The Neighborhood
Commercial land use designation is flexible to allow for smaller
scale administrative/professional businesses, such as medical
services, finance, insurance and real estate offices.
The issue appears to be one of scale.
identifies approximately 47 acres of
designation at this corner. The
identifies Neighborhood Commercial at
The existing General Plan
the General Commercial land use
proposed General Plan Update
this location (Attachment #1).
MEMOFB.037/CS
-1-
In response to issues which have been identified by citizens,
homeowners, and elected and appointed officials throughout the
General Plan Update process (relative to increasing traffic through
and adjacent to established and future neighborhoods, the scale and
character of commercial uses serving residential neighborhoods, as
well as the types of non-residential uses adjacent to neighborhoods)
a concerted effort was made to reclassify the existing commercial
land use designations to be more sensitive and appropriate to the
scale and character of the various residential areas in the city.
Consequently, the neighborhood commercial land use designation was
defined to include the uses described above. Moreover, general
development standards were developed to ensure that the integrity and
desirability of the residential neighborhoods adjacent to the
Neighborhood Commercial areas were maintained. The development
standards included in the Neighborhood Commercial land use
designation would allow for 20 acres of commercial uses at this
corner. The permitted building floor -to -site area ratio of 0.25
would allow a maximum of approximately 217,800 square feet of
commercial uses on 20 acres, which is very adequate for a
neighborhood commercial center and ancillary professional
office/service uses. (The Plaza La Quinta shopping center at the
southwest corner of Washington Street and Highway 111 is currently
113,000 square feet). Building heights would complement the
surrounding neighborhoods by being a maximum of two stories in height
and vehicular access would be prohibited from local and collector
streets. Driveways to the Neighborhood Commercial areas would be
only from arterial streets. All of these standards are intended to
complement neighborhood scale and character and to discourage the
deterioration of residential areas in La Quinta. The types of uses
(Home Depot, building materials centers, offices) mentioned by Mr.
Haag during the September 22, 1992 Planning Commission public hearing
are intended to be located in areas designated Community Commercial
and Mixed/Regional Commercial.
Fenady/Sadd:
The location of the La Quinta Civic Center and Ralph's Supermarket at
the corner of Washington Street and Calle Tampico illustrates the
dynamics of the planning process. The free enterprise system of land
economics will result in development pressures along Calle Tampico
which should be addressed in the context of the entire Village area
and not on a lot -by -lot basis. Redesignating the land use
classifications of the small lots identified by Ms. Fenady and Mr.
Sadd (see Attachment #2) at this time, without addressing the land
use, traffic, noise, urban design and accessibility impacts on the
surrounding area as a whole would be premature and inappropriate.
The General Plan is a document which establishes overall development
policy on a city-wide scale. The issues presented by Ms. Fenady and
Mr. Sadd are more appropriately addressed in the Village Specific
Plan. The General Plan Update includes policies and implementation
measures regarding revisiting and updating the Village Specific
Plan. The context and scale of the Village Specific Plan provides
the appropriate forum within which to address specific lot -by -lot
issues in the area.
MEMOFB.037/CS -2-
Hank Hohenstein - City of Indio:
The extension of Madison Street north to Highway 111 dictates that an
appropriate facility to handle projected traffic volumes be
provided. Based on buildout ADT for the La Quinta General Plan
Update, in order to maintain a minimum L.O.S. D (Policy 3.2.1.3; page
3-14; Circulation Element), Madison Street should be designated as a
4-lane divided primary arterial, in accordance with Tables CIR-1 and
CIR-2, between 52nd Avenue and Highway 111. When contacted in March,
1992, the City of Indio indicated that Madison Street is designated
as a 4-lane primary arterial at 110-feet right-of-way, north to
Highway 111 from 50th Avenue. Although the need for primary arterial
status farther south of 52nd Avenue cannot be fully determined at
this time, potential development/expansion of the Thermal Airport
area suggest that the need for such facilities could very likely
develop during the buildout time frame.
At one point the course of evaluating alternative land use scenarios
and circulation elements, Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes
generated with the City of La Quinta traffic model indicated that six
lanes on Madison Street would be required to support projected
community buildout traffic volumes. Following subsequent revisions
to the buildout land use scenario and ADT projections, Madison Street
has been redesignated a four -lane arterial roadway in the Circulation
Element of the City of La Quinta General Plan Update.
The intent of the statement that the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments identifies Madison Street in it's Regional Arterial
Improvement Program was to demonstrate consistency in the City of La
Quinta's designation of Madison Street as a four -lane arterial with
the regional designation of the facility. The reference to the
Regional Arterial Improvement Program is not intended to imply any
future funding arrangement.
Michael Bangerter:
Mr. Bangerter's property at the southeast (Attachment #3) corner of
Avenue 52 and Jefferson Street is designated Special Commercial on
the existing General Plan. The property is zoned C-P-S, Scenic
Highway Commercial, on the La Quinta official Zoning Map. The
General Plan Update addresses General Plan land use designations, not
the underlying zoning of a specific site. The zoning ordinance is
one of a number of tools utilized to implement General Plan
policies. Subsequent to adoption of the General Plan Update, zoning
issues will be addressed in order to be consistent with the General
Plan policies.
Relative to Mr. Bangerter's property, the proposed General Plan
Update Land Use Policy Diagram designates this area as Low Density
Residential. In response to concerns regarding the proliferation of
commercial land uses along the Jefferson Street corridor, the
preservation and enhancement of neighborhoods and the scale and
character of nonresidential uses in this area of the City, this
corner was redesignated Low Density Residential.
MEMOFB.037/CS -3-
It was believed that the Neighborhood Commercial on the northwest
corner of the same intersection would be adequate to serve the retail
and service needs of the surrounding area which is almost exclusively
rural, low and very low density.
If the Planning Commission is concerned with the impact of
redesignating the southeast corner to Low Density Residential and is
contemplating changing the designation, Staff and the consult and
should suggest using the Neighborhood Commercial land use
designation. As presented in the response to Mr. Haag's comment, the
Neighborhood Commercial designation includes development standard
which are intended to ensure that commercial zones are of a scale,
character and include tenants which are compatible with surrounding
residential neighborhoods. In Mr. Bangerter's September 18, 1992
letter to the Mayor, City Council, Planning Commission and Planning
Director, he indicated that the Neighborhood Commercial designation
would be suitable.
Ray Hanes- A.G. Spanos:
Relative to the Lake La Quinta project, the proposed General Plan
Land Use Policy Diagram should include the 3.5 acre parcel contiguous
to the lake within the Office designation, to allow for the
restaurant facilities planned at this location (Attachment #4). The
existing General Plan designation for this location is Mixed
Commercial. The proposed General Plan Update is representative of
the uses actually occurring and being approved for the project site
(e.g. residential uses, commercial, etc.).
The Office designation in the proposed General Plan Update includes
provisions for office support uses such as eating and drinking
establishments and retail and personal services. The restaurant
facilities proposed on this parcel would be consistent with the
intent of the Office designation in the proposed General Plan Update.
Relative to the Specific Plan 88-012 project, at the southeast corner
of Washington Street and Miles Avenue, the General Plan Update Land
Use Policy Diagram should be amended to reflect the entire area
intended to be developed as Low Density Residential uses, as
illustrated on approved Tentative Tract 23995 (see Attachment #5).
This would result in a small area designated High Density Residential
changing to Low Density Residential on the Land Use Policy Diagram.
This makes the approval more project specific on the proposed General
Plan Land Use Map, and also addresses the fact that this approval was
not illustrated on the currently existing General Plan Land Use Map.
In addition, the following minor text corrections are recommended:
1. Policy 2-1.1.1.: delete "S= Reserved but undedicated school or
public park sites (acres).
2) Add a policy requiring "employment support services" in the
Mixed Regional Commercial (M/RC) and Office (0) categories.
MEMOFB.037/CS -4-
3) Assign the land use designation Low Density Residential (LDR) to
approximately 40 acres located at the northeast corner of
Madison and Avenue 55 (TT 27224). (Delete the designation Very
Low Density Residential - VLDR).
4. Revise Policy 2-6.4.3. to read as identified in Response to
Comments, EIR Appendix C, page C-16, response number 45. As a
result our response to comments for the E.I.R. a change in this
General Plan policy is warranted.
The minutes of the September 22, 1992 Planning Commission meeting
have been attached for your reference. Most of the above discussed
revisions were made based upon comments presented at the last meeting.
RECOMMENDATION:
The Staff recommendation remains as set forth in the September 22,
1992, Staff Report (Attachment #7), subject to any changes the
Planning Commission may wish to make, either based upon tonight's
Staff Report or any other modifications prior to any decision on the
General Plan. Staff does not recommend that any further findings be
made.
Attachments:
1. Landmark Land property at the northwest corner of 50th Avenue
and Jefferson Street.
2. Fenady/Saad property location
3. Bangerter property location
4. Spanos property: Tract 24230
5. Spanos property: Tract 23995
6. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting of Sept. 22, 1992
7. Staff Report from meeting of Sept. 22, 1992
MEMOFB.037/CS -5-
. \Ap
r
0
0
o b o
2
Z
V N 0
f'br. fk
Le
/ ; 400'
ATTACHMENT *'
LANDMARK
PROPERTY
4/
CURRENT BOUNDARY
GENERAL COMMERCIA
47.2 AC
PROPOSED BOUNDAR'
NC 20 AC MOL.
e
March 9, 1992
Mayor John Pena
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Mayor Pena:
It is my understanding that the City of La Quinta is in the
preliminary stages of revis_ng its General Plan - Land Use
Designation.
In reviewing a most recent text produced for the City, several
parcel. designations appear to suggest a changed Land Use. Of
specific importance to Landmark Land Company, Inc. are the
proposed changes suggested at: the N/W corner of Jefferson St.
and Ave 50, the S/W corner of Jefferson St. and Ave 52, and the
S/E corner of Jefferson St. and Ave 52.
First, the N/W corner of Jefferson St. and Ave. 50. In 1989, General
Plan Ammendment No. 89-026, Zone Change 89-045 redesignated
36.5 acres (Citrus Property) from Commercial to LDR, a zone change
from CPS to R-2. In conjunction, General Plan Ammendment N0.89-027,
Zone Change 89-046 redesignated 47.2 acres (N/W Jefferson St. and
Ave 50) from LDR to Commercial, a zone change from A-1-10 to C-P-S.
The entire 47.2 acre parcel should be zoned C-P-S.
Second, the S/W corner of Jefferson St. and Ave 52. The Land Use
Designation should be Commercial as approved in the Oak Tree West
Specific Plan.
Third, the S/E corner of Jefferson St. and Ave 52. The Land Use
Designation should be Commercial as was designated by the County of
Riverside. Landmark's agreement to annex the property into the City
was in part related to the City of La Quinta accepting and designating
the parcel consistent with County Zoning.
Mr. Mayor, it appears that an oversight has occurred in the early stages
of the City's review of these specific parcels. Revisions to the text
reflecting the previously approved land use is being requested and is
appropriate.
Your further review and involvement is appreciated.
Respectfully,
���
Greg A.badie
Landmark Land Company of California, Inc.
cc: Jerry Herman
LANDMARK LAND COMPANY, INC., Post Office Box 1000, La Quinta, Califprnia 92253 (619) 564-3672
'02.
6 T.' 6 S. R. 7 E.
QB6�
I73
h
al 74
•'
\
I
TkA SB£ 20/- dd
Par. 3
AVENI DA
LA FONDA
R=4.$, A- 26'!11I
AVE.
66
o•se's�•w
ATTACHMENT *2
FENADY/GAAD PROPERTY
... ADDITIONAL AREA
STUDY BOUNDARY
ASSESSOR'S MAP BX 769 PIS. O�
RlmnlDE couNTY, CALF
June 15,1991
City of LaQuinta
Planning and Development Department
P. 0. Box 1504
LaQuinta, California 92253
Mr. Jerry Herman: Planning Director
We, as property owners of land in LaQuinta, Ca., specifically
identified as APN 769-083-005 and situated on Calle Tampico
between Washington and Desert Club Drive, are interested and
concerned about the General Plan update program scheduled for
June 25, 1991, in LaQuinta.
In the past we have, through our realty agent/representative,
requested the LaQuinta Planning Commission to up grade the land
on the south side of Tampico from an SR zone to Commercial Zoning.
That request was favorably accepted, though unoffically.
Recently, the Commission upgraded part of Tampico to Commercial
Zone to allow for Ralph's Super Market. Many other commercial
buildings and properties are currently situated on the north
and south side of Tampico.
Considering all of the above, plus the fact that the land in
question is directly across the street from one of the largest
medical complexes in the state and next to the new site of
La.Qui.nta City Hall and public buildings, we strongly suggest
and respectfully request that up date of the General Plan include
our suggested change.
Please read this letter into the records.
Sincerely,
Georg J. Fenady
l
Andrew J., enady
i
Adeeb Sadd
ARLENE TURI
P. o. sox 1094
LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 U.S.A.
June 17, 1V,
5:r. Jerry Herman, Planning Dir,
& L',embers of tY_e Planning Dept.
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta, CA. 92253
Sirs:
I ,:ould like tc voice a point to consider rezoning all
the lots on Celle Tampico to business. I an one of the
three lot o,•-.ners that were rezoned do::n to resic3r.ntiP_.l,
-:,hile 'being, surrounded on all sides ;b-v lots zoned bus--
iness,• I do nct think this fair or Practical practice.
Kindly consider rezoning in fair fashion all of the lots
on Tampico to business. Its the only fair and practical
procedure to follow.
Yours truly,
". Arlene Puri
Lot 65, 51st. St. (Celle Tampico)
"TP
► .,, •. •. ._� Wit:.. s: ;!'+' '�,: 9,.,'.;.,•��{,'!�
. *•yil � `tZRN
.� chh)
S � ® o4 d
AVENIDA OCAAWOW S f
I C-t
a , (A..
et
0�= rJ•�
1'
rn
x D£S£Rr ---- ® —
z a: t
... (D I . a • .r
I; O
VO
10,
;6
7 �
030
p a� �• .Ir .w
0
3'
15-Ly
"69 — 29 T. C. A. OW -' 004 2
�Q
ow- 006 N S EC. 9 7
v�
a
5 14 �' 52�d
8arm.09� Sg/�I�67■ O f�
LANDMARK ' Gi
400 { ! 925 C
� v
EX
6.6/.iAr,
5.9 r:C O
R�
r PPC',PERTIES aN `l 9ESTION
I'
EXISTING:SPEUA1- ^0%#k4E` UTA.!
<O O PROPOSED: LOW DENSITY
PEQUEST- NE1,a-4C0R iCf0D
h O
W�
/0
ATTACHMENT #3
oto ft NEW Mo, 1 53 / d
/ /4
/4
PM. 44167--68 Parcel Mop No. 8961
�Q
ol�
1=S
o �o
$ 60�Rds. per insf.
v 32692 4159
MARCH 19057
Honorable Mayor & City Council
Chairperson, Planning Commission
Planning Director
September 18,1992
Re: General Plan update related to Commercially Zoned land, north of the All
American Canal and just south of the S/E corner of Jefferson and Ave. 52, APN
769-290-016.
The City of La Quinta is undertaking the task of amending the General Plan in
September and October,1992. The draft General Plan submitted, changes the
zoning of our described property from CPS to Low Density Residential. We are
asking that the Planning Commission and the City Council allow us to retain our
Commercial designation. If the Council or Planning Commission feels that it is
appropriate to designate the property as Community Commercial, CC or
Neighborhood Commercial, NC , we would welcome this change in zoning.
Keeping these parcels zoned commercial makes sense. If you look at the attached
map (Exhibit A), you will see that the All American Canal is a natural buffer
from Commercial to Residential. It would be very difficult to market a
residential project at the intersection of two major arterials and we are
sure this corner at ultimate build -out would exceed the noise
limitations described in the General Plan for any residential
development. Also, the possible ingress/egress problems along Avenue 52 and
Jefferson to the adjoining parcels could very easily be eliminated by planning the
access points to these parcels between property lines.
In 1989, prior to annexation of the property into the City of La Quinta, it is our
understanding that the Staff acknowledged our pre-existing zoning status, which
was Commercial. The Staff further, verbally affirmed that our land would
continue at it's present zoning after annexation. We also understand that the
original land owner was opposed to annexation into the City.
Both the City Council and Planning Commission reviewed the annexation and
neither indicated that a change was necessary. The City Council approved the
Pre -Annexation Zoning with Resolution#89-048, Environmental Assessment with
Resolution#89-143, the General Plan Amendment with Resolution#'s 89-025
through 89-028 and finally, Annexation #5 with Resolution #90-90.
It is the intention of the property owner to provide commercial resources to the
numerous planned communities that surround this property. With planned
projects like Vista Santa Rosa, La Quinta Shores and the expansion of PGA West,
and Oak Tree West, residents will need near -by commercial services. We hope
that the Council and Commission will not reverse their original position taken at
the time that this property became included into the City of La Quinta.
We appreciate in advance your serious consideration of our request.
Sincerely
Michael L. ter
SEP 2
1 1992 4
CNT
EX H6IT 'A�
I
9mir1C:T PROPERTY
our ��� L r •
46
J.
R
a,
o
0
b
G
o
a'
r
D R
WAnr CAW S
i
14
�o
f�;1uJ rrae a.•p
i
y
a
g8
* so
c
•�i
n
,
! b
. I
J
4
{
s E P 2 1 1997
CiTY
+w
1•_
E x H 1. BI T 'A"
C
�8
ZZ
fU�^
i
LSI
30 August 1992
Mr. Jerry Herman
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta (",A 92253
Dear Mr. Herman:
With regards to our request of Mark Moran, representing
Michael L. Bangerter and Robert 'S. Newhouse, in the matter
of zoning of 52 250 Jefferson Street, La Quinta, CA 92253,
please allow him a. review, and/or a copy of all public
records relating to the above mentioned property.
Thank you,
Michael L. B-angerter
MB/1n
u
30 August 1992
Mark Moran
P.O. Box 1305
La Quinta CA 92253
Dear Mr. Moran,
I, Michael L. Bangerter, at 53-245 Avenida Martinez, La
Quinta, CA 92253, representing Robert S. Newhouse, 2243
Barry Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90064, hereby request that
you, Mark Moran, represent us in preserving the present
zoning at 52--250 Jefferson Street, La Quinta, CA 92253,
of special commercial.
We request that you limit your representation to the General
Plan issues only.
Thank you,
Michael L. Bangerter
MB/ln s
Copy: Jerry Herman,
City of La Quinta
P.O. Box 1504
La Quinta CA 92253
HAND DELIVERED
May 29, 1992
John Pena, Mayor
City Council
Planning Commission
Jerry Herman, Planning Director
City of La Quinta
La Quinta, California
RE: General Plan Review
Gentlemen:
My property is located at 52-250 Jefferson, La Quinta. My property
was in the process of being zoned commercial to conform to the Riverside
County General Plan when it was annexed to the City of La Quinta, with the
understanding that it would come into the city as "CPS Commercial'. That
occurred on December 4, 1990.
I am absolutely opposed to this parcel and the Landmark parcel adjacent
to it being changed from "CPS Commercial" to a high density residential.
It is a much needed commercial corner
largest intersections - Jefferson & Avenue
need cf this commercial property. At this
able to make assumptions as to if and when
at PGA, West might be developed in order to
there has been delays also with the Ralphs
Center.
located @ one of the city's
52. These thoroughfares are in
point in time, it is unreason --
the closest commercial property
service our area. I understand
Center across from the Civic
I.n conclusion, I believe we need to continue my zoning "CPS Commercial"
to allow for development to serve our area. The property is separated by
the A1.1 American Canal from the high density residential that is around us.
It creates a "commercial island" and in so doing produces a buffer zone
between this commercial property and the residential neighbors of at least
125 feet. It makes an ideal commercial project. Thank you.
Sincerely,
David R. Broadhead
52-250 Jefferson
La Quinta, CA 92253
(619) 564-4561
0
[•sir'/ A i,r.es
_ mm --
{� ,/. rrr r drM 00-e pP7
y y w e}elWve72YM9 rdt `S �1 + --• pN
(��• O p i Y -!°1 Q
yp ^ '+« `e ®�: 4 S•O,°sts � �64.t11 •a `. i OM7/N71 YN n I 4
h it J ••'a, X.1 s
W ;� g . YAgryLy � „4 e,r QD N
�" ^ � �.._ y B �aF x I 0 0 v
N J
;Y ty. -.
�4Mro VIA m
a
-7-21412 VIA
C9 CO
CM
I � ,dh Aet 6 .4� • __
N g !t• M `V VIAm N 0- f
1 O.
,b a Z� 3VIA a
ZOOrIA 07 I (A Z
�rO�
3/A I •Y/A /a7 tl Cl� �
i ti. V 4 p
'� la
All
Ih57ff• „sr, 99.y7 `d Ilb i/'i/BB � � N 191t �, yr Y� '
t00
$ V ' L S 4 s,
La
�^ .e ti O' 'N .°1 � „ ,/!'St/ s -� t.M•96' °' N g I� �
IL pN
`) 8 3 107 Z.�,\ Ay.,t�A 0f07 /16'/f// JJ /07
1 ►�
M G s000'r B5pr6E t~ 0, cot B�'sBt ti
•') .b y 'lr8siosy oos/ise� w�,st, s.,00w •,^ e N ` (n•
I
n x I
2 Ci I w
I
i
00 ° 9r•�os ca rasi � I� M M
N
gNgON,t� 4 0
ooG$ \a I : o
'NZ.C10
•. 4 Q I w V V �
thi
M 3' n, N Z
m y
I o v 1f '.tom
v a -
3L d
OOZ\fL •.IJT p�p W N b� ; N p �1 h d
`w\• 2
r�et__ -�% ♦ � N
A. G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION, INC.
5449 FRIARS BOAC • SAN DIES_=ALIFORN A 92' ZE
TELEP -Z%E ZIS, 293 39E4
mav (1, 1 qq'
Mavor :'ena. Nitnber, of the ci t%, C'ounci 1
and Plannint Commi 5'on
c.t�• of La Quinta
post office Box 1504
"x- 105 ('a I I e Fs t ado
La )uinta. California `-_1253
RE: General Plar Amendment
Worksnop Heariny
Land Use F. 1 ement
Ladies ano Gentlemen:
A.G. Spanos Construction. Inc. is proud o: i:s efforts tO
quit ity. mixed -use projects to La Quinta. '�Ce have ocmon�trat e I ou:
commitment and major investment in the future of Foul' Cithe
follo\ring projects:
1. Lake La Quinta - 151 acres mixed -use residential incluc:ng a
20 acre commercial (restaurants. office. retail) lake:ront
Project. All infrastructure improvements completed in e,irly
1991. (East side Washington Street between Avenue 4- and
Avenue 4-).
2. N'orthbank - 131 acres mixed -use residential including a small
5 acre neighborhood commercial center. (East 51Ge Or
Washington between Whitewater channel and Miles Avenue).
3. La Quinta Shores - 225 acre mixed use lakefront residential
project with a small 4 acre tourist commercial site. (Between
Jefferson and Madison, just north of PGA lest).
We art! particularly apprehensive and concerned that the proposed
general plan "update" land use element significantly and
unnecessarily changes the land use designations for our projects.
In regards to the Northbank and La Quinta Shores projects. the
small, but important commercial components are proposed for
elimination; La Quinta Stores is to receive a 'rural overlay": and
Lake La Quinta's 20 acre commercial component is to be severely
limited in its range of uses.
Page Two
Mavor Pena. Members of the City Council.
.and Planning Commis,,ion
MaY 6. 1992
It is imperative that the previou,i} approved projects and
entitlements 7e given a legitimate opportunity to mature. It i�,
un-�ise and unnecr,,nary to overturn the recent land use e.eci,,ion,,
affectin_^ these projects as part of a hroad based "city-wide" plan
wth ch Iias not had the benefit of the close scrutiny anr: cietailec:
focus which directed the approvals a5 they stand.
These long term projects represent year- of planning and proce,,sine
with your city and millions of dollars of investment. Quality
projects are not built overnight, especially: with our national and
local economies facing the severest economic recession in :0 year,,.
The recession has been particular!y destructive to the construction
industry and lending institutions that provide the eriticaI caP:ta:
required for development and constructinr.. One o` the more
damaging effect,, of proposing change tc esi�ting approvals is that
it creates even more lack of conficitnce among buyers. ller,,.
investors. and lenders.
Mixed use project,, provide balance. narmon.: and u,,ine��
opportunit\ for the entire community. ont, v n c v in governmenta:
regulation encourages companies like A.G. Spano� to make long term
commitments. Master -plan developers must have some certainty that
they will be given sufficient time to allow orderly market
progress -- sufficient time and permanence of land use designation
to develop the project. The City needs consistency as well,
otherwise it will only see smaller. pocket projects where the
developer can get "in and out" in a short period of time.
Inconsistency through the changing of rules and entitlements on
approved projects is a sure way to make the long term developer
regret his investment. If the long term developer cannot count on
having sufficient development time without entitlements being,
unnecessarily at risk. re cannot afford to invest the millions of
dollars and thousands cf hours necessary to plan and construct
quality projects in a City.
Page Three
Mavor Pena. 'iemhers of the City Council
and Plannin,u Commission
\1 i7l b , I U') '
We respectfully request .hat the general pin:: amendment update,
pre,,erve our present lane use approvals and that the proposed Ian,-'
use element he moci,fied accordinrl%.
vcry truly vours.
U%nU
Dean A. Spanos
Presilent
RH.cam
cc: 'errs• Herman
Ired M. Barer
C
QE
CNY76
r--- - • ___-1191 — 177d�Lf fW oY .r
.—s `� �— � •.— � .. � '. — i I � I _ I � _ - _ _ I ^ i � (� 16. i °r Y -J I! r ' -./ t� - I . �-1 ' '. I i
i y 1 i 11 i 1' L� 4 (/E �7
t •: • `' iI. : � S Dios r - � .. � !,/' ` �s = A a l
• + a-, a r; ' = 1 .. .. e i _ 1 i t 1: 'i t i ! J,' 7 p �+ 7 I
� J : � 3 r< ; •/ �." .e ? ii � i �+a � i. .a It ! t',�a" i y ^� ° ° ` y•.t� �- ,
V `' 1��, a �+ j r� •`7 J• 1 1 - - - i•, '- ^ r � I I" 7 ^�� (�2,r .I ; ;�
o :/�3•
li i1 .7 / : /Y\yl� � i i y ' °t� / J .� •� J a 1 ' �y• s �\' � i `' ,! � _ _ � a+ %r` � �
�"I,I I 8 J• ` / ,F� `+t rE;� ,` a, } + i ' , �,aya /j/ •+ • ,1 �:.
�► t i ~Y. � � tJ6M '� i +N• 'i jj i •• �•� -+ _�. , �.�f . /L� =7 .
9' r
f J a•'�P s - �i, ��,:1/=. ± j is g �„ j ��:!'-"• � �y'
�:,7 ° I � t'.' Iaa���t•� a ° j J ; i + r� . a -1 Q 13-� � .,i ty .. �
1 .
a d ! ! e •J tt/Y �f� ,�;1 ;1, q + /
+
�• ,a •J16
�
W 1 j� • , p
.(rrlmrrlrmr.1 a"a§.. ( = t7 _ a•- / ` ' ' 't y �° � / •� �� ! 54
•,• um a IW7V- ` + ° • ',a . `J7f t
JJCC E- _ � /� � P ►e
n «
.p vuoutu.—l-
nrul�.lr.�l
0
N If
i
l
C
a
w
MO
CD t
I=
f
ENi BY: XEROX 1'elecopier 7017: 6-25-92 :10:59AM 5505169 z
A G, SPANOS CONSTPUC110N, IN(
a°°e MAM aaAc • ea" NM Mi is MW
September 25, 1992
Mayor ndnPlanningrs of thComraissionity Council
a
City of La Quint&
post Office Sox 1504
La Quint$, California 92253
RE: General Plan Update
Ladies and Gentlemen:
With reference to the proposed neA.GOenesplancsPlan
Companies,now
asbsthe
considered for adoption, theIt
developers of Tract No. 24�iLri �g a City SubdivialonicImprovement
improved in accordance
Agreement dated February 20, a19commmercialrelanXu use designation
apprehensive about receiving
which would be Less desirable throc�satpr;orhto entering into the
ch WO were e
by the Tentative and Final Map p
gubdivision Agreement.
The current land use designation wor ois ths,h ghest ncommereial
Tract 24230 is General Commercial hich
designation. Since that zonineliminated with
Plant thesonly cmparablenation will edesignation from
the proposed new Genera' Plan, that the
the new land use list would
pla ayowsrLotI284Wto beeCommunity
latest draft of the new Gen
ComM*rcisl, Lot 283• to be 0 inice, surd p= po ed tchangesw a .great
Residential. 9y ibe L
mp�emen 8 Y
economic burden would be placed upon
this
zoning on lo: 284 to
important to understand that by
office only, it would suandctthat this
Office s building markets &moat
rrow
segment of the market,
everywhere are consid®red to beancin8the 1isivirtuallyest t nonexi nonexistent.
country and their means of finLow
office zoning has no valueLo` t282y�s en irrnment. it
Density Density Residential for
dysfunctional and unusable• celsAnother �►agpoint is that designed the
installed infrastructure for these par
considerable coat to accommodate touch higher uses of commercial
development.
TENT BY: XEROX Teiecopier 7017; 5-25-12 .11:OGAM ; y bbcbblrva o
September 259 1992
Mayor
nMembers
ity Council
andPlanningCommission
Page Two
an
have
Since we have spent many' reillin$ of the dollars
witltgood
regardafaith
tod this
fulfilled our obligations to
development, we respec�itmentsk andlly astdesignate each parcel aathe City honor our sno
and their previous ao
less than Affixed Commercial.
Attached is a plat showing the subject parcels for your reference.
very truly yours,
l i JA �.�
Dean A. Spanoa
President
RH:cam
Enclosures
cc: Jerry Herman
Fred M. Baker
SENT BY: XEROX Telecopier 7017; 1-25—S� �tA�00AM 175 56�56o.
I O 1 N �' i a69 ...�
•� H !! 89•�0'D4'E BlZ.S4 �63
Z � � 177 ifie
'` 3 L0T 284 �179
� � i56 �65
dIIAS! 011C �COµMEIlCIAL LOTI
IIAMPE0 RCE. 1503 + �• /
71/15.32. ACCEPT «. •0 '
S.C. of EXISTING tD !!
SON ST. C/L
C r
lei ISO
i;Iva.Pt
- ^' Cc , 152 I
40/70 LOT M
1
l " PiSERVED FOft I
{ L07 pQ i5 = i ►` R£GREAT:ONAL
r; +' •� 111"PoNES 184 lies
do
r I>tiQo' aTaRM
j 1/4 6aAf5 OtlC
7fM STA►tPEO ACE.1503 r
+ :J OitAiN LAfilrt[NT r
d 'I 7
�SCN/1kOtQN '10.00' StOAM
EcF [XIST14 (44'4'49•
L 1 DRAIN [AS[MENS
St. cL *v[!
�
�R
° o , rhn�ovESSA 212 `
ILOI N!
r
274 0 270
a p
L07 'C + r�� Z75 259
pp y, Y LINE\ , 216 r
FV 1 RCA/9SS13 C o 1 0 51. 1/4 JIM. }� i•i'7 AC 265
' fyfW* ON SIDE. RESEt LOT277
3 P011T ION F Oti C/L B.C. to
-SS. " Jz, z6 AC, 282 ~ + 267
PEA PM 79/1e �V o L 0 T ONMERCIAL L
278 266
1a
$ s , 1G,M g3:AL LOT} ' c79 265
If, I. L( '•-
it 1 �v = j 250 264
• EXisT iNG C/L +—
IIASNlN4TCN aT.
1E1t PM TS/51-31 9 + LOT' D + 2111 2s3
ccwvcvgo t0 CG. f
(� or Rtv[Rs10[ PER
OEto REc. 0/14179
AS 114
STL I342e1. --�—�'
C,/L MfA!►IINOTON ST. A I I W ie 17
ISR SPEcIr IC PLAN P.jm i
'3 s I x 4 3l.360•x
rah J .
a
1;�► B O'g)'00'N 2� 14 19
3
i; 4 3J 3a o'E ao
20'
4 � 12
OT CC
11
• .i IIVEYEC TO COUNTY 22 � B id
p� ItIVERSIOE I'EI1 ` O
lic age. PG 304. 60 23
� a 7 9
a � LOT C �
! 1 r f0 t 1/2" I.P. 01� O� ` _ � ,� _ � .. •- � '� „
N 1�ON WILL
I
CAIIVIV ®1= 11r*4"1K>
September 23, 1992
Mrs„ Katie Barrows, Chairwoman
Planning Commission
City, of La Quinta
78-105 Calle Estado
La Quinta, CA 92253
Dear Mr. s . Barrows:
You are in receipt of three letters from Mrs. Dorothy N. Papazian
(Sternberg) dated January 6, February 12 and March 6, 1992 all of which
refer to future standards established for Madison Street. Mrs. Papazian
owns property abutting Madison Street in La Quinta and Indio.
Mrs. Papazian raises questions regarding circulation standards in adjacent
communities. Madison Street in the area known as Indio Ranchos serves an
area generally designated low density in the General Plan and Country
Estates,/Equestrian in the City's zone text. The attempt is to maintain a low
density rural atmosphere in this area.
The City of La Quinta states that the Coachella Valley Association of
Governments (CVAG) identifies Madison Street in their Regional Arterial
Improvement Program. Thus the city of La Quinta makes the assumption
that: either CVAG or the adjacent property owners would make these
improvements. However, the City of La Quinta, according to CVAG does not
collect a Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee. This should be addressed.
We would welcome the opportunity to discuss circulation issues which
mutually concern Indio and La Quinta.
Si cerely , ` t
Henry J. Hohenstein, AICP
Community Development Director
HJH/krr,
x/c : City Manager
City Attorney
CITY OF INDIO • 100 CIVIC CENTER MALL • PO. DRAWER 1788 • INDIO, CA 92202
DEPARTMENT TELEPHONE NUMBERS, ALL IN 619 AREA CODE
CITY CLERK 342-6570 • CITY MANAGER 342-6580 • COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT/REDEVELOPMENT 342-6500
FINANCE 342.6560 • FIRE 347.0756 . HUMAN RESOURCES 342-6540 • POLICE 347.8522 & FAX 347.4317
PUBLIC SERVICES/ENGINEERING 347-6530 • CITY HALL FAX 342.6556 9 CITY YARD 347-1058
A aninry 0,
7, L- ry Qrnm-1
>1 "mia, 4 mpowl
-f A Q-INU
C. TOW
Onuk
you j_, rw6r
QK
Concarainy yy
MY!:= Tor zqlelag
iV nO
anmi On, 1
M 40
anj nVison.
jonvi
Q7 of r� u 0�
,j
acremy
it
MLS per acre, T,
no"jj
OVIQ but t�e
Lane
Wall 4" CCMPnL14.Y -�:o
Luc MOW properties UL
0�e 1 -nWIPLE
S�Wa$
,;eCjni;;
a, tat 'aijson Ave
�trlp, %nything chat yo,
j,i 0
t- vmioidm
�: f0ju-S!
j2r Sis T!Wlaj,
while Me P!
"Vint
revis will
N"
3veal L,
a 111-NueZ
I q!
b- %,:. 1cry
1L
Opndt 00
yAO weals, sn
W!
yj,,,
",,
I p,n
a12� vc reached aL1%jOJ1A
WA-24MR!, aA�
1, V a 'Atan
in; r17
inach Am, 01mvic
11M, F1 1217.
T H E C I T Y
0 F
La qtnta
199. Carat Decadr
March 25, 1992
Ms. Dorothy Papazian
581 Beach Avenue
Atlantic Beach, FL 32233
SUBJECT: LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN UPDATE; YOUR LETTER OF MARCH 6, 1992
Dear Ms. Papazian:
We are -in receipt of your above referenced letter regarding the delineation of
Madison Street on the recommended Major Street Plan for the La Quinta General
Plan Update. In your letter, you ask why segments of Madison Street which are
not in La Quinta have been shown on the recommended Major Street Plan.
California State General Plan Guidelines specify that local planning agencies
(cities) coordinate their circulation elements with applicable State, regional
and other local agencies. Madison Street is therefore shown extending north to
illustrate the impact of proposed land uses on the arterial street system. Land
use decisions made by the City of La Quinta and surrounding jurisdictions will
have certain impacts to traffic volumes along the entire length of Madison Street
and other roadways, not just on those portions within La Quinta. The attached
draft document shows Madison Street north of 50th Avenue as a result of the
potential regional implications of growth and development.
The traffic model we are using in our General Plan Update process considers a
buildout scenario for the City and surrounding jurisdictions; the model assumes
that all land will be developed to its highest potential. This is why Madison
is shown as a six lane facility. As you may be aware, the current La Quinta
General Plan shows Madison Street as a four lane arterial at 110-foot right-of-
way, with a 12' - 18' median, and our traffic model projects the need for a six
lane facility to Highway 111.
You should also be aware that the Coachella Valley Association of Governments
also identifies Madison Street in their Regional Arterial Improvement Program as
a regionally significant facility; our current designation is consistent with
their plan.
LTRWN,002
City of La Quinta
Post Office Box 1504 • 78-105 Calle Estado
La Quinta, California 92253
Phone (619) 564-2246, Fax (619) 564-5617
Design & Production Mark Paimer Design. 619-346-0772
Should you have any questions concerning the above information, please feel free
to contact this office.
Very truly yours,
JERRY HERMAN
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
WALLACE H. NESBIT
Associate Planner
WHN:bja
cc: Tim Campbell, BRW, Phoenix
Mark Peterson, BRW, San Diego
Fred Baker, Principal Planner
LTRWN.002
ENT BY: XEROX Telecopier 7017: 9-25-92 10:59AM 564561'l;# 2
A, G, SPANCS CONSTRUC110N, INC
8448 FKAPS M34C 4 5AN NEW, CAUMPINia WI OF
TFAAPWONE Vim 28S,NGA
September 25, 1992
Mayor Pena, Members of the City Coancil
and Planning Commiswion
City of La Q`ainta
post office Box 1504
La Quint&, Califcrnia 92253
RED: General Plan Update
Lsdies and Gentlemen:
With reference to the proposed new General Plan which is r,�yr being
considered .for adoption, the A.G. Spanos Companies, as the
developers of Tract No. 24230, "Lake La Quinta"f which was fully
improved in accordance with a City Subdivision Improvement
Agreement dated February 20, 1990, we are q= concerned and
apprehensive about receiving a commersiai 'land ease designation
which would be less desirable than that to which we were entitled
by the Tentative and Final Map process prior to entering into the
Subdivision Agreement.
The current land use designation for Lots, 282, 283, and 284, of
Tract 24230 is genera' co=ercial which is the highest commercial
designation. Since that zoning designation will be eliminated with
the proposed new General Plan, the only comparable designation from
the now lanai use list would be Affixed Commercial. We note that the
latest draft of the new Gensral Plan shows Lot 284 to o be be ComLow munity
Commercial, Lot 289 to be Office: and Lot 282 proposed changes a greatResidential. By
implementing your
economic burden Mould be placed upon this developer+ent. It is
important to understand that by limiting the zoning on lot 284 to
office only, it would sub ec , this development to a very Marrow
segment of the msrket a and that office building markets most
everywhere area considered to be the riskiest investments in the
country and their means of financing is virtually &nonexistent .
office zoning has rto .,►value in today`s environment. Aloof Low
Density Residential for Lot 282 would render i-; totally
dysfunctional and unusalale. Another point is that the underground
infrastructure for these parcels was designed and installed at a
considerable cost to accommodate mush higher uses Of commercial
development.
ENT BY: XEROX Teiecopier 701'I; 0-25-32 ;11:OOAM -+ 5645517;# 3
September 259 1992
Mayor Pena, Members of the City Council
and Planning Commission
Page TWO
Since we have spent many millions of dollars in good faith and have
fulfilled our abligat:ions to the city with regards to this
development, we respectfully ask that the City honor our request,
and their previous commitments, and designate each parcei as no
ieVO than Mixed commercial.
Attached is a plat showing the subject parcels for your reference.
Very 'truly yours,
Dean A. Spanos
President
RH : cam
Enclosures
cc: Jerry liens
Feed M. Baker
EV BY: XEROX TeleLopier 7017; 9-25-92 ,11.00AM 5645517;# 4
ag,
07
! 6>3 j 163 �!
to
•�RassDtsC .o I LCJT 264 'i79
4 t
TAMPED Rce. 9503 tt;oA;MERS:tA� LOT;
79I58.99. AGGEP+ o Q tf> ®mob
P' °uj•° I' 135
n �� 6' t 9132 f
M Q LOT RMJ C
T a D Fulsv VED FORFURPOSEO
° @it's. UN
1 tr4 8RA55 DIgG 111 VV'
JSH STAJ�PED AC¢.9303 O°y � " l . I ,- IE.CCt' Jb i'G ,iS ,r
PN 7ar9a-09, ACCEPT + w� GRAIN 4.Ar ULA
C!L E.G.. OF Ei4rsT1N L` �y ' $4'9a'49" C-1� m.o0' S;tiFM
e..
EsmaTON ST. lt n► ; Dt2a1M IASrINPN'
RISE
AND
r' Ii tLG s{,
0LOT
rrr
� � � r �E9 �• 266 �.
t t°F I II4- DRAAS DISC: WILY LINE 3.x 7 t3C 276 ~, 1
1 266 1
• StAMPED FCE 5505° � �! I � S.E. i/4 9t:C., t
LYtNO ON SIDE. JZESET.L a LOT 14 277 1
c
i POSITION FoR "rm 3.c. I
b' PER PM 79/56-59. N I z.. Z6 A C, 282
267
� al10 ��. g5AMEnCIAL L .2'e —
oi `iWEw r .263
2$6
S i11 tCshtbAERDiAL LOTFel
1 G7
�M
t ' �y!
ExrsTrNW c�L nTk r �I8� 264 t,
WASHINGTCN ST. - I
PER Pm TS/59-3
0.1
®
rDNVEYED TO CC. ' 29i 253 i
j ERbiUE PER
DE
QEiD REC, i�llg�"�� } • �VTT��
r i AS INSTR. t94901, 0
C!L q1,k9}itN13TOI•. sT, �s
FiR SPECIFIC PLANS w W 16 17 = -
t� t 35,26 $1 r
0' 23'00"14 2.5 1
�Ssu IN w 1 55,00 14 �g
• I � 3 •�
2C' m t4 4 33 38 Q* F i3 2G
4
i OT CC 14
-` P. a
J1f—m5 ^} 11
tpfiVEYEQ to r-0!JN1Y >` 22
OF RiVERSi4E FEr $' ` io
CEGO REC. S/E/t9 IN Ob°�
IK 4qe, P0, 3n4. 0,A. ` 23
{ Q -C G Q 7 r 6 `� g 2 a
fo t 1/2" J.P. ZIJ
+H Mom WILL
ICE $Sal FER 1 r k
Pbt 7i/86-69 AHV I'�
DRAFT &
INCOMPLETE
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California
September 22, 1992 7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting was called to order at 7:08 P.M. by Chairwoman Barrows.
Commissioner Mosher led the flag salute.
H. ROLL CALL
A. Chairwoman Barrows requested the roll call. Present: Commissioners Mosher
Ellson, Marrs, Adolph, and Chairwoman Barrows.
B. Staff Present: Planning Director Jerry Herman, Principal Planner Stan Sawa,
Principal Planner Fred Baker, Associate Planner Wallace Nesbit, Associate
Planner Greg Trousdell, and Department Secretary Betty Anthony.
C. Consultants: Jon McNamara, Tim Campbell, Kate May, Mark Peterson, and
Matt Burt.
III. PLBLIC HEARINGS
Chairwoman Barrows excused herself due to a possible conflict of interest and turned the
meeting over to Vice Chairman Mosher.
A. Draft General Plan and Final EIR; a request of the City to approve the FEIR and
General Plan for the La Quinta General Plan.
1. Mr. Jon McNamara, Mr. Tim Campbell, and Ms. Kate May presented the
information relative to the General Plan and FEIR. A copy of which is
on file in the Planning and Development Department.
2. There being no questions of consultants, Vice Chairman Mosher opened
the Public Hearing. Mr. Forrest Haag, representing Landmark Land
Company addressed the Commission regarding Lardmark's concern of
having their property on the southeast and northeast corner of Jefferson
and 52nd Avenue and the northwest corner of Jefferson and 50th Avenue
remain commercial.
PC9-8 1
Planning Commission Minutes
September 22, 1992
3. Commissioner Ellson questioned Mr. Haag if these changes had not been
at the request of Landmark in exchange for other zoning consideration.
She further asked how the commercial zoning at 50th Avenue and
Jefferson fit in with Landmark's long range plans. Mr. Haag stated there
plans were for a variety type of commercial area with possibly a home
improvement and office use.
4. Ms. Mary Francis Fenedy, property owner on Tampico west of the new
City Hall site, addressed the Commissioner regarding commercial zoning
for her residentially zoned property that was "sandwiched between
commercial property and the new Civic Center. She had made application
to rezone the property but the cost was too excessive. Discussion
followed as to the location of the property, the size of the property and the
shape of the lot.
5. Mr. D. G. Saad, property owner on Tampico, shared the same concerns
as Ms. Fenedy. Commissioner Adolph asked if Mr. Saad had plans to
develop the property. Mr. Saad stated that if it were zoned commercial
he would move to develop it immediately as a retail use.
6. Mr. Hank Hohenstein, representing the City of Indio, read a letter from
Mrs. Dorothy Papazian (Sternberg) into the record regarding her concern
to maintain low density zoning along the border with Indio. He further
stated their concerns regarding the Transportation Uniform Mitigation
Fee. Discussion followed regarding the fee and the number of lanes
planned for Madison Street.
7. Ms. Audrey Ostrowski, stated her concern over the amount of land that
was being zoned commercial.
8. Mr. Tim Bartlett, speaking for different land owners, stated his concern
that a number of people who own property were unaware of the changes
that are proposed to their property. Discussion followed relative to the
notifying process and the Commercial/Park zoning.
9. Mr. Michael Bangeter, asked the Commission to consider keeping the
commercial zoning on the property he was representing at 52nd Avenue
and Jefferson
PC9-8 2
Planning Commission Minutes
September 22, 1992
10. Mr. Ray Hanes, representing A. G. Spanos Company property at the
southeast corner of Miles Avenue and Washington Street. He asked the
zoning remain consistent with what was approved on the tentative tract
map. In addition, their property at Lake La Quinta be retained as
commercial. Discussion followed as to the exact location of the request.
11. There being no further discussion, Commissioner Adolph stated his
concern that each of these requests needed to be reviewed separately. He
felt it was unfair to group all the requests together and approve the
General Plan without independently identifying these requests and
evaluating them.
12. Vice Chairman Mosher stated his agreement regarding these requests and
asked Staff if they could prepare an informational packet to the
Commission showing the respective properties as they are zoned now and
what is proposed.
13. There being no further comment it was moved by Commissioner Marrs
and seconded by Commissioner Adolph to continue the matter to a special
meeting to be held September 28, 1992, at 7:00 P.M. at the La Quinta
YMCA Child Care Development Center. Unanimously approved with
Chairman Barrows abstaining.
Chairman Barrows returned to the meeting. Vice Chairman Mosher moved to reorganize
the Agenda and place Item #3, Public Use Permit 92-013 The La Quinta Senior Center,
as Item #2, and Item #2, Change of Zone 92-072 and Tentative Tract 27613, as Item #3.
Unanimously approved.
Break: 8:25 - 8:35 P.M.
B. Public Use Permit 92-013; a request of the La Quinta Senior Center for approval
of a public use permit to allow the construction and operation of a 10,600 square
foot senior center.
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. Commissioners Adolph and Ellson questioned different uses in relation to
the floor plan.
PC9_8
PH #1
r-4 4vaumrao
NIEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRWOMAN AND PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS
FROM: PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 22, 1992
SUBJECT: DRAFT GENERAL PLAN AND FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (FEIR)
BACKGROUND
The City's current General Plan, adoptedtate tannin an85, d became
vutdated as a vironmental law. The 1985
ult of the
City's rapid growth, and changes in " planning to locate essential
document lacks "user friendliness in that it is not easy
information. Some portions of thecurrent
update had been undertaken until the
dated
periodically since 1985, but no comprehensive P
current process was initiated with the first community workshop.
In June, 1991, the first in a series of Community General Plan n hops was the
initiated with a joint meeting of the City Council and Planning Co missio
assistance of the Planning consulting firm of BRW, Inc. , the City was provided ou thh
a summary of existing physical and environmental conditions in IA Quin g
a review of a Masser Environmental ticesof Assessment
) (NOP) forlved citizen input
the General Plan
on key general plan issues. A Nhouse and all responsible agencies
update was sent to the California State Clearing
on November 19, 1991.
The General Plan update process continued with a series hOf a joint city
'zen
Planning Commission Community Workshops,
participation, to systematically develop an updated General Plan. These workshops
included:
o Visions, Goals & Objectives ( September 9, 1991)
o Review Draft General Plan Goals
ler d O jec ives (October 9, 1991)
o Land Use Alternatives
o Recommended Land Use Plan (February 121 1992)
o General Plan Elements: Land
�; Use, Circulation, Open Space, Parks &
Recreation (May 20,
o General Plan Elem ls �Environmen a1 Haz ntal Conservation,
Quality (June 10Infrastructure992)
(Public Services),
00.
STAFF REPORT FINDINGS
1. The Final EIR prepared for the La Quinta General Plan Update has been
completed in compliance with CEQA.
2. The Final EIR for the La Quinta General Plan Update was presented to
the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, and said Planning
Commission reviewed and considered the information contained in the
Final EIR prior to recommending certification of the Final EIR and
approval of the General Plan to the City Council.
3. That there are significant environmental effects which can be
reasonably mitigated if the proposed General Plan is implemented and
that findings as required under Section 21081 of the Public Resources
Code can be and shall be made by the City Council prior to certification
and approval.
4. That impacts to biota, traffic circulation, and air quality cannot be
mitigated to a level of insignificance based upon information in the Final
EIR, and a Statement of Overriding Considerations shall be adopted to
that effect by the City Council.
BEC2MMENDATI0N
1. That the La Quinta Planning Commission, by Minute Motion, recommend to the
City Council certification of the Final EIR for the 1992 IA Quints General Plan
in accordance with the findings set forth in this Staff Report.
2. That the La Quinta Planning Commission adopt Resolution 92- ,
recommending to the City Council approval of the adoption of the 1992 La
Quinta General Plan.
MEMOFB . 002 3
004
The City received valuable citizen input at the Workshops which was essential in
shaping the policies of the Draft General plan; the City also received written
correspondence regarding the General Plan Update process (these are attached).
An exhibit at the public hearing will identify locations of those properties on which
we have received written correspondence.
The Draft General Plan and Draft EIR were completed in July, 1992; and a Notice of
Completion was sent to the California State Clearinghouse and all responsible
agencies. The public review period began July 17, 1992, and ended August 31,
1992. The City received .i0rpimreSt response he comublic mentseare adinterested ttached and are made
These comments and the Ci y P
a part of the Final EIR.
The recommended General Plan consists of eight elements:
o Land Use
o Circulation
o Open Space
o Parks & Recreation
o Environmental Conservation
o Infrastructure & Public Services
o Environmental Hazards
o Air Quality
These elements address six of the seven State
of this General Plan update auired s the five year review
Housing Element was not a paPlan Elements; the
cycle for La Quintals Housing Element began in 1989.
The draft EIR has been developed in conformance with California Government`r�Coddee
Section 65300. The Master Environmental he existing conditions for the Draft
an
advisory document, was useful in determining g
EIR. The Draft EIR is organized into IchaptMeasures,t4) Disicussion
Project Description, 3) Summary Pacts and Mitigation
of the Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures, 5) Growth Inducing
Impacts, 6) Cumulative Impacts, 7) Alternatives, 8) Short Term
Uses/Long
Term
Productivity, 9) Significant Irreversibly Environmental Changes, 10)Organization
and Parsons consulted, 11) Documents available for Public Review.
The Draft EIR consists of the MEA, DEIR, Technical Documents, and Response to
Comments.
MgVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS
Pursuant to provisions of the CaliforEnvironmental EI�saAct Q
A Guidelines
15090) the lead agency is required certify F Rs being completed in
compliance with CEQA, and that the decision making body of the leadagency di
;review and consider the information contained in the Final EIR, p PP g
the project. Because the Planning
Plan commissiitself, itn, as an iadvisory on considered appropriate for
make a recommendation on td to
hethe
the Commission to also make a recoR en
ecommended f ndinuteogs foro thisCmou'onu are
on certification of the Final EI
contained as follows:
MEMOFB .002 2
003
PLANNING COMI�IISSION RESOLUTION 9�
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CALIFORNIA,SON
OF THE CITY OF LA Q TO CERTAIN
RECOMMENDING AMENDMENT
ELEMENTS OF THE GENERAL AL DOCUMENT. ADOPTING
AN UPDATED GENERA
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta, California previously
adopted Resolution 85-97 establishing a General Plan for the City;
WHEREAS, it is recognized that the current General
Ph�consisting ant State
State -mandated elements requires revision and update to assurep
Laws and regulations; and,
Department has prepared an updated
WHEREAS, the Planning and Development of the CaliforniaPlanning and Zoning Law and
General Plan pursuant to Sections 65350 et. seq.
has
transmitted same to the Planning Commission in compliance with Section 65354 of said
Law; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has held at least one public hearing on the
updated
La Quinta General Plan as required by Section 65353 of the California Planning and
Zoning Law; and,
WHEREAS, the updated La Quinta General Plan consists of a Land Use Element,
Circu
lation Element, Open Space Element, Park and Recreation Element, Environmental
Conservation Element, Infrastructure/Public Services Element, an Environmental Hazards
Element, and an Air Quality Element and comprises six of the seven elements required
by
Section 65300 et. sect•
of the California Planning and Zoning Law and as recommended by State
of California General Plan Guidelines; and,
WHEREAS, the current Housing Element has not been included as part of the
General Plan update, as the five-year review cycle for the La Quinta Housing Element began
in 19$9; and,
WHEREAS, an Environmental Impact Report has been prepared for this project
as prescribed by the California Environmental Quality
Act that identifies various mitigation
measures to reduce potential impacts to a level of insignificance, and identifies certain impacts
which cannot be so mitigated with a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and,
RES®Pc.084
1 � 004
WHEREAS, pursuant to AB 3180, a mitigation monitoring program has been
included in the Final EIR, which sets forth monitoring and reporting procedures for maintaining
the effectiveness of the proposed mitigation measures.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the
City of La Quinta, California, hereby recommends that the City Council amend certain elements
of the General Plan, with exception of the Housing Element, by adopting an updated General
Plan consisting of maps and text which are incorporated into and made a part of this Resolution
by reference herein.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quints
Planning Commission, held on this 22nd day of September, 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
KATIE BARROWS, Chairwoman
City of La Quinta, California
ATTEST:
JERK Y HERMAN, Planning Director
City of La Quinta, California
RESUPc. 084 1 005