1998 09 26 PCNOTICE
CANCELLATION OF REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
ON SEPTEMBER 27, 1988
NOTICE OF PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION FOR
SEPTEMBER 26, 1988
The September 27, 1988 Planning Commission meeting has been
cancelled due: to lack of agenda matters. However, the Planning
Commission will have a Study Session on September 26, 1988 at
4:00 p.m. to discuss the Policy Preview for the Hwy. 111
Specific Plan.
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
:FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 26, 1988
SUBJECT: GUIDANCE TO STAFF ON HWY 111 POLICY PREVIEWS
Background:
On August 22nd, a "policy preview" for the Hwy 111 Specific
Plan was presented in written form and a presentation made to
explain the material. At the following Study Session (Tuesday,
September 13th) another discussion of some of the more basic
Policy orientations took place.
Before staff attempts to progress beyond this "policy preview"
:stage of development, additional guidance from the Planning
Commission would be beneficial.
As a way of focusing attention on issues, the following
analytic guide (in the form of a checklist) has been prepared
to help you distill your thinking into a form which lends
itself to giving staff guidance.
Analytic Guide:
The following analytic guide calls attention to the major
issues contained in the policy preview (cross indexed to the
discussion in the text). Adjacent to each statement is an area
to record your thoughts on each issue.
Study Session:
At the Study Session, the agenda will consist of working
through the checklist, to elicit your reactions and comments as
to how to proceed with further policy development.
K.H/MEMOTB.002 -1-
ANALYTIC GUIDE
In front of each question, make a note to yourself whether you
;u ort (S), have questions about (Q), or have an
alternative policy to propose (A).
S C) A
1. The Hwy 111 corridor is too important
to the City's long term welfare -
especially in terms of fiscal potential
- to allow an unguided form of
development.
2. In the process of guiding the
development of Hwy 111, the City must
focus on the long term effect on the
development plan, rather than acquiesce
to near -term convenience or premature
development.
3. Access to properties from Hwy 111 and
Washington should be carefully
controlled.
4. Development plans should be guided to
center on access points, not
haphazardly fill in between them.
5. Property configurations should be
guided to conform to the objectives of
the Hwy 111 Plan.
6. The Redevelopment Agency will have a
significant role to play in the
implementation of the Hwy 111 Specific
Plan, and therefore should be closely
coordinated with the City's refinement
of the Plan.
7. Immediately adjacent to Hwy 111 and for
an appropriate depth, no residential
development should be permitted as a
separate primary land use. Commercial
should be permitted to displace
residential down to 48th Avenue -
especially if the commercial is
associated with a major hotel
development. Within 660 feet of Hwy
111, residential should not be
permitted to displace commercial land
uses.
KH/MEMOTB.002 -2-
•
S Q A
8. The value of the Hwy 111 Corridor (its
future potential) for the City of La
Quinta and its residents will only be
realized if the City adopts a strong,
united, continuously supported position
that "Only what complies with the
long-term objectives of the Hwy 111
Specific Plan should be permitted to be
developed there." Flexibility should
be maintained in how to accomplish the
objectives. Each alternative proposed
should enjoy the same in-depth
consideration as the original plan with
regard to compatibilities, linkages,
and effects on the future
implementation of the rest of the Plan.
9. Development concept: Major commercial
complexes centered on access road. (Al.,
page 2)
10. Design concept: Window to La Quinta,
Vistas, desert compatibility, unified
architecture within complexes. (A2,
A3, A4, A5, pages 2 and 3)
11. Heights: Natural grade, low profile
along major thoroughfares, vertical
accents, view angle concept. (A6, A7,
A8, A9, A10, B2, pages 3, 4 and 7)
12. Landscaping concept: Palms along entry
roads, dense separations between
complexes. (pages 4-6B)
13. Major infrastructure investments: The
:burden of costs should be spread as far
as the benefits in order to facilitate
development. (No. 4, page 13)
14. Access concepts: Limited access,
signalized intersections, 47th Avenue,
connections between properties, low
water crossings on Adams and Dune
Palms, down playing pedestrian emphasis.
(pages 14-17)
15. Land use concepts: Emphasize
commercial, major complexes,
appropriately located residential in
higher densities, affordable housing,
mixed urban uses. (pages 18-21)
KH/MEMOTB.002 -3-
S Q A
16. Amending the General Plan: Residential
land uses, refined density categories,
higher densities, preferred uses with
flexibility and alternatives which
maximize compatibilities and linkages.
(pages 21 and 24)
K.H/MEMOTB.002 -4-
•
NOTICE
CANCELLATION OF REGULAR PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
ON SEPTEMBER 27, 1988
NOTICCE OF PLANNING COMMISSION STUDY SESSION FOR
SEPTEMBER 26, 1988
The September 27, 1988 Planning Commission meeting has been
cancelled due to lack of agenda matters. However, the Planning
Commission will have a Study Session on September 26, 1988 at
4:00 p.m. to discuss the Policy Preview for the Hwy. ill
Specific Plan.
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 26, 1988
SUBJECT: GUIDANCE TO STAFF ON HWY 111 POLICY PREVIEWS
Background•
On August 22nd, a "policy preview" for the Hwy 111 Specific
Plan was presented in written form and a presentation made to
explain the material. At the following Study Session (Tuesday,
September 13th) another discussion of some of the more basic
policy orientations took place.
Before staff attempts to progress beyond this "policy preview"
stage of development, additional guidance from the Planning
Commission would be beneficial.
As a way of` focusing attention on issues, the following
analytic guide! (in the form of a checklist) has been prepared
to help you distill your thinking into a form which lends
itself to giving staff guidance.
Analytic Guide:
The following analytic guide calls attention to the major
issues contained in the policy preview (cross indexed to the
discussion in the text). Adjacent to each statement is an area
to record your thoughts on each issue.
Study Session:
At the Study Session, the agenda will consist of working
through the checklist, to elicit your reactions and comments as
to how to proceed with further policy development.
KH/MEMOTB.002 -1-
•
ANALYTIC GUIDE
In front of each question, make a note to yourself whether you
support (S), have questions about QQ), or have an
alternative policy to propose (A).
S n A
1. The Hwy 111 corridor is too important
to the City's long term welfare -
especially in terms of fiscal potential
- to allow an unguided form of
development.
2. In the process of guiding the
development of Hwy 111, the City must
focus on the long term effect on the
development plan, rather than acquiesce
to near -term convenience or premature
development.
3. Access to properties from Hwy 111 and
Washington should be carefully
controlled.
4. Development plans should be guided to
center on access points, not
haphazardly fill in between them.
5. Property configurations should be
guided to conform to the objectives of
the Hwy 111 Plan.
6. The Redevelopment Agency will have a
significant role to play in the
implementation of the Hwy Ill Specific
Plan, and therefore should be closely
coordinated with the City's refinement
of the Plan.
7. Immediately adjacent to Hwy 111 and for
an appropriate depth, no residential
development should be permitted as a
separate primary land use. Commercial
should be permitted to displace
residential down to 48th Avenue -
especially if the commercial is
associated with a major hotel
development. Within 660 feet of Hwy
ill, residential should not be
permitted to displace commercial land
uses.
KH/MEMOTB.002
-2-
S Q A
8. The value of the Hwy 111 Corridor (its
future potential) for the City of La
Quinta and its residents will only be
:realized if the City adopts a strong,
united, continuously supported position
that "Only what complies with the
long-term objectives of the Hwy 111
Specific Plan should be permitted to be
developed there." Flexibility should
be maintained in how to accomplish the
objectives. Each alternative proposed
should enjoy the same in-depth
consideration as the original plan with
regard to compatibilities, linkages,
and effects on the future
implementation of the rest of the Plan.
9. Development concept: Major commercial
complexes centered on access road. (Al.,
page 2)
10. Design concept: Window to La Quinta,
Vistas, desert compatibility, unified
architecture within complexes. (A2,
A3, A4, A5, pages 2 and 3)
11. Heights: Natural grade, low profile
along major thoroughfares, vertical
accents, view angle concept. (A6, A7,
A8, A9, A10, B2, pages 3, 4 and 7)
12. Landscaping concept: Palms along entry
roads, dense separations between
complexes. (pages 4-6B)
13. Major infrastructure investments: The
burden of costs should be spread as far
as the benefits in order to facilitate
development. (No. 4, page 13)
14. Access concepts: Limited access,
signalized intersections, 47th Avenue,
connections between properties, low
water crossings on Adams and Dune
Palms, down playing pedestrian emphasis.
(pages 14-17)
15. Land use concepts: Emphasize
commercial, major complexes,
appropriately located residential in
higher densities, affordable housing,
;mixed urban uses. (pages 18-21)
KH/MEMOTB.002 -3-
•
S Q A
16. Amending the General Plan: Residential
land uses, refined density categories,
higher densities, preferred uses with
flexibility and alternatives which
maximize compatibilities and linkages.
(pages 21 and 24)
Kki/MEMOTB . 0 0 2 - 4 -
'may 4 .�.q"
MEMORANDUM
TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
CON:MI S S I ON
FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
DATE: SEPTEMBER 26, 1988
SUBJECT: HIGH AND MEDIUM DENSITY STUDY
Background
In January of this year, City Council requested that Staff
begin a study of the General Plan's designations for higher
density residential land. uses. This study has been ongoing for
a number of months. Parts 1 and 2 of the Staff analysis were
transmitted to the Planning Commission in March. The
subsequent phases of the task involved the assistance of
consultants to evaluate residential market absorption and
traffic impacts; associated with the designated locations of
high density residential land.
Report
The attached report is the result of Staff work based on
information from the consultant evaluations and other inputs.
The Staff Report on this subject was submitted to City Council
on September 19th. It will be the subject of discussion and
guidance to Staff on Monday evening September 26th. It is
anticipated that Council guidance may generate a new consensus
alternative as the basis for consideration of a General Plan
amendment. Any amendment which may be contemplated would
follow the usual processing involving Planning Commission
consideration and recommendation.
Commission Use
The noted report is being provided to the Commissioners for
their liabrar'Les and as background material for a possible
later request to consider a General Plan Amendment.
Attachment: Report re City -Wide Analysis of Medium and
High Density Land Uses
KH/MEMOTB.003 -1-
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
BACKGROUND
T--,eaf 4 #QuAro
MEMORANDUM
HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF CITY COUNCIL
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
SEPTEMBER, 1988
CITY-WIDE ANALYSIS OF MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY
LAND USES
On April 5, 1988, a transmittal memo conveyed to the City
Council results (to date) of Staff work on the requested
City-wide analysis of the General Plan allocation of Medium and
High Density Residential Land Uses. Parts 1 and 2 of the Study
were presented:
Part 1: An analysis of General Plan density and its
policy implications; and
Part 2: A more detailed look at specific high density
areas designated or implied by the General Plan.
While these first two parts introduced the issues and explored,
in a general way, the possible direction of a resolution of
noted issues, the analysis performed to that date was not
sufficient to provide a firm basis to contemplate a General
Plan Amendment.
On April 19, 1988 a recommendation was made and direction given
to pursue five additional analytic tasks. The first three of
those five tasks are the subject of the attached report:
Part 3: A more in-depth analysis of the seven high
density residential areas designated in the General Plan,
with respect to two technical considerations:
a.) Traffic analysis and the effect of high
density at each location on the planned road system
(and a second analysis presuming a medium density
designation); and
b.) Market absorption for high and medium density
residential units over time to determine whether
the General Plan designated land inventory is
- 1 -
BJ/MEMOTB.007
• 0
sufficient, deficient, or excessive for high and
medium densities.
Part 3 was conducted by consultants retained to
accomplish the technical data manipulation and
interpretation necessary to confirm or refine the earlier
general Staff analysis in Part 2.
Part 4: Reviewing all work, especially the results of
Part 3 technical consultant input on traffic and market,
Staff would prepare:
a.) A comparative summary table of the seven
designated high density residential areas,
characterizing them across all the variables in a
brief, succinct way;
b.) A set of concrete recommendations on how to
treat each of the designated areas leading to any
necessary General Plan Amendments;
c.) A set of general recommendations on how to
treat the residential potential of the Mixed
Commercial Land Use in the Highway 111 Corridor,
leading to either a General Plan Amendment or a
policy directive for the Specific Plan;
d.) An analysis of the implications of the above
recommendations for the medium density residential
category (if, for instance, some high density were
recommended to be amended to medium density);
e,.) A revised Residential Land Use Profile of the
City (similar to that found in Part 1), based on
the recommendations in the report, to demonstrate
the implications of any recommended land use
re -designations.
Part 5: An in-depth City Council consideration of the
Staff analysis and recommendations, resulting in a set of
directives to Staff as to which recommendations would be
most favorably considered.
The remaining tasks, Part 6, Staff refinement of
recommendations and preparation of the General Plan Amendments;
and Part 7, Environmental Analysis and related considerations,
will follow Council's consideration of the attached material
and directives to Staff.
REPORT
The attached report contains two sections:
- 2 -
BJ/MEMOTB.007
• 0
Part :!: Summary of consultant reports on Market
Absorption for High and Medium Density Residential units
and on Traffic Impact Evaluation of seven designated high
density residential locations. The summaries are quite
brief. Excerpts, or the full text, of both reports are
available to the Council upon request.
Part 4: Summary of Staff analysis and recommendations.
This part contains two levels of focus. The first deals
with the seven designated high density areas in a
comparative table summarizing the many considerations
surfaced about each area. However, because the high
density areas do not exist in a vacuum, the remainder of
the analysis focuses on the total residential land use
pattern,, City-wide, including all densities.
Within the analysis section of Part 4, the General Plan, the
market, and three alterntive scenarios have been prepared for
Council discussion and consideration. For each scenario a pair
of maps have been prepared (to compare with the present General
Plan Map). For each scenario, a table has also been prepared
to describe the acreage, dwelling unit and population
implications of each alternative.
It is expected that the exploration of these three
scenarios will focus on policy positions needing
leading to a Scenario #4 upon which any General Plan
may be based.
alternative
refinement,
Amendments
3 -
BJ/MEMOTB.007
0 0
PART 3:
September, 1988
STAFF REPORT
SUMMARY OF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
ON THE CITY-WIDE GENERAL PLAN STUDY OF
MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY LAND USES
Summary of Consultant Reports on
A. Market Absorption for High and Medium Density
Residential Units; and
B. Traffic Impact
Plan Designated
Locations
A. HOUSING UNIT ABSORPTION
Evaluation of Seven General
High Density Residential
At an average rate of economic growth, between the years of
1990 and 202C, additional housing units could be expected to be
absorbed by each of three density categories in the following
numbers:
1. Medium Density (4-8 du/ac): 2844 units
2. Medium -•High Density (8-12 du/ac): 1773 units
3. High Density (12-16 du/ac): 497 units
Total 5114 units
In the same period (1990-2020) approximately 5289 lower density
units (four or fewer per acre) would be absorbed.
By the year 2020, the total housing units absorbed in La Quinta
would be approximately 15,245, of which 8,049 (53%) would be at
a density of four or fewer dwelling units per acre, and 7,196
(47%) would be above four dwelling units per acre, if the
market were the sole determinant of residential land uses in La
uinta.
B. TRAFFIC IMPACT
An analysis of the seven designated high density residential
areas together with all previously approved projects, compared
to the General Plan design capacities of the Circulation Plan
"revealed that virtually all intersections within the City
would continue to operate well within limiting values after
their occupancy". However, the character of the traffic
along Calle Tampico and its intersection with Washington
dictates consideration of down scaling the two high density
areas along 'Washington (to avoid turning movement problems),
- 1 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
•
and a closer look at the other high density areas in the
vicinity of "The Village".
"'...it is concluded that the current location for high density
uses should be replaced with medium density. Further, given
land area locations that are still available along Highway 111,
Washington, and Jefferson Streets, higher density land uses
should be planned for those areas."
:PART 4: Summary of Staff Analysis on:
A. Comparison of Seven High Density Areas.
B. General Plan and three alternative Scenarios
for Residential Land Use Designations.
A. Seven General Plan Designated High Density Areas.
The General Plan designated seven areas for high density (8-16
du/ac). These areas have been subjected to considerable study
as to their potential for high density (compared to other
alternatives). The following Map Exhibit 1 indicates the
general location of these seven high density areas. The
following Table, Exhibit 2 summarizes the analysis of the seven
areas and presents a recommendation for each area in terms of
both General Plan designation and later zoning changes (if
warranted).
Following the Table is a discussion of some of the salient
points leading to the recommendations.
- 2 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
FIQOD
AREA 1 = 28 ACRES
AREA 2 = 11 ACRES
AREA 3 = 48 ACRES
AREA 4 = 8 ACRES
AREA 5 = 45 ACRES
AREA 8 = 18 ACRES
AREA 7 = 8 ACRES
C
W
W
= M�
r
�
AVENUE
HIGHWAY 111
O ® Z
s O
Z <
W ® �
� Z �
W W fit.
dc
7
NOTE: LOCATIONS ARE GENERAL - SPECIFIC
SCALE NOT INTENDED
4
IVE
GENERALPLAN DESIGNATED HIGH DENSITY AREAS
Exhibit 1
IVE
a
a
4'0
.
it I 0
V4
a
woVy
a •
®
Go w
+
u
Its
e a
ad 0
w In
y+� 41 >1
�A�
a
.+a
of
so I
o
,d%�-04
b9:
ecy
2Nd
1WLn
m10
blN a
�
11
Id Id s
q >
Q >
taC M
(A$4oS:
r-f�Cib
ANV10
3
Awem
(ALa�
w
«
w
H
Q
W
0
Q
u
Q
N
S
fi
B
Q
H
w
H
vI
n
H
0
a
in
IOd
P
u .c
> r�
qw
z
cc
1-4
1 1
gn
NN
1
ococa
a
N
LO O
0 u
w w
00
a
•rl
w Ok
v
av
ow
101
coo
Nea
a�
v�u
SONd
A a
V O
9v O
41 a •.d
ON to
aN a
8ab
ww
0 w
p Ai b
a w w
e
N
ft
v
a
C
b
Ln
qw
d V
aOc
W4 i
to fV
FT
I
H.
0
344
N O
as 0
v�.ca
0� "4
a141
V4 MI if H
in
47 on �+
x 1 0
01 1 C 4 di
y N 0 "4
Id 1"4u
aMI
Pi 04 6 04
w
a
w
ad Id
Id
ad
b
a
0
> >
>
>
W
W
bd
�
1
1
N
M
r4
N
�c
a a
OK
a
ra a%
r♦ �
w C U � � a
ai1w ;;>v°Id
w C.
0-A1 �wa
u t� .� id A
ta>a z31
fV 9"
y c0� d
co
qr E '4' u
3C4 W u, m� 0 aw a
a1 in O +j
O 0 wa � 3 0 4 0
I
d
adlwa •v(A tlylawald
zu z 3 3 p1bi G au
cvu1�IT 9
of
a
w
v
+1
u
� a
C a
�o y
m d
a N �
u a
ON V
d1 •
u b
Ind tv w
V4 u
d
v
a
a
O� y
u
a
x.
ri
4 �I
p
r4 C9
d
V �
w
y
r-1
d
a
Op
Ala
y v
� b d
as a>
A�aw �ff
wi
a
w
0
w0v w
a
V 0 -4 to
do £
wba a ba
►+
8L
� a
DISCUSSION OF POTENTIAL FOR HIGH DENSITY FOR EACH AREA
Area 1: (Northwest corner Washington and Tampico)
The "location" is poor for high density in that it is on the
outside edge of the Village area - and on the side toward
Highway 111 - so that its population would not likely support
The Village commercial development. The location is too far
removed from The Village core for good pedestrian interaction.
The "compatibility" is poor because of its location along
Washington -- an image corridor emphasizing low density
appearance -- and the conflict with the low density lots along
the other side of Washington. The "access" is poor because no
access can be permitted along Washington (sight distance and
separation problems with the elevated bridge and proximity to
Tampico°s intersection). Any access along Tampico must be at
least 300 feet removed (to the west) from the Washington
crosswalk. A second access along Tampico would be essential
for high density, but not likely, given the frontage
available. The market is fair because the site is
approximately half the absorption acreage predicted for high
density, but the location is far removed from likely employment
centers, significant shopping, services, and other Valley
amenities.
Area #2: (Southwest corner Washington and Tampico)
The "location" is poor for the same reasons as Area 01. The
"compatibility is also poor for the same reasons as Area #1.
In addition, Area #2 abuts medium density (but single family
lots) on the south. The "access" is fair (only slightly better
than Area #1) because turning movements at Tampico are not
absolutely required. If Tampico is used for access, a 300 foot
space should be provided between Washington and the access
point. Access could be taken from Washington or from La Fonda
off Washington (but that would put traffic past single-family
lots). Being on the same side of Tampico as The Village core,
pedestrian interaction could be accommodated. The "market" for
high density in this location would be fair (the size is right)
but the opportunities for amenities would be limited, and
proximity to significant shopping and employment opportunities
are too far removed. Now that Area #2 is in City ownership as
a prospective Civic Center location, this area should be
removed from the high density residential land use category.
Area #3: (North of Whitewater Wash, Adams to Dune Palms
South of Westward Ho)
The "location" is fair
water crossir:g through
Westward Ho. It is
end. "Compat.ibility" is
along Westward Ho and
developing largely as to
w
because the site is north of the low
Whitewater Wash off Dune Palms and
somewhat remote, especially its eastern
poor in that the area to the east
north along Dune Palms appears to be
density areas. The western end of
BJ/RPTTB.09B
- 3 -
•
the area is nearer Adams and is closer to medium density
prospects. "Access" could be good, in that the area touches
both Dune Palms and Adams, although Adams will be the more
major route. Along Adams, the area has a smaller frontage,
making access with good sight distance removed from the Wash
more difficult. Area #3 has a poor "market" potential because
of its 49 acre size, exceeding the projected high density
absorption for the year 2020.
Area 4: (South of the new alignment of Avenue 52, east of
Bermudas, north of the Desert Club property).
The "location" is only fair in that it lies close to The
Village but, the area is on the far side of Avenue 52, making
pedestrian access across Avenue 52 and through The Village
South area to the commercial Core unlikely. "Compatibility"
for Area #4 is only fair because, although the Desert Club lies
to the south and Village Commercial lies across Avenue 52 to
the north, lower and medium density residential lie to the east
and west (respectively) of the area. "Access" to Area #4 is
good, due to Avenue 52 (although on -site access must avoid the
intersection with Bermudas). The "market" for Area #4 would be
good given the., small size of the area, except for its extremely
removed location from significant Valley shopping, service, and
employment opportunities. Its position on two traffic ways
would lessen its appeal for family housing, leaving the market
narrowed to singles and seniors. Singles, being more attuned
to location, would prefer to be nearer to employment. Seniors,
given choices, prefer to be nearer shopping, services, medical,
and recreational opportunities.
Area #5: (North of Whitewater Wash, west of Adams)
The "location" is good in that the area along Washington and
its extension along the Whitewater Wash down to Adams appears
to be developing as medium or higher density. "Compatibility"
for Area #5 is less likely to be a problem. Less single family
development will surround this area than areas further east.
What single family development eventually abuts this area will
not be pre-existing but either simultaneous or subsequent,
meaning that buffer arrangements can be designed in. "Access"
to Area #5 is good, due to both Adams (which has on arterial
status south of Highway 111) and its greater proximity to
Washington via Miles. The "market" for Area #5 as high density
will be limited (i.e.," poor") due to the size of the area
(exceeding the projected acreage left to be absorbed).
Area #6: (East of Eisenhower, north of Tampico, south of
Bear Creek Channel)
The °'location" of this area is reasonably good, due to its
proximity to The Village Commercial area, especially because it
abuts the fluture commercial expansion area north of Tampico.
"Compatibility" of Area #6 is excellent because it has the Bear
- 4 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
Creek Channel. to the north, Eisenhower and the golf course to
the west, and Village Commercial on the south and east.
"Access" to Area #6 is only fair because of the bridge on
Eisenhower over the Bear Creek Channel. Because of sight
distance and separation problems, no direct access may be
permitted from this area onto Eisenhower. Access to this area
must come primarily from an extension of Bermudas north of
Tampico, and through The Village Commercial to the south, using
the commercial access exit onto Eisenhower (if one is
permitted) or onto Tampico east of Eisenhower. The "market"
for high density is fair due largely to the size of the area
and its location, removed from major shopping, service,
employment and transportational opportunities of the Valley as
a whole.
Area #7: (Southeast corner of Eisenhower and Tampico, north
of La Quinta Park)
The "location"' of this area is good because of its relationship
to The Village Commercial area (on the correct side of major
thoroughfares). As for "compatibility", the area lies between
Village Commercial on three sides, while across Eisenhower, the
actual land uses are higher density residential. Thus
compatibility is excellent. "Access" to Area #7 is excellent
in that it is served by Tampico, Eisenhower and Bermudas at
multiple points, so that congestion is less likely. The
"market" is good from two perspectives. This is the smallest
area designated high density, being one -sixth the acreage
projected to be absorbed. Moreover, the area is already
subdivided into numerous smaller blocks and lots, which will
:result in smaller projects - a marketing plus. The market is
already proven for this location because almost half of the
area is already developed in high density residential. The
remainder will be merely in -fill. Even so, the market will be
limited by the same locational disadvantage suffered by all of
the Cove area, due to its distance from Valley employment,
major shopping, service, and transportational opportunities.
- 5 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
i
PART 4B. GENERAL PLAN AND THREE ALT
RE:SIDE:NTIAL DENSITY DESIGN
WIVE SCENARIOS FOR
I. ACREAGE IMPLICATIONS OF MARKET ABOSRPTION STUDY.
A. Market Study
In the year 2020, market absorption projections
suggest the following acreages and percentages of
acres, broken down by densities:
Density Acres %
Low (avg. 3 du/ac) 2683 73.5
Medium (avg. 15 du/ac) 673 18.4
Medium High (avg 10 du/ac) 247 6.8
High (avg. 14 du/ac) 49 1.3
3652 100%
B. Comparison of Market Absorption to General Plan:
The General Plan designations by density are as
follows:
Density Acres %
Low (very, low and low combined) 5810 72.6
Medium 1825 22.8
Medium High ('N/A) -- -'
'.High (medium high and high) 368.5 4.6
8003.5 100%
C. Analysis
As can be seen by comparing the two tables, the
average percentages for low and medium densities
are not too dissimilar. However, the acreage
figures in the General Plan are more than twice the
projected absorption by the year 2020.
The medium density figures have some potential for
mis -interpretation however. The Cove area, while
technically medium density (due to the historical
creation of very small lots) is still single-family
detached in product type, and hence competes (with
a price advantage) in the low density market. Lot
sizes such as are found in the Cove will not be
replicated elsewhere in La Quinta. The Cove medium
density lots account for 927 acres (approximately
half) of the medium density General Plan acreage.
BJ/RPTTB.09B
•
In terms of market absorption however, the Cove
lots should be considered as a special case of
low density. The in -fill of the Cove SFR
detached lots (3250) could be completed by the year
2020 at the rate of construction experienced in the
last five years. Therefore, the best way to
interpret the market projection for medium density
is to expect a different product type than can be
placed in the SR Zone of the Cove and to count the
new medium density acreage as being found elsewhere.
The other half of the question comes to the
foreground, however. If the Cove is to be
considered a special case of low density, and as
direct competition for absorption against new low
density areas, and if the Cove is only 40.7 filled
in, should we count the remaining in -fill against
the projected low density absorption? The answer
is that we probably should. Therefore, we might
expect 927 acres to be absorbed as if it were low
density in the Cove out of the 2683 acres
projected. This understanding calls for an
adjustment to our tables.
An adjusted market absorption might appear as
follows:
Density Acres %
Low 1756 48.1
Cove (as if low) 927 25.4
Medium (not in Cove) 673 18.4
Medium High 247 6.8
High 49 1.3
3652 100%
A correspondingly adjusted General Plan acreage
table might appear as follows:
Density
Low
Cove (as if low)
Medium (not in Cove)
High
Acres %
5810
72.6
927
11.6
898
11.2
368.5
4.6
8003 100%
7 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
i
II.
If these two adjusted tables are compared, several
interesting conclusions are suggested.
1. Residential land will .only be about 45%
absorbed overall by the year 2020.
2,. Low density residential land will only be
about 30% absorbed by the year 2020.
3,. Low density plus the Cove accounts for 84% of
the land inventory provided, but only about
74% of the land to be absorbed. Moreover,
the acreages do not compare. There would be,
in the year 2020, about 4000 surplus acres of
low density land.
4.. Medium density absorption could be 18%
compared to 11% of land provided, but the
acreages are not far off: 898 acres provided
versus 673 acres (74%) absorbed by 2020.
5. High density shows an interesting
discrepancy. 368 acres are provided versus
296 acres absorbed (80%). High density is
4.6% of the inventory provided and 8.1% of
the absorption. But the breakdown of high
density in the market study shows that the
greatest portion of the absorption will be in
the "medium high" category (8-12 du/ac) at
6.8% versus 1.3% of 12-16 du/ac). The market
for truly high density therefore, is expected
to be very minimal.
6. If left entirely to market dynamics, the
profile of the community would be different
from what the General Plan would lead one to
expect.
OTHER PLANNING CONSIDERATIONS.
A. Image Corridors.
In the General Plan, Highway 111, Washington, Eisenhower
and Tampico are designated as "Primary Image Corridors".
Jefferson, Avenue 50 and Avenue 52 are designated
"Secondary Image Corridors". (Fred Waring, Miles and
Avenue 48 should also be considered for image corridor
status.) With regard to residential development, the
impact of the image corridor is a need for a low density
appearance, via height limitations (Policy 6.5.7). A
supportive policy statement might read as follows:
8 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
•
"Within 150 feet of Image Corridor streets, all
residential structures shall be low profile (one
story), and clustered in no more than six units per
structure. Beyond 150 feet, the residential
structures shall be limited by the height
restrictions for that location."
But the "Image Corridor" concept also has implications
for densities. Above a certain density, single story
development is not feasible. As a result, along Avenue
48 on the north side between Washington and Jefferson, up
to the quarter section east/west line (approximately
1,320 feet) and along the west side of Washington from
Avenue 48 up to Avenue 47 (Highland Palms), for a depth
of approximately 1,320 feet east, residential densities
should not exceed "Medium Density" (4-8 du/ac). These
areas enhance the image corridors and serve as a
transition from low density south of Avenue 48 to higher
density and commercial further north.
B. Non -Residential Area Along Highway 111.
Land along Highway 111 is too valuable to the City for
eventual commercial development to be used in the near
term for residential land uses. In addition, noise
contours for Highway 111 suggest that significant
structural protection would be necessary to render nearby
residential development habitable. The eastern portion
of the Highway Ill corridor is also subject to some
flooding potential. For these reasons, residential land
uses near Highway 111 are generally not appropriate.
Specifically, in the areas between Highway 111 and the
Whitewater Wash, and south of Highway 111 at least 660
feet (down to about Avenue 47) residential development as
the primary land use should not be permitted. Any
incidental residential uses proposed in these areas must:
1.
Be
a part of
a larger mixed -use
project; and,
2.
Be
a very
small percentage
of the total project
square footage; and,
3. Be well integrated into the larger development
(i.e., not a separate use); and,
4. Serve a legitimate necessary purpose for the
development, such as employee housing; and,
5. Have a high ratio of affordability; and,
6. Be subject to specific approval by the City.
9 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
0
Except for integrated mixed -use
uses should be located at least
111 and. generally along and/or
Section 30.
developments, residential
660 feet south of Highway
south of Avenue 47 in
To make clear the policy of the City reserving the
immediate Highway ill Corridor for commercial
development, a "non-residential area" is proposed in all
three alternative scenarios. The guiding principle
should be that commercial may displace residential
within the Highway 111 Corridor, but residential shall
not displace
C. Mixed Residential and Commercial.
In the: area of Highway 111 Corridor outside of the
non-residential area, and especially where higher density
residential development may be designated, such higher
densities generate a market for, and are generally
compatible with properly designed commercial facilities
providing personal goods and services. Higher density
residential together with commercial (and other
facilities) constitute a typical "urban neighborhood
mix". Such a mix might contain:
--Higher density residential and associated recreational
amen.'ties
--Congregate living and nursing homes
--Personal services
--Small goods and convenience retail
--Medical, dental, and related services
--Finance, insurance, real estate, legal, etc.
--Churches
--Possible fire station
Urban neighborhood mixed uses, including light commercial
(personal services, small goods retail, and offices),
could be mixed with residential (in any proportions)along
Avenue 47 (Highland Palms) between Washington and Adams,
and along Adams from Avenue 48 to Avenue 47.
Further east between Adams and the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel starting 1,320 feet north of Avenue 48 and up to
a line south of Avenue 47 extended, higher density
residential could be mixed with commercial or hotel uses
(in any proportions).
The only type of mixed -use (in place of a stated
preferred use) which the City should consider in any
location within the Highway 111 Corridor is a major hotel
mixed with tourist -oriented commercial, intensive
recreational, and/or seasonal residential, and/or limited
permanent residential uses. A hotel should be permitted
to displace residential to any depth south of Highway 111.
- 10 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
0
D. Median Versus Maximum Density Per Acre.
Parts I & II of the analysis (already submitted) used the
maximum density per acre to calculate the outside
number of dwelling units and population capacity provided
by the General Plan. The calculations contained in this
final analysis use median densities for the General Plan
and for each alternative scenario. This results in more
realistic figures.
E. Commercial at Fred Waring and Washington.
A small area of commercial is designated on the General
Plan for this location. The area is neither large
enough, nor does it have feasible access potential for
commercial use. All three scenarios suggest conversion
of this small area to medium density residential,
consistent with its neighboring parcel.
F. Highway 111 Specific Plan.
Scenario #3 contains a preview of the direction now being
considered by the Planning Commission for residential
land uses within the Highway 111 Corridor.
G. Givens.
Existing development or entitlements such as approved
specific plans are treated as "givens" and are not
proposed for any changes - except for Village Pointe
Apartments.
H. Surplus Over Market Demand.
In some cases, a scenario may propose what appears to be
an over -supply of a particular density. This is done to
accomplish three objectives. First, some locational
choice should be provided among sites for a density with
low acreage totals. No one site should have a monopoly
on a particular density. Second, some "shrinkage" may be
expected because a development may come in at a density
below its designation. And third, mixed use (residential
with commercial or quasi -public uses) will absorb some of
the nominally residential land inventory for the higher
density designations.
I. I'!ow Absorption for Low Density.
The market analysis suggests that La Quinta will not have
absorbed even half of its low density land inventory by
the year 2020. The year 2020 is used as a target for
absorption for higher densities, but not for low
density. A significant surplus is left for future low
density absorption well beyond the year 2020.
BJ/RPTTB.09B
• 0
J. High Density Placement.
The location of any high density residential should have
one of two planning rationales:
1. Be within the Highway 111 Corridor and be within
one quarter mile of either Highway 111 itself
and/or Washington or Jefferson as Major Arterials;
or
2. Be a functioning part of the Village. Higher
density residential contributes to the pedestrian
theme of The Village and helps create the critical
market mass needed for The Village plan to succeed.
The degree to which any high density residential is
provided in the General Plan should be determined by the
degree to which any market warrants a density bonus for
providing affordable housing for the City.
R. "Fighter Control Over Densities.
The City should consider adopting a City Policy that
medium, medium high, and high density designated acres
are just that. Designated higher density areas should
not be converted to other uses nor should they be
developed at significantly lower densities. Higher
density areas are placed on the General Plan for a
purpose. Higher density areas should be considered
reserve resources, not available for near term
conversion. Higher density designations are placed where
they are for reasons of traffic, infrastructure and the
buffering of one use from another.
If particular density areas are permitted to be converted
to other uses, then later higher density uses will have
to be forceably inserted into neighborhoods where they
weren't planned from the beginning, causing even greater
disruption and impact.
�,. Present Medium Density Trends.
As an outgrowth of the previous point, some adjustment of
medium density seems warranted. Much of the existing
medium density designated land is in an area where land
prices are relatively cheaper. It doesn't seem realistic
to hold this land for future medium density when there is
a present market for 7,200 square foot lots for
single-family residential at low densities.
Medium density should be designated for areas where land
prices are/or will be higher. This helps guarantee its
use for non -single-family residential detached (i.e.,
medium density) products. Therefore, in the Scenarios,
- 12 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
0
much of the medium density inventory along Miles is
shifted south into the Highway 111 Corridor.
M. Parcels oc
CateQor
Two Resid
i
A distinction between one density and another should be
placed on the .map for reasons of access, compatibility,
etc. When a parcel is split between two density
categories, the two areas should be treated separately,
not. averaged.
N. Affordable Housing.
The analysis of the implications of the SCAG Regional
Housing Needs Analysis and La Quinta's resulting
obligation for providing afforable housing is not yet
completed. However, early reviews suggest that La Quinta
will have a sizeable obligation. Affordability is the
key. All mechanisms for providing housing afforability
will have to be examined. One opportunity is to require
a minimum affordable component of all higher density
projects, and to provide incentives for higher
percentages of afforability.
Residential land uses exceeding eight units per acre
should contain provisions for requiring low and
moderate income household affordability (up to 25 percent
maximum, of the total units for any one project). A
minimum of five percent of the units should be required
to be affordable to low and moderate income households.
Density bonuses for providing affordable housing should
apply only to projects in which more than five percent of
the units are affordable to low and moderate income
households, as in the following table:
Percent Affordable Bonus
5.0%
Required
0%
5.1%
- 10.0%
. 10.0%
10.1%
- 15.0%
. 15.0%
15.1%
- 20.0%
: 20.0%
20.1%
- 25.0%
. 25.0%
O. Design Excellence.
Excellence of design should be
density/intensity of land
guidelines and standards.
entitled to bonuses in
use according to adopted
- 13 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
0
P. Recreation.
All residential development should provide sufficient
internal active recreational facilities and passive open
space.
Q. Noise.
Because noise contours in the Highway 111 Corridor
provide no open locations where exterior noise levels
fall below 60 CNEL (the acceptable exterior noise level),
residential projects shall be designed so that exterior
quiet areas (areas where noise levels are below 60 CNEL)
are created for passive recreational uses.
Interior noise levels shall meet interior standards for
all residential locations.
R. Maximum Densities.
Residential land uses should not exceed approximately 16
dwelling units per acre (High Density), except for any
bonuses for affordability and/or excellence in design.
S. Higher Densities in the Highway 111 Corridor.
Higher densities (exceeding 8 du/ac) if permitted, should
be located south of 47th Avenue (except in Section 30 --
nearest to Washington -- where they may extend up to 660
feet north of 47th Avenue), and north of the quarter
section east/west line (1,320 feet north of 48th Avenue),
and at least 1,320 feet west of Washington. See Scenario
#3.
T. Strategy for Consistency with the General Plan.
At the same time that the Highway Ill Specific Plan is
being finalized, a number of amendments to the General
Plan should be considered:
1. The General Plan needs to be amended to allow
residential uses in greater than 30-percent
proportions where appropriate. Residential should
be a designated land use in some portions of the
Highway 111 Corridor, and a mixed -use option (in
any proportion) in other appropriate locations.
2. The mixed -use commercial land use designation
presented in the General Plan, should be amended in
the General Plan to a more specific pattern of
preferred uses presented in the Highway Ill
Specific Plan.
- 14 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
0
3. As; soon as practicable after the adoption of the
Highway 111 Specific Plan, the City should initiate
rezoning of all land within the Corridor to a
zoning classification consistent with the Specific
Plan land use designations.
4. The Zoning Ordinance
Commercial" should create
only specific uses and
The subzones should be
preferred uses expressed
Alternatives for preferred
but will require a change
Amendment for "Mixed
subzones, within which
mixes will be permitted.
consistent with the
in this Specific Plan.
uses will be specified,
of zone/subzone.
5. As; an outgrowth of the multi -family residential
density study, the residential densities designated
in the General Plan may need to be further refined
from four categories into five categories by
breaking High Density into two levels*:
o Very Low Density:
0
- 2
du/ac
o Low Density:
2
- 4
du/ac
o Medium Density:
4
- 8
du/ac
o *Medium High Density:
8
-12
du/ac
o *High Density:
12
-16
du/ac
This refinement would permit a more precise control of
impacts and compatibility among residential land uses.
The exact placement of any particular density within the
Highway 111 Corridor will be determined by the City
Council''s decision on how much of any particular density
is foreseen as necessary, based on the alternative
scenario chosen as appropriate for La Quintals future.
I:II. GENERAL PLAN
A. Notes on General Plan Residential:
1. The General Plan provides for seven
designated high (8-16 du/ac) areas - two in
the north and five around The Village -
totaling 160.5 acres.
2. Mixed Use Commercial contains a provision for
up to 30% (by acreage) of residential -
presumably high density (8-16 du/ac) -
amounting to approximately 208 additional
high density acres anywhere in the Highway
Ill Corridor.
3. Medium density is concentrated in three
areas: north of Whitewater Wash west of Dune
Palms; the Cove (technically medium density,
- 15 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
C
4.
but single-family
character), dating
subdivision activity
now sub -standard size
72' X 100'); and an
detached lots in
from historical
resulting in what are
lots (50' X 100' vs.
array of medium density
areas through the south center of the City
resulting from several specific plans of more
recent origin. Of these, the area south of
Bear Creek Channel (approved as part of Duna
La guinta) knowns as Village Pointe
Apartments is designated medium density but
contains the accumulated left -over densities
of other parts of the same specific plan, and
as a result, (if built out at full entitled
units) would create an actual very high
density area adjacent to the Village
Commercial north of Tampico. The plot plan
for Village Pointe Apartments has expired.
However, a subsequent application may attempt
to capture most of the leftover units from
the Specific Plan. The General Plan
designation for this area will be critical.
Low density
residential
characterizes
areas.
the remaining
BJ/RPTTB.09B
- 16 -
0
B. General Plan Maps
--North Portion: Exhibit 3
--South Portion: Exhibit 4
- 17 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
•
Z
A
«0
A
m
� CD
.�
1
�
W
CL
}, 00
}
O
V
Q
Lu
z
Z
W
Q Z
W
CO)
C
Ljal
®
® S
W t_7
2 _
W
X_
2
❑
�=��
El
Exhibit 3
1 r -iL• M-)r \
.
C.
Revised
General
Plan Profile, Based on
Average
Dwelling
Units Per
Acre (rather than maximums),
and
adjusted
totals.
Low
Cove
Medium
High
Totals
;Acres
5,810
927
898
368.5
8,003.5
@
3/ac
6/ac 6/ac
12/ac
Dwelling
Units
17,430
5,562
5,388
4,422
32,802
Pers/HH @
3
3
2.5
2.5
Population
52,290
16,686
13,470
11,055
93,501
BJ/RPTTB.09B
- 18 -
• 0
IV. ALTERNATIVE SCENARIOS.
Three alternative scenarios have been developed to compare
their policy implications with the existing General Plan. The
alternatives are as follows:
#1 - "Low Density Community"
#2 - "Guided Market Demand"
#3 - "Recommended"
A. Scenario #1 - "Low Density Community".
(1.) Notes on Scenario #1:
(a.) Scenario emphasizes community intent to
remain low density community.
(b.) All present high density areas become
medium density.
(c.) Highest density provided is "Medium"
(4-8).
(d.) Medium density concentrated in three
areas:
(1.) Highway 111 Corridor
(2.) Around The Village
(3.) Existing medium density
developments/commitments.
(e.) Area north of Whitewater is reserved for
Low Density Residential (other than
existing and Option 1A).
(f.) Option lA allows for an additional area
of medium density north of Whitewater
Wash, centered on Adams.
(g.) Holds "Village Pointe Apartments" area
to medium density (as presently
designated).
(h.) Existing area of very high density north
of the park would be allowed to build
out only at medium densities for the
remainder, thereby lowering the average
density in that area.
- 19 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
0 0
(i.) Converts Commercial at Fred Waring and
Washington to Medium Density Residential.
(j.) Removes high density and mediums areas
where Civic Center will be.
(k.) "No residential" zone along Highway 111
from the north side of Whitewater Wash
to 660 feet south of Highway 111 (plus
down to within 330 feet of Avenue 47 in
Section 30) except for west of
Washington on south side of Highway 111
behind Plaza La Quinta.
(1.) No higher than medium density along
Washington and low along Jefferson.
- 20 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
(2.) Scenario #1 Maps
--North Portion: Exhibit 5
--South Portion: Exhibit 6
- 21 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
CL
0
0
z
w
z
w
LUUJ
z
w 3
0 0
CO -1
o
w
2
m I
z
0
z
r
LAI-
F-11
w- v-
-.0.j !W#' -WA
3A b s 4; 1.1 Exhibit 5
3 9 ki I
44 * - l' , H .
-4-141
----------
+* +
0,
40'
JV
1
X
5
.T1•.W
k , : LOW DENSITY (up to 4 at,
,• 1 F MEDIUM DENSITY (4-8/ac)
• f 1
f
l .•
'• •a — ' •—_ — — - ---- ITO -- 1
j Exhibit 6 i
i
0
Acres
Dwelling
Units
Pers/HH @
Population.
(3.) Scenario #1 - "Profile"
Low Cove Medium High Med-Hi Hi Tot
6,645 927 587.5 0 0 0 8,1'35
3/ac 6/ac 6/ac
19,935 5,562 3,525 29,02;
3 3 2.5
59,805 16,686 8,813 85,304
Scenario #2 - "Guided Market Demand".
(1.) Notes on Scenario #2
(a.) Scenario approaches averages and mix
suggested by market absorption study,
(but not to full extent and not in
locations where market may attempt to
place higher densities.)
(b.) Exhibits full range of densities.
(c.) Introduces a refinement of General Plan
"high" (8-16 du/ac) into medium -high
(8-12 du/ac) and high (12-16 du/ac).
(d.) Recognizes trend of market location
preference for low density SFR in north
sector and reduces some medium to low.
(e.) Recognizes the "Village Pointe" area as
a potentially high density development
location and scales remainder of Duna La
Quinta west of Washington to its actual
low density character.
(f.) Allows an alternative high density area
(in addition to Village Pointe) even
though this exceeds the projected market
absorption acreage, so that locational
choice is made available.
(g.) Provides a concentration of density in
the Highway Ill Corridor.
- 22 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
0 0
(h.) Recognizes the Washington Square
proposal for high density along 47th
alignment.
Holds northwest corner Washington and
Tampico at medium density (because of
access problems).
(j.) Down scales other three Village high
density areas to "medium -high" (8-12).
(k.) Recognizes Dune Palms Mobile Home Park
as medium density.
(1.) Converts small commercial corner at Fred
Waring and Washington to medium density
residential.
(m.) Floats Option 2A as medium -high density
north of Whitewater Wash along Adams (40
acres).
(n.) Removes Civic Center high and medium
density areas south of Tampico at
Washington.
(o.) Provides no higher than medium density
along Washington, Jefferson, and Avenue
48 in keeping with the General Plan
Image Corridor.
(p.) Recognizes existing and/or commitments
to medium density.
(q.) Creates a "No residential"
Highway 111.
zone along
- 23 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
(2) Scenario #2 - "Maps"
--North Portion: Exhibit 7
--South Portion: Exhibit 8
- 24 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
OD
uj
co
1 cc
CY
1
q*
two
OD 4c
eat
0
z
LU
0
z
w
z
w
Z
-W w
0 cr.
z
w
C.) 0
CO _j
DEO-J-ov
D
.
I
w z
0
z
DOE]
-
I _j
. Adak-i I
ir luccr4_ -. W
------------
IT
............
. .....
! Mu*�H; tT: �+-:L+I
I:t
V
ff �-Wt
.........
.
+
...........
=*
Im
- -
+Lflf-
...........
....... . ...
4**
3 L d
S
4; 1
Exhibit 7
3 IV-61
S
19 1
...............
...................
•
d ........ ..................
. ..............
.. ..................
I ...............
........ ......
..... . .......
A ***"** ........
I ................
0 0
•
(3.) Scenario #2 - "Profile"
IOW Cove Medium High Med-Hi Hi Total
Acres 5„958 927 1,074 0 115.5 86 8,16C
@ 3 6 6 10 14
Dwelling
Units 17,,874 5,562 6,444 0 1,155 1,204 321239
Pers/HH @ 3 3 2.5 2.5 2.5
Population
53,,622 16,686 16,110 0 2,888 3,010 92,316
C. Scenario #3 - "Recommended"
(1.) Notes on Scenario #3
(a.) Scenario #3 is a "middle -ground"
alternative leaning toward the provision
of some limited higher densities, but
placing them mostly in the Highway 111
Corridor, and downscaling most of the
other density areas elsewhere in the
community.
(b.) Uses "medium high" refinement (8-12
du/ac).
(c.) Provides "No residential" zone along
Highway 111.
(d.) North sector mostly low density but some
medium density is provided along
Washington and stair stepping down along
Whitewater Wash to cross Adams.
(e.) Northwest corner Washington and Tampico
held at medium density (access and
separation problems).
(f.) Area north of Desert Club (south of new
Avenue 52) downscaled to medium density.
(g.) Area along Eisenhower north Tampico
downscaled to medium -high density.
(h.) Retain area north of Park as high
density.
- 25 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
0
(i.) Civic Center high and medium density
areas removed.
(j.) Recognizes medium densities existing/
commitments including specific Plan of
Duna La Quinta except Village Pointe
area: keeps at medium density on plan.
(Density even with bonuses should not
exceed "medium high" (8-12 du/ac) in
this location.)
(k.) Most of higher density areas
concentrated near Highway 111.
(1.) Small high density areas southwest of
Adams and Avenue 47.
(m.) No greater than medium density along
Washington, Jefferson and Avenue 48.
(n.) Possibility of higher density
Residential and Urban Commercial Mix
along Avenue 47 and Adams.
(o.) Medium -high density with potential
hotel/commercial mix south of no
residential zone from east of Adams to
La Quinta Stormwater Evacuation Channel.
BJ/RPTTB.09B
- 26 -
0 0
(2>) Scenario #3 - "Maps"
--North Portion: Exhibit 9
--South Portion: Exhibit 10
- 27 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
� A
U
N A 4
w
m
a,ID
M
v
O ;
4/
}
g
4c
J
4c
N
W
cc
Z p
z
p Z N
_
U 3
OJ
0
w
vd
El0
W ® O
; Z
-
m
J l____-_
r
iri
.
..... .....
• • • • • • • •
e•e•e•e• •e•e•e
• • • •
!s•�
• • • • • • • •
• •
444144+4
.•TTIT. ..-• . r
• • • • • • O • • • • O •
ieee• • 1f � 1�
1� }t
• • O • • • • O • • • • O •_
:JI•�
• •� `
• • • • • • • • • • • • • •
•e•e•e•e•ese•• • • • o • • • •
(
E
r
7
e e•'� .
• • •
•esesesesese!• • • • o • • •
+
•e•e••�•s�.�••e•e••oe•
.... _......+._.r.. Lc
KdWdWF
......
3 c b
s s -l--�
Exhibit 9
3 o tl
�L
4
N
40
n I�
• I
••:1f�:1Y': • • •
'�IIAYI ti1.�
••iTr-r•T•T•TT
1
22
•
3
..: E
.•..
�r • ..
1t+;
O
ob
fr
04
me
Moo
00
to •.
i ••
��}�•��•••�
y ► > �,� ITN�gttltf lttfitl•titltH�#14kaosenoase.i isle III tiltilptilatgat11'
..............' ...................... r .. i
ti
1
SCENARIO #3-;-;,:-
S
Y
a LOW DENSITY (Up to 4/ac) "•
MEDIUM DENSITY (4-8/ac)
'MED HI DENSITY (8-12/ac)'E�
'HIGH DENSITY (12-16/ac)'
r + �
Exhibit 10
`_ t f
0
(3.)
Scenario
#3 - "Profile"
Low
Cove
Medium
High
Med-Hi
Hi
Tota:
Acres
6,151
927
961
0
69
47.5
8,155
@
3
6
6
10
14
Dwelling
Units
18,453
5,562
5,766
0
690
665
31,136
Pers/HH @
3
3
2.5
2.5
2.5
Population
55,359
16,686
14,414
0
1,725
1,663
89,848
(4�.) Comparing the Scenario #3 ("Recommended") to
the Adjusted Market Absorption Acreage
Projections for 2020, we see that:
(a.) 1756 acres will have been absorbed of
low density, leaving an unabsorbed
surplus of 4395 acres.
(b.) All 927 acres of Cove lots would be
absorbed.
(c.) of the "not in Cove" medium density, 673
acres would be absorbed, leaving 288
unabsorbed surplus acre.
(d.) All of 69 acres of medium -high would be
absorbed, leaving an un-met market for
178 additional medium -high density acres.
(e.) All 47.5 acres of high density would be
absorbed, leaving a possible market for
a few additional acres.
- 28 -
BJ/RPTTB.09B
F
Percent of Acres, Dwelling
Units and Population by
General
Low
Market
Recommended
Denisty for each Scenario
Plan
#1
#2
#3
% Acres
72.6
81.4
73
75.4
p Dus
53.1
68.7
55.4
59.3
a
% Population
55.9
70.1
58.1
61.6
Acres
84.2
92.8
84.4
86.8
aw
a Dus
70.1
87.9
72.7
77.1
S v
0
a % Population
73.8
89.7
76.2
80.2
61% Acres 11.2 7.2 13.2 11.8
AID Dus 16.4 12.1 2.0 18.5
w
Z% Population 14.4 10.3 17.5 16.0
% Acres N/A 0 1.4 0.8
ox
q H % Dus N/A 0 3.6 2.2
wx
z % Population N/A 0 3.1 1.9
% Acres 4.6 0 1.1 0.6
x
x% Dus 13.5 0 3.7 2.1
% Population 11.8 0 3.3 1.9
Exhibit I 1
KH/DOCTB.003 -30-