The URL can be used to link to this page

1989 06 13 PCA G E N D A PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La. Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California June 13, 1989 - 7:00 P.M. CALL TO ORDER - Flag Salute ROLL CALL **NOTE** ALL AGENDA ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. MAY BE CONTI19UED TO THE NEXT COMMISSION MEETING HEARINGS 1. Item ............ Applicant ....... Location ........ Request ......... Action .......... Beginning Resolution No. 89-026 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 88-021 SPECIFIC PLAN 88-012 TENTATIVE TRACT 23995 CHANGE OF ZONE 88-035 A.G. Spanos Area between Washington Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street, and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash, La Quinta, excluding the small triangular area just north of the Wash and just south of the east/west Avenue 46 alignment (Westward Ho Drive) s A General Plan Amendment application proposing changing the land use designation from Medium and High Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential (altered configuration) and General Commercial 0 Specific Plan proposing a mixed -use development consisting of 7.6 acres Tourist Commercial, three Multi -Family Residential parcels consisting of 250 units each, and a 303-lot single- family subdivision Tentative Tract application proposing to subdivide the property as described above in the Specific Plan ® Change of Zone from R-1 and R•-2-8000 to C-P,, R-3, and R-1 Resolution No. 89- 1'MR/AGENDA.613 -1- 2. Item ............ Applicant ....... Location ........ Request ......... Action ........... :PUBLIC COMMENT TENTATIVE TRACT 24230 CHANGE OF ZONE 89-037 A.G. Spanos Construction Northeast corner of 48th Avenue and Washington Street • A zone change from R-2-9600, R-2-2500, and R-5 to R-1, R-2, and C-1 a To subdivide +151 acres into 281 single-family lots, four future commercial lots, one future multi -family lot, and one recreation area lot Resolution No. 89- This is the time set aside for citizens to address the Planning Commission on matters relating to City planning and zoning which are not Agenda items. Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission under Public Comment and scheduled Agenda items should use the form provided. Please complete one form for each item you intend to address and submit the form to the Planning Director prior to the beginning of the meeting. Your name will be called at the appropriate time. When addressing the Planning Commission, please state your name and address. The proceedings of the Planning Commission meeting are recorded on tape and comments of each person shall be limited. CONSENT CALENDAR - None 13USINESS SESSION :L. Item ............ Plot Plan 89-414; Sign Application 89-088 Applicant ....... Roger L. Johnson/Chester Dorn Location ........ Existing building southwest corner of Calle Tampico and Avenida Bermudas, previously La Quinta Builders Supply. Request ......... Exterior building modifications and placement of wall -mounted sign. Action .......... Minute Motion 2. Item ............ Applicant ....... Location ........ Request ......... Action .......... Fencing Requirements City of La Quinta SR Zone Proposed changes to existing fencing requirements Minute Motion MR/AGENDA.613 -2- OTHER - None ADJOURNMENT ------------- ITEMS FOR JUNE 12, 1989, 3:30 P.M. STUDY SESSION "DISCUSSION ONLY" 1. All Agenda items. 2. Identification of future Commission Agenda items. 4:00 p.m. 3. Highway 111 Property Owners session with Commission. ITEMS IDENTIFIED FOR FUTURE AGENDAS �. Dark Sky Ordinance C. Park Land Locations b. Minute Format/Content d. Downtown Parking District e. Street Address Illumination f. Fencing Requirements MR/AGENDA.613 -3- STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JUNE 13, 1989 APPLICANT: A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION, INC. OWNER: TTP, LTD./TFP, LTD. PROJECT: RESUBMITTALS FOR: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 88-021 CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 88-035 SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-012 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23995 PH-1 LOCATION: AREA BETWEEN WASHINGTON STREET, MILES AVENUE, ADAMS STREET, AND THE WHITEWATER CHANNEL (SEE ATTACHMENT NO. 1 IN ATTACHED STAFF REPORT) ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 88-099 WAS PREPARED PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA)F THE INITIAL STUDY INDICATED THAT POSSIBLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS MAY OCCUR DUE TO THE PROPOSAL. THREE ISSUES; TRAFFIC, LAND USE ABSORPTION/MARKETING, AND THE POSSIBILITY OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL REMAINS; WERE STUDIED IN GREATER DEPTH. THE OUTCOME OF THESE STUDIES ARE AS FOLLOWS: A) THE TRAFFIC STUDY SHOWED THAT MITIGATION MEASURES COULD BE APPLIED IF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, INCLUDING COMMERCIAL, WAS IMPLEMENTED. B) THE MARKETING STUDY SHOWED THAT THE LOCATION OF A GENERAL COMMERCIAL LAND USE AS PROPOSED BY THIS PROJECT WOULD NOT BE VIABLE FROM A NEAR -TERM LAND USE INVENTORY PERSPECTIVE. DEVELOPMENT OF COMPETITIVE PROPERTIES AND INCREASED DEMAND AFTER THE YEAR 2000 WILL, HOWEVER, CREATE COMMERCIAL DEMAND TO SUPPORT COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THIS SITE. C) THAT A MITIGATION MEASURE NECESSITATING FURTHER EVALUATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL EVIDENCE IS REQUIRED. MR/STAFFRPT.080 -1- (PLEASE SEE ATTACHMENTS 2, 3, 4, 5, AND 6 FOR EXTRACTS FROM THE ABOVE STUDIES. MITIGATION MEASURES FOR THE ABOVE, WHEN MADE A PART OF THE PROJECT, WILL REDUCE THE IMPACTS TO AN INSIGNIFICANT LEVEL AND A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL, THEREFORE, BE PREPARED. 1. BACKGROUND .Che above four applications were resubmitted and brought before the Planning Commission on May 9, 1989. At this Hearing, the Commission recommended to the City Council approval of the General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone and chose to continue the Specific Plan and Tentative Tract Map. ':Che above applications were scheduled for the City Council meeting on May 16, 1989. The Applicant requested a continuance of this City Council Public Hearing. On May 25, 1989, the Applicant resubmitted all four applications showing a change in location for the commercial site. This latest submission is now under discussion. 2. APPLICATIONS RESUBMITTED 2.1 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 88-021. A General Plan Amendment has been made for this property, changing the land use from Medium and High Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential (altered configuration) and General Commercial. (See Attachment No. 7) a. General Commercial: The La Quinta General Plan states: "General Commercial is a generalized category for the broadest range of use activities. It includes general merchandise above and beyond that found in local neighborhood centers. The latter provide primarily food and food services." A 7.6-acre General Commercial site is proposed, located on Miles Avenue approximately 1,500 feet east of the intersection of Washington Street and Miles Avenue. In previous applications, this commercial site was located on the corner of Washington Street and Miles Avenue. MR/STAFFRPT.080 -2- b. High Density Residential: This project proposes 49 acres of High Density Residential. General Plan Amendment No. 88-021 shows the High Density area located in the central portion of the site, surrounding the proposed General Commercial development, and bordered on the east and including part of the proposed Medium Density land use. Please note that an inconsistency emerges when comparing the GPA and changed zone area requested by the Applicant for the multi -family residential area and that shown on the Specific Plan and Tentative Tract. Approximately 10 acres (+38 lots) of the single-family residential area lies within the area allocated for High Density Residential in the proposed General Plan Amendment and proposed Change of Zone. The total density for the proposed 49 acres of High Density Residential, including all units located within the identified area, multi -family and single-family residential, is 16.3 units per acre. This exceeds the General Plan standard .for High Density Residential development, 12 to 16 dwellings per acre. Please note, as required by the La Quinta General Plan, the 49 acres used to calculate density excludes the right-of-way dedicated for streets identified in the General Plan Circulation Plan (Washington Street, Miles Avenue, and Adams Street). C. Medium Density Residential Area: The Medium Density Residential element is located on the eastern side of the subject property between the proposed High Density area, Miles Avenue, Adams Street, a vacant property, and the Whitewater Wash. This area encompasses 67.25 acres, at a density of +four units per acre. The La Quinta General Plan identifies Medium Density as having 4 to 8 dwellings per acre. 2.2 CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION NO. 88-035. An application has been made requesting a change of zone from R-2-8000 and R-1 to C-P and R-3 (with a 67.25-acre portion of the property remaining in R-1). (See Attachment No. 8) MR/STAFFRPT.080 -3- a. C-P (General Commercial). The C-P zoning district provides for a large variety of commercial uses including retail and service activities, hotels, motels, gasoline service stations, automobile repair shops, mobile home and trailer sales, rental and storage, and outdoor advertising structures. The Applicant proposes a C-P zone on a 7.6-acre parcel located on Miles Avenue approximately 1,500 feet east of the corner of Washington Street and Miles Avenue. Existing zoning is R-1, single-family residential. b. R-3 (General Residential). The present R-3 zone text permits multiple -family dwellings, apartment houses, and a number of other nonresidential uses. The proposed R-3 zone would occupy some 49 acres. This area is located in the central portion of the proposed project, surrounding the proposed C-P zone, bordered by Miles Avenue, the proposed R-1 zone, the Whitewater Flood Control Channel, and Washington Street. Currently this area is zoned R-1 and R-2-8000, i.e., multiple -family dwellings with 8,000 square feet of gross lot area for each unit. 2.3 SPECIFIC PLAN APPLICATION NO. 88-012. A Specific Plan has been made proposing a mixed -use development for this property. This plan consists of 7.6 acres Tourist Commercial, three multi -family residential parcels consisting of a total of 750 units, and a 300-lot single-family subdivision. (See Attachment No. 9) The table below compares the land use areas given for the General Plan Amendment, Change of Zone, Specific Plan, and Tentative Tract. MR/STAFFRPT.C80 -4- GENERAL PLAN/ SPECIFIC PLAN/ CHANGE OF ZONE TENTATIVE TRACT GENERAL COMMERCIAL 7.60 HIGH DENSITY/MULTI-FAMILY 49.00(10 ac single-family) I:,OW DENSITY/SINGLE-FAMILY 67.25 SUB TOTAL 123.85 RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION 1.50 CVWD EASEMENT 7.00 '.DOTAL 133.00 No Figure Given 38.30 Net 75.02 Net 120.92 No Figure Given No Figure Given 132.50 (It is not known how the Specific Plan net areas were calculated.) a,. General Commercial. The General Commercial area comprises those building pad areas described below: --------------- BUILDING RETAIL OFFICE (SQ FT) (SQ FT) -._----------------------------------------- A 25,360 4,400 B 15,700 6,500 C 11,200 None The proposed buildings are arranged with the retail components facing towards a central parking area and the office sector located at the southern entrance to the commercial area. Parking is provided between and around the building areas, primarily in the central area of the site. Access points into the commercial area is off Miles Avenue and at two points off the major access road into the whole project. MR/STAFFRPT.C80 -5- b. Multi -Family Residential Area. The Multi - Family Residential area (38.3 acres) is illustrated on the Specific Plan. (See Attachment No. 9) Three phases have been provided as shown below: # Units Net Acres --------------------------------------- North Phase 220 12.45 South Phase 256 13.05 East Phase 274 12.80 A road linking Miles Avenue to Washington Street provides access into all three phases. The access point off Miles Avenue lines up approximately with the westerly access point for TT 23268. Three different types of units have been shown, both single- and two-story. The units are grouped in complexes of eight to sixteen units, surrounded by open space and parking areas. Each phase has a centrally -located recreational element. The parking areas are laid out in a linear -type arrangement partly covered with carports. It is noted that all "open space" areas in each multi -family phase will be totally landscaped with turf, shrubs, and trees, and irrigated with automatic sprinkler systems. C. Single -Family Residential Area. This area consists of 300 lots, 230 of which are 7,200 square feet in size and 70 of which are 8,000 square feet in size. The layout shows one access point off Miles Avenue, approximately matching up with the proposed easterly access point for TT 23268. Two access points are provided off Adams Street, the northerly access approximately lining up with the proposed access for TT 2.3519. MR/STAFFRPT.C80 -6- The internal road network consists of minor loops and cul-de-sacs feeding off a collector system of major looped roads. All stormwater will be channeled into the adjoining Whitewater Stormwater Channel so no retention basins are necessary for this single-family subdivision as is the case for the multi -family component and tourist commercial area. It is intended by the Applicant that all front yards, in addition to the street side yard of corner lots, shall be fully landscaped prior to final inspection. 2.4 TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23995. Tentative Tract application, proposing to subdivide the property essentially as described above in the Specific Plan, has also been submitted. (See Attachment No, 10) :3. EVALUATION 3.1 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT. (See Attachment 7) 7.6 AC GENERAL COMMERCIAL/49 AC HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL/67.25 AC MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL a. General Commercial. The inclusion of General Commercial land use in the proposed project is questioned. The following comments are generally those given for not supporting the commercial land use in the prior report: i. The La Quinta General Plan currently allocates +325 acres exclusively for commercial land uses and +375 acres with the potential of having commercial land uses along Highway ill. Market studies have shown that, under normal conditions, only 200 acres of this land will be utilized before the year 2020. ii. Existing General Plan Land Use Designation. The General Plan discussion of commercial land uses emphasizes the commercial development of the Highway 111 Corridor, Jefferson Street MR/STAFFRPT.C80 -7- Corridor, and the Village, plus, resort development at the La Quinta Hotel and PGA West. No provision has been made for commercial development along Miles Avenue north of the Whitewater Wash. In fact, the Whitewater Wash provides a natural barrier between proposed commercial development to the south and residential development to the north. The approval of this development could set a precedent for other strip commercial development along major streets located north of the Whitewater Channel. if commercial development is permitted along Miles Avenue (in a mode at variance with the strategy in the General Plan), that would call for a complete re-examination of the policy for economic development/commercial strategy in the General Plan. The policies regarding the location of commercial property alongside low and medium density residential would also have to be re-evaluated. iii. Highway 111 Study. if a neighborhood shopping area is created on Miles Avenue, it would be a substitute for similar development which could be focused along Highway 111. In essence, if this commercial land use is allowed to go forward, the strategy for fostering development along Highway 111 would be weakened. iv. Location of the Proposed Commercial Area. An analysis of locations of competing existing and proposed neighborhood shopping facilities compared to the proposed site shows that the latter falls within a one -mile MR/STAFFRPT.080 -8- 3.2 radius of Plaza La Quinta, within a one -mile radius of two proposed centers along Highway 111, and within a two-mile radius of an existing center at Avenue 42 and Washington (please see Attachment 5). The close location of other commercial centers reduces the viability of the commercial segment of the proposed project, particularly in view of the potential access problems. V. Miles Avenue essentially serves the existing and future residential uses in the area. it is not intended to facilitate traffic for a commercial development. In fact, the location of a commercial area on Miles Avenue will encourage extraneous traffic to use that street and the surrounding road network. Staff, therefore, still recommends that commercial land use area be excluded from this project. b. High Density Residential. The total density proposed for the High Density area is 16.3 du/ac, as was previously discussed. This exceeds the General Plan requirement for High Density Residential development, 12 to 16 dwellings per acre. Staff recommends, therefore, that the Applicant reduce the density of the High Density area to conform with the General Plan density requirements. C. Medium Density Residential Area. The proposed single-family residential area at a density of approximately four units per acre is acceptable. CHANGE OF ZONE. (See Attachment 8) 7.6 AC C-P / 49 AC R-3 / 67.25 AC R-1 a. General Commercial Zoning (C-P). C-P zoning is a basic commercial zoning. In comparison to C-P-S zoning (more MR/STAFFRPT.080 -9- commonly used in the La Quinta area), C-P zoning allows a wider range of uses including hotels, motels, automobile repair garages, mobile home sales and storage, trailer sales and rental of house trailers, and outdoor advertising devices. If this zoning is approved by the Planning Commission, conditions strictly regulating the permitted uses in this commercial area should be attached to the Specific Plan for this project. b. Residential 3 Zoning (R-3). R-3 zoning allows for other uses besides multi -family dwellings, including hotels, motels, and offices. The R-2A zone would accommodate the multi -family land use envisaged, but does not permit any non-residential uses, including hotels and motels. Staff, therefore, recommends zone R-2A for the multi -family area and not R-3 zoning. 3.3 SPECIFIC PLAN. (See Attachment 9) a. Access. Conditions, as outlined below, regarding access to this project should be attached to Specific Plan No. 88-012. i. The following access points will be right-in/right-out only: o The access off Washington Street; o The northern access into the single-family residential area. ii. In the following cases, access points in this project should line up with access points identified by approved tentative tracts located opposite this project: o The most northerly access point on Adams Street; o The easterly access point onto Miles Avenue; MR/STAFFRPT.080 -10- o The multi-family/commercial access point onto Miles Avenue; iii. The right-of-way for the access road linking Washington Street and Miles Avenue needs to be 72 feet wide. b. General Commercial Area. If this land use is approved, a number of conditions regarding the design and type of tenants should be attached to Specific Plan 88-012 conveying the following principles: i. Specify the types of tenants to be found in the commercial area, i.e., grocery, drug, small personal services and shops, Circle K- and 7-11-type tenants. ii. Specify a two-story building height limit on 30 percent of the commercial building area. C. Multi -Family Residential Area. If this land use is approved, the following conditions should be attached to Specific Plan 88-012: i. A certain percentage of the parking spaces provided should be covered. ii. A suitable buffer should be created between the Multi -Family Residential and the Single -Family Residential areas. iii. Parking areas for the multi- family units should be located alongside the commercial area. This will help provide a barrier between the two land uses. iv. Buildings in the multi -family area should be set back 50 feet from the multi -family/ single-family residential area boundary. If two story dwellings are located alongside this boundary, they must be oriented away from the single-family residential area. V. The residential element of the La Quinta General Plan is in the process of being amended. This amendment will require that all residential areas over MR/STAFFRPT.080 -11- a density of eight units per acre have at least five percent affordable housing. If more than five percent is provided, density bonuses can be granted. vi. The multi -family area will have a building height restriction of two stories. vii. Only emergency access will be provided directly off Miles Avenue. 3.4 TENTATIVE TRACT 23995. (See Attachment 10). If approved, standard tentative tract conditions should be attached to TT 23995. The following issues, however, require further clarification. a. Stormwater Retention. This project is located alongside the CVWD stormwater channel. Since stormwater from the site can flow directly into the stormwater channel, no stormwater retention basins are required on -site. Drainage easements, however, will need to be shown on the Tentative Tract Map, A condition reflecting the above should be attached to the Tentative Tract Map approval. ba. Maintenance of Common Areas. A condition has been attached to this Tentative Tract Map ensuring maintenance of common areas, in particular the required landscaped setbacks along the major roads. This condition requires the assessing of individual lot owners, either by establishing a homeowners' association or a landscape maintenance district. C. Parkland Dedications. Chapter 13.24, Article II, of the La Quinta Municipal Code, enacted pursuant to the authority of Government Code Section 66477, sets forth requirements for parkland dedications. (See Attachment No. 11) i. Multi -Family Residential Area. State law requires parkland space to be provided for multi -family units and allows this to be in the form of a "private open space within the development which is usable for active MR/STAFFRPT.080 -12- N e recreation uses." Based on the La Quinta Municipal Code, the amount of 6.57 acres of "open space", as defined above, should be required in the Multi -Family Residential area. ii. Single -Family Residential Area. The La Quinta Municipal Code requires 2.63 acres of parkland to be dedicated or assessed to secure an in -lieu fee. In this instance, an area of 1.5 to 2 acres of parkland is requested in the northern half of the subdivision. A fee can then be paid in lieu of the balance of parkland not provided. Tentative Tract Map 23995 shows a park 1.22 acres in size, located in the northern half of the Single -Family Residential area. The Applicant is requested to enlarge the park to 1.5 to 2 acres to comply with the park dedication requirement. Traffic Signals. The following percentage of bonds for proposed traffic signals will be required; i. Twenty-five percent at the intersection of Washington Street and Miles Avenue; ii. Fifty percent at the General Commercial/Multi-Family area access point onto Miles Avenue; iii. Twenty-five percent at the intersection of Miles Avenue and Adams Street. Sunline Bus Turnout. Policy 7.5.20 of the La Quinta General Plan requires provision by new developments for bus turnouts where appropriate (See Attachment 12). Sunline Transit has requested reservation of a bus turnout area along Washington Street. A condition has been incorporated in order to allow for this provision. f. Archaeological Study. The Research Unit at University conducted a preliminary study under discussion to establish of any archaeological remains site. (See Attachment 6) Archaeological Of California on the property the possibility existing on the MR/STAFFRPT.080 -13- It was established that the presence of surface artifacts suggest the existence of possible subsurface deposits in several small areas located along the banks of the Whitewater River. The study recommends: "That a program of subsurface testing be conducted to obtain additional information to enable a better understanding of the nature and significance of the undisturbed areas containing surface artifacts. It may well prove that the subsurface remains present are not significant. Alternatively, it may be that the artifact -bearing deposits at depth can provide additional information on the prehistory of the area." A condition has been attached to the approval of this Specific Plan reflecting the above. Please also see Attachment 13, a letter from the Coachella Valley Archaeological Society. g." Height Restrictions. Only single -story multi -family units will be allowed within 150 feet of Washington Street and Miles Avenue right-of-way. In the single-family residential area, at least 75 percent of the dwelling units within 150 feet of Miles Avenue must be one story. 4. COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES 4.1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. CalTrans has provided the following comment on the project under consideration: "The traffic generated by this development, when added to the cumulative effect of other existing and proposed development in this area, will have a significant impact on State Route 111 and the Interstate 10/Washington Street Overcrossing. Presently, CalTrans has no funds available to widen State Route 111 or the Interstate 10/Washington Street Overcrossing. However, the recently completed SCAG/RTC/CVAG Regional Transportation Study recommends widening State Route 111 to six lanes. The funding source that was identified in this report for highway improvements was a combination of sales tax and developer fees. This funding mechanism is not currently in place, MR/STAFFRPT.080 -14- therefore, it might be beneficial to establish an interim funding account for development occurring during the transition period." Funding of such improvements is a policy question not yet addressed by the City. 4.2 DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. The Desert Sands Unified School District makes the following comment on this project: "The schools servicing this area are already overcrowded. A project with this type density increase could have a significant impact on the schools, depending upon unit types and how quickly the project would be developed." "State law states we can only charge $1.53 per square foot on residential projects, this amount would not be sufficient to mitigate impacts if moderate to low income apartments and/or moderate to low income single-family dwelling units were developed. This type of housing historically has a higher student generation factor than higher end apartments, condos, or single-family units." "For your information, we will also be needing a new elementary school site and a new high school site in this area within the next five to seven years (the elementary school site may be needed sooner if the area develops at a fast pace)." 4.3 PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. The City Engineering and Public Works Department has provided a number of standard comments/ conditions for this project. Special note should be made, however, of the comments requesting the Developer of this project to contribute towards construction of a low water crossing by Adams of the Whitewater Channel, and widening of the Washington Bridge. 5. SUMMARY AND FINDINGS 5.1 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT. Two alternative courses of action have been proposed. o Approve the General Plan Amendment submitted by the Applicant. MR/STAFFRPT.080 -15- o Deny the above application due to (1) the inclusion of the commercial and use in the project area, and (2) the High Density Residential area exceeding the density allowed. Resolutions are attached for both Alternatives. 5.2 CHANGE OF ZONE. The following alternatives have been proposed. o Approve the Change of Zone application submitted by the Applicant, substituting an R-2-A zoning in place of the R-3 zoning. o Deny the above because of the inclusion of the commercial element. Resolutions are attached for both Alternatives. 5.3 SPECIFIC PLAN AND TENTATIVE TRACT Conditions have been attached for SP 89-012 and TT 23995. Alternatively, if GPA 88-021 and CZ 88-035 are denied, SP 88-012 and TT 23995 need to be continued for redesign and resubmittal. 'RECOMMENDATION: General Plan Amendment 88-021: By adoption of attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 89-- 1 recommend to the City Council concurrence with the environmental analysis and approval of GPA 88-021. By adoption of attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 89- , recommend to the City Council denial of GPA 88-0,21. Change of Zone 88-035: L By adoption of attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 89- , recommend to the City Council concurrence with the environmental analysis and approval of CZ 88-035. By adoption of attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 89- , recommend to the City Council denial of CZ 88- , (as amended). MR/STAFFRPT.080 -16- Specific Plan 88-012: OR By adoption of attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 89- , recommend to the City Council concurrence with the environmental analysis and approval of Specific Plan 88-012, subject to the attached conditions. By Minute Motion, request a continuance and resubmittal of SP 88-012. '.Tentative Tract 23995: (DR By adoption of attached Planning Commission Resolution No. 89- , recommend to the City Council concurrence with the environmental analysis and approval of Tentative Tract 23995, subject to the attached conditions. By Minute Motion, request a continuance and resubmittal of TT 23995. ,Attachments: 1. Locat:ion Map 2. Extract from J.F. Davidson traffic Impact Study 3. Extract from Market Consultant Draft Report 4. Letter/Report from Agajanian and Associates regarding the commercial development potential for the Spanos site 5. Plan showing existing and proposed neighborhood shopping center 6. Archaeological report 7. General Plan Amendment 88-021 8. Change of Zone 88-035 9. Specific Plan 88-012 10. Tentative Tract 23995 11. Parkland Dedication ordinance 12. Bus Turnout Policy 13. Letter from Coachella Valley Archaeological Society MR/STAFFRPT.080 -17- 131VERSIDE COUNTY LA QUiNTA MILES AVENUE :; J w N N I a 0 a ATTACHMENT No. 1 �S`�//// ,opMWq r/cbiiiyiii� h,��Ft LOCATION MAP CASE No. GNA 88-021 CZ 88-035 SW 88-012 TT 23995 � � t t t t at ►►►uttuttt �►t � EXTRACT FROM J.F. DAVIDSON TRAFFIC REPORT ATTACHMENT No. Introduction This traffic impact study was commissioned to determine the specific impact which may be created from a proposed neighborhood retail center. A study conducted by BSI Consultants, Inc. was completed in December of 1988 which addressed this site in addition to a major residential component. Since the completion of the BSI study, questions have been raised concerning the appropriateness of the Proposed commercial component. Therefore, this study will address in greater detail, the associated traffic from the commercial site. The study will generate, distribute, and analyze the traffic which may be expected at the completion of this project. The traffic generated will be adjusted to reflect internal and pass -by traffic. These adjustments, which will be described in the trip generation section, were not considered in the BSI study due to the limited magnitude of the retail relative to the overall project. The proposed modifications to the initial BSI study were discussed with Mr. Jerry Crabill of BSI who concurred with the need to evaluate the proposed retail use in greater detail. Included in the discussion with BSI were the adjustments to generated traffic based on pass -by and internal trips. In most cases, both the AM and PM peak hours should be addressed for necessary mitigation measures; however, this study will address only the PM peak due the size of the proposed center. Retail centers of this size do not typically experience morning peaks. With impacts identified, mitigation measures will be recommended in order to assure acceptable traffic operations during the evening peak. .Project Description The proposed project is part of a larger site which is Primarily residential, including 750 multi -family units and 303 single-family units. The pro ect to be addressed by this study is a neighborhood commercial establishment consisting of 60 to 70 thousand square feet on a 7.60 acre site. A Proposed access road would be provided connecting Washington Street south of the site to Miles Avenue east of the site. This proposed road will divide the multi -family component. Access to and from the proposed road at Washington Street would be restricted to right turns only. Full access would be ;provided at the intersection of Miles Avenue and the proposed road. 1 From this table, it is illustrated that the proposed conunercial site will not require any off -site improvements other than a storage lane to be used for U-turns on Miles Avenue at the 1;7rcposed project road. Intersections were analyzed with necessary mitigation measures for background, background plus residential project, and background plus total project traffic. Total project traffic accounts for both the residential and commercial traffic of the A. G. Spanos project. Exhibit 10 illustrates the PM peak required geometries for the background traffic as well as the specific site required mitigation measures. The commercial site has the greatest impact at the intersection of Washington Street and Miles Avenue. The increase in the ICU value with the commercial traffic is .05 which may be considered minimal. The level -of -service remains unchanged. Other off -site intersections experience no more than a .01 increase in the ICU value. Therefore, the off -site impact of the neighborhood commercial land use is negligible. Furthermore, the establishment of neighborhood commercial centers would help maintain acceptable traffic operations along Highway 111 byproviding the convenience type retail centers within the neighborhoods which they are intended to serve thereby minimizing the otherwise necessary trips to and from the commercial property adjacent to Highway 111. Recommendations 1. Signalize the proposed road at its intersection with Miles Avenue. 2. Provide a 50' storage bay to be used for U-turns on Miles Avenue at the proposed road. 3. Construct the proposed road as a three lane section. The middle lane would operate as a continuous left -turn lane serving the multi -family and the commercial sites. Conclusions With the above recommendations which address the commercial site: and those recommendations developed by BSI Consultants, traffic operations during the PM peak should be maintained at acceptable levels -of -service. This study has generated, distributed, and analyzed the traffic associated with a proposed neighborhood center at the corner of Washington Street and Miles Avenue. The analyses indicate that this proposed establishmentwould have a negligible impact to the existing and future intersections 16 ad)acent to the site. This negligible impact is due to the neighborhood nature of the commercial site. These establishments depend much on pass -by traffic and traffic attracted from the surrounding residential land uses. Intersections more than a couple of miles from the site should not experience any significant impact from this proposed commercial use. 18 ATTACHMENT No. 3 EXCERPT FROM MARKET CONSULTANTS DRAFT REPORT Washington Street Corridor The Washington subarea is projected to absorb from 122,000 SF to 310,000 of commercial development by the year 2020. This development is expected to serve principally community and tourist market segments. In the near -term, the subarea is expected to serve the growing residential areas to the north and west with neighborhood and community commercial uses. In the long-term, this subarea is expected to serve both tourists and regional commercial market segments as the corridor becomes a high traffic roadway link to the I-10. As described more fully in a 12/5/88 memorandum regarding this subarea's potential for commercial development, this subarea can best serve the proximate residential areas in the near -term. Tourist and regional commercial uses can be expected only after Highway 111 sites become less available. Consequently, restricting the use of the 7 acre site to tourist uses only would preclude the property from developing with neighborhood and community commercial uses in the near -term. Increasing the tourist use restriction to the entire subarea would have the same net effect of precluding commercial development in the near term. Prompting near -term tourist related commercial uses in the subarea would likely produce low end developments and not directly compete with other higher end tourist uses in other subareas. These limitations of the subarea are due to some degree upon its 64 acre size. With a larger size, extending to the west and north, the subarea has the potential to compete more effectively for regional commercial uses in the Highway 111 subarea. The development of this larger Washington subarea would not be likely to induce greater amounts of commercial uses in La Quinta. Consequently, development at the enlarged subarea would be attracted from the ;Highway 111 subarea, thereby slowing projected development in the Highway 111 subarea. Findings This study has examined the historic trends of commercial development in the Coachella Valley and projected development growth for the Valley. Projections of commercial absorption for the City of La Quinta and its four subareas were then derived from the Valley -wide commercial development projections. The key findings from this study can- be summarized as follows: The Washington Street Corridor subarea is projected to absorb between 122,000 SF and 309,000 SF of commercial development by the year 2020. Initially, this projected development will serve the neighborhood and community market segments with retail center uses. After the year 2000 this projected development will serve the tourist and regional market segments with retail center and hotel uses. 3 - BJ/DOCTB.015 NO. WASHINGTON Neighborhood Community Regional Tourist TOTAL Neighborhood Z-ommunity Regional rourist 1990-1995 1996-2000 2001-2010 2011-2020 1990-. 21,000 28,900 68,000 98,000 215 21,000 9,900 0 29,000 30, 0 19,000 24,000 29,000 72, 0 0 19,000 191000 38, 0 0 25,000 50,000 751 311,900 415,900 1,143,800 1,559,700 3,431, 62,400 491900 80,000 109,200 301, 136,300 153,900 285,900 405,500 981, 9,400 20,800 423,300 655,100 1,108, 103,800 191,300 354,600 389,900 1,039, BJ/DOCTB.015 - 7- ATTACHMENT No. 4 AGAJANIAN & ASSOCIATES DEVELOPMENT ECONOMIC AND PLANNING CONSULTANTS December 5, 1988 Mr. Murrel Crump Planting Director City of La Quinta 78-105 Calle Estado La Quinta, California 92253 Subject: Commercial Development Potential for Spanos Site Dear Mr. Crump, The purpose of this letter report is to present our preliminary findings on the commercial development market potential for the seven acre Spanos site located on the SEC of Miles Avenue and Washington Street in the City of La Quinta, California. The site is currently applying for consideration of a General Plan amendment to change the land use from R-2 Multifamily Residential to Tourist Commercial. The findings presented in this report are based upon a larger commercial market evaluation now underway to prepare an integrated forecast of commercial development for La Quinta as a whole and for four commercial subareas within La Quinta. Due to the need for an evaluation of the Spanos site prior to the completion of this larger study the information and findings used in this letter report are to be considered preliminary in nature. However, the larger study is sufficiently far along in the analysis to provide fairly sound estimates of commercial demand both for the Coachella Valley and La Quinta. The report presenting this larger study will contain the detailed methodology used, the market information, and the basis for estimating long term commercial demand. This letter report is presented in three sections. The first section briefly describes the Spanos site along with an evaluation of the development opportunities and constraints for the site. Section two presents an overview of the larger study and the preliminary estimates of commercial demand for La Quinta. The final section presents our findings regarding the commercial development potential for the Spanos site. In summary, this report found that the subject site is not able to effectively compete for the limited amount of commercial demand in the near term future without extraordinary concessions of price or development of marginally commercial uses. Development of competitive properties and increased demand after the year 2000 will, however, create commercial demand to support commercial development at the site. The greatest and earliest 666 Baker Street, Suite 369 - Costa Mesa, California 92626 - (714) 557 - 7276 demand for the subject site will probably be neighborhood level commercial uses. A. SITE DESCRIP`.l'ION The subject site is a seven acre parcel located at the south east comer of Miles Avenue and Washington Street. The site is currently undeveloped, as are the properties surrounding the site. The site is situated just north of the Whitewater wash with principal frontage on Washington Street, an arterial roadway linking La Quinta with Interstate 10 to the north. As such, the roadway can be expected to serve as an important traffic corridor as the City develops. The flood control channel creates a strong visual separation between the north side where the site is located and the south side where other commercially zoned properties fronting on Highway 111 are located. The areas surrounding the site are largely planned for residential uses and are now largely undeveloped. Some residential development is occurring in Riverside County areas to the north of the site and in the City of Indian Wells to the west of the site. Thus, the site is competitively situated to serve both the arterial traffic travelling between La Quinta and the I-10 and the local residential neighborhoods planned to develop near the site. B. MARKET CONDMONS The commercial development potential for the site will be largely influenced by the overall growth in commercial demand in La Quinta and the site's competitive position in relation to other sites within La Quinta. It is necessary to first estimate the type, amount and rate of commercial demand growth for La Quinta before evaluating the site's competitive position. Preliminary estimates of commercial development demand have been prepared for La Quinta as part of the larger study described above. The study has reviewed the historical growth of commercial demand for four types of commercial activity. These commercial types reflect particular market areas including neighborhood, community, regional and tourist. Descriptions of these commercial types are presented on Table 1. The estimates of commercial demand for La Quinta are based upon an evaluation of the City's competitive position in the Coachella Valley. Our analysis indicates that La Quinta is one of the fastest growing communities within the Coachella Valley. As indicated on Table 2, the population growth in the City has doubled since 1980 at a growth rate of 10.7% annually. This rapid growth is second only to Cathedral City in the Coachella Valley. Commercial development in the Coachella Valley has been exceeding the residential growth since the tourist industry generates commercial demand above and beyond that needed by the residential population. Since 1980 commercial development has grown at a rate of 13.0% annually, or an average of 823,000 SF per year. During the relatively slow economic period of 2 AGAJANIANI &. ASSOCIATI 1980-1984 commercial demand grew at 11.3% annually or an average of 529,000 SF per year. During the strong growth period of 1984-1988 commercial development grew at a rate of 14.7% annually or an average of 1,160,000 SF per year. There is currently 10,554,000 SF of commercial development in Coachella Valley with 6,585,000 SF added since 1980. La Quinta has absorbed 2.6% of the Valley's commercial development since 1980. This share is expected to increase sharply as the path of development continues to head south along the Highway III corridor toward La Quinta. Accordingly, commercial absorbtion in La Quinta is expected to increase from the 1980-1988 average of 21,000 SF per year to 34,900 SF per year in the 1990-2000 period. This rate will further increase to 65,800 SF and 115,200 SF per year in the 2000-2010 and 2010-2020 periods respectively. These estimates reflect the most likely level of commercial demand for La Quinta. Under slow economic conditions we estimate annual absorbtion to be 22,500 SF, 42,300 SF, and 74,100 SF for each succeeding decade while under rapid economic growth we estimate the absorbtion rates to be 47,400 SF, 89,300 SF and 156,300 SF respectively. Commercial demand within La Quinta for neighborhood, community, regional and tourist uses will be limited by the total commercial demand for the City.The likely location of these commercial types in each of the four commercial subareas within the City will be largely dependent upon the site characteristics of each subarea and their competitive positions. Commercial acreage within La Quinta is plentiful for all types of commercial development. The Village Core, North Washington Street, and Jefferson Street subareas can provide for neighborhood and community commercial uses. The Highway 111 corridor subarea can provide for regional and community commercial uses. Tourist commercial uses are expected to locate within the Highway 111 subarea for access and visibility and the Jefferson Street (PGA West) subarea for a destination hotel and associated tourist facilities. C. STTE POTENTIAL About 350,000 SF of commercial development are forecast for La Quinta between the years 1990 and 2000. This amount of development is equivalent to 6 neighborhood centers, 4 community centers, one-half of a regional shopping center, or a hotel with 875 rooms. These estimates can be doubled for the following decade and doubled again for the 2010 to 2020 decade. It is clear from these estimates that commercial development within La Quinta will largely occur after the year 2000. The subject site has possibilities for all types of commercial development. The site can support neighborhood commercial uses to service the residential areas in close proximity, to the site. This level of commercial development would be competitive at the site. The period of absorbtion would depend largely upon the timing of the planned residential neighborhoods nearby. The subject site also has possibility to support community level commercial uses due to it's 3 AGAJANIAN &. ASSOCIATE frontage on Washington Street.. This level of commercial activity is less likely at the site due to the smaller sbze of the site and the availability of competitive sites located along the Highway III corridor. The high visibility, easy access and large parcel sizes along Highway I I I make the corridor a far more desirable location for community level commercial uses than the subject site. The subject site is too small and not well located to effectively compete for any regional level commercial uses. Tourist commercial uses can be supported at this site. However, these tourist uses, such as hotels, motels, restaurants, attractions, amusements, specialty retail and transportation services, are far more likely to seek locations along Highway III unless they are associated with a destination hotel. Thus, the subject site has a far greater chance to support tourist commercial uses only after the Highway 111 corridor has been largely built out. From this evaluation we may make the following findings regarding commercial market potential for the subject site: 1. The site is in a weak competitive position for any commercial use besides neighborhood level commercial uses because it does not appear to have any particular locational advantages over other available properties. The demand period for neighborhood level commercial uses may occur before the year 2000 as nearby residential areas develop. However, it is more likely that neighborhood level commercial demand will occur after the year 2000. 2. The site can accommodate other level commercial uses but will require extraordinary conditions to attract these rises from other more competitive sites within La Quinta in general and the Highway 111 corridor in particular. These extraordinary conditions may involve reduced costs, availability, or the accommodation of marginal commercial uses. 3. Hotel/motel use of the site does not appear to be supportable at this time or in the near future. Locations for convenience hotels/motels along Highway III are far more competitive except for budget level facilities. However, the site may support a moderate level hotel/motel after the year 2000 as the availability of suitable sites diminishes following the development of the Highway I I I corridor. 4. There is not expected to be sufficient commercial development demand in La Quinta to induce commercial development of the subject site before the year 2000. The increased rate of absorbtion for commercial uses in La Quinta after the year 2000 will, however, be significant enough to create commercial demand for the subject site. 5. In short, the subject site is not able to effectively compete for the limited amount of cominercial demand in the near term future without extraordinary concessions of price or development of marginal commercial uses. Development of competitive properties and increased demand after the year 2000 will, however, create commercial demand to support commercial development at the site. 4 AGAJANIAN & ASSOCIA.TI This brief letter report summarizes our preliminary findings regarding the commercial development potential of the Spanos site. The supporting documentation for these findings will appear in detail in the report of the larger study. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this letter report please do not hesitate to contact me personally for a prompt response. SRa t Agajanian, PhD Principal Attached: Tables 1 and 2 AGAJANIAN & ASSOCIATE Table 1 Market Level Market Area Neighborhood Serving local residential areas within 1.5 miles of the site. Community Serving residential and business commercial needs within 5 miles from the site. Regional Serving residential and business needs within Coachella Valley or about 20 miles from the site. Typical Commercial Uses Convenience outlets, foots stores, drug stores, gasoline stations, fast foods and similar uses. Retail apparel, hardware, banks, small department stores, personal services, auto repairs, restaurants, movie theaters and similar uses. Retail discount stores, appliances, new car auto sales, larger offices, hospitals, theaters, major department stores and similar uses. Tourist Serving overnight visitors from Destination hotels, convenience outside the Coachella. Valley hotels, budget hotels, specialty from throughout the world. retail, specialty restaurants, attractions and similar uses. Source AGAJAN AN do Associates Table 2 POPUIAIJON GROWTH OF COACHELIA VALLEY CITIES Annual Growth City 1-1-1981 1-1-1988 Rate Cathedral City 12,041 26,758 12.08% Coachella 9,469 14,115 5.87% Desert Hot Springs 6,245 10,383 7.53% Indian Wells 1,473 2,443 7.50% Indio 22,490 33,068 5.67% La Quinta 4,552 9,274 10.70% Palm Desert 12,120 18,088 5.89% Palm Springs 31,549 31,919 0.17% Rancho Mirage 6,333 8,525 4.34% Coachella Valley Cities 106,632 154,573 5.45% Riverside County 680,710 946,074 4.82% 4 County Region 11,119,874 12,980,699 2.24% Source AGAJANIAN & Associates California Department of Finance ATTACHME-NT No. G 0 t 30b owe ,t �, 1 is 130tlNow Clq a[` ♦,t (",• _ +y . A. r- / ii( a r5 w /••� •� W/ t Epp ® a ^Y ; . s a t� ,, 'rui ••�� .�� a t .�.'• l'• •' - �., OL LL %[( , : l��dts dlin �• < OM N•t•,. ®- I c 1 w n. ► P u �.r .r d r� r . .�, , J U•�rl .i •+• � Ej }• • I• � � • �'(jf' '• `t Qr;,[.,. D � E � ..M wl•,t ^( twl•A •'•' r1 f ''lam •� it., '>y�l; 57''=R�'t.+► a+lr I C\ to R = '•tlwyaw - - _ •r. p „ .;; �,, • , 11• ` w r .. � +14 (—_y 'ems �� ..rr� •.. .. i �t L..� r � ' If � •�7 •' � Q ..J � •t <Ei bi T �r ji II j• \• � ^t [• i 16 • �,• gib. t, y, :� :� ila.s�-�♦ - At IF rT f,, , 1 y _: art • a ($'� 6 ATTACHMENT No. 6 REEVALUATION OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL SITE CA-RIV-2200 RECORDED ON TENTATIVE TRACT 23995, LOCATED NEAR INDIAN WELLS IN RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA By: Daniel F. McCarthy Staff Archaeologist Archaeological Research Unit University of California Riverside, CA 92521 UCRARU 1970 Philip J. Wilke Administrator and Principal Investigator 1 1) CQ W 9 I �--iN IS 13 Ll for: J. F. Davidson Associates, Inc. 73-080 E1 Paseo, Suite 106 Palm Desert. CA 92260 Attn: Michael B. Dotson Project Planner Ref: December 1988 M.O.# 8810576-01 C I INTRODUCTION An archaeological assessment was performed on Tentative Tract 16449 by Jean A. Salpas in 1980. The project area, now identified as Tentative Tract 23995, is located northeast of Washington Avenue and the Whitewa.ter River flood control channel. One archaeological site, CA-RIV-2200, was Identified on the project area during the course of the 1980 field investigation. This archaeological site was described as a sparse scatter of artifacts along the northern edge of the Whitewater River. Before development of the project area can proceed, the recommendations made by Salpas (1980:11) need to be addressed. Specifically, Prior to development, the locations of all surface cultural resources would be mapped and collected. In addition, the area of ash -and charcoal (hearth) should be tested for depth, sub -surface artifacts, and any evidence of a cremation. At the request of Michael B. Dotson, J. F. Davidson and Associates, Inc., the Archaeological Research Unit (ARU), University of California, Riverside, conducted an evaluation of the archaeological site CA-RIW-2200. On November 22, 1988, the author met with Mr. Dotson at the site to review and assess the most appropriate way of mitigating adverse effects to the site. It was necessary to relocate the site and assess its nature and present condition in order to evaluate the proposed recommendations and offer current recommendations for mitigation. Surface artifacts are scattered along the southern part of the property along the former banks of the Mhitewater River. There are two areas located in the southeastern portion project area where artifacts were concentrated. The artifacts observed, mostly pottery, along much of the southwestern property boundary may represent secondary deposits because much of the bank has been modified during earth moving activities to channelize the river for flood control. These artifacts were all located on soils that have been either pushed up from the river bottom or moved latterly along the former river bank. Because of these disturbances, the context of the materials is lost and it is unlikely that it can ever be determined. Surface evidence of artifacts was limited, however, there is the possibility of isolated locations that may contain subsurface cultural deposits. During this field evaluation only a few artifacts were observed on the surface, but include numerous pottery sherds, fire -affected rock, and some bone fragments. Cremations are reported to be present, however, there r E was no surface evidence. There is insufficient data at this time to determine whether the site was used on a permanent or seasonal basis. The presence of any deposits, their depth, or significance cannot be determined at this time. The lack of surface artifacts could be due to past disturbances on the property. These include dumping, ORV use of the area, and maintenance roads and construction activities associated with the flood control channel. Also, relic hunters picking up artifacts could be responsible for the lack of surface artifacts. RECOMMENDATIONS The surface artifacts suggest the presence of possible subsurface deposits in several small discrete areas located along the banks of the Whitewater River. Shifting sands may have hidden other evidence of aboriginal use of the area. Therefore, it is necessary to test for any subsurface deposits. It is recommended that a program of subsurface testing be conducted to obtain additional information to enable a better understanding of the nature and significance of the undisturbed areas containing surface artifacts. It may well prove that the subsurface remains present are not significant. Alternatively, it may be that the artifact --bearing deposits at depth can provide additional information on the prehistory of the area. This proposal outlines a testing program that is designed to reveal the extent, context, significance, and presence or absence of deposits, and attempt to gain additional information on the behavioral classification of the site and perhaps on the probable time that site was used in the past. In order to most efficiently determine whether subsurface cultural deposits are present at the site, two methods of excavation are proposed. The first consists of a series of backhoe trenches placed at intervals throughout the site area, and the second consists of hand excavated 1 x 2-m units. The primary emphasis in this phase of the fieldwork is to determine the presence or absence of cultural deposits, and their depth if deposits are encountered. The trenches will be excavated to a depth of not greater than 2.0 m (6.6 ft), with an average length of 6.0 m (20 ft). After areas containing subsurface cultural deposits have been identified, data to evaluate the complexity of these deposits will be obtained from the hand -excavated units. 'These units will be excavated in arbitrary 10-cm levels unless i cultural stratification is present, in which case those strata will form the vertical provenience. All excavated soil will be screened through 1/8--inch mesh. Cultural and ecological remains, kept separate by unit and level, will be packaged and labeled in the field for transport to the laboratory where analysis will be conducted. Reco mendations for further studies will be made if the site contains significant materials. The purpose of this phase of the fieldwork is to collect quantitative data on the character and quantity of remains contained in the deposits, so that the data recovery/protection plan can address the specific research values. The testing may well prove that no subsurface remains are present within the boundaries of Tentative Tract 23995. If this is the case, a report detailing the test phase with recommendations for no further work will be submitted. REFERENCE Salpas, Jean A. 1980 An Archaeological Assessment of Tract 16449. MS on file at the Eastern Information Center, Archaeological Research Unit, University of California, Riverside (MF-1027). PLAN ALME-M)ML-N-1- 88-021 ATTACHMENT N( M11M DMSn-y it IOZIL14 DEMITY W 4--8 mmulqt�v)m APPROX. 84 ACRES Mkim % )ITCH DMM Ilk MMLDKS/Xmz APPROX. 40 ACRES MISTING MEM PLAN LAND usE Lff 4 111GH DI%SITY PMIDFMM 40 ACRES 7 67.25 ACRES c * If mmrtA DcxsrTy mlmn= C4.11 MPOSED GaMM PLAN LAND USE CHANGE OF ZONE EXHIBIT TENTATIVE TRACT N° 23."S .., T.,.t. %WSW �CP Proposed Zone 7 6 acres R . 3 R.! Proposed Zone • .Proposed Zone 49 acres . 67.25 •ones min PROPOSED ZONING A TArACHMENT N®. 9 _ � a� t : � � a � `' i r t : t i t ty"`a K%�e Cam`.. ��t'�q f : + •r , � o as I ztm +. /'_t £ i, "•s�/ 1.° j t : ! = K } r, Y £o ''T A ! ; 4 j i t ;✓� i� t1-g ►_ +� ! � a+ f , �a , .t • i f ie �--�-'=.-i—•"� a ♦ . - +-a-•n�C---c--- c-Ta"1 I + 1, ��q+-F �i"-T''�`- °-mac^:.. � _ a , , , � � .. r .. — >t A t +� {tea i`li L� �Y � �1r � �+ i �; i i+ �.♦ � itt C, ;41% i i+' � ! '�'e� ' J I` � c--r hhr1'. 7 j ''' r } � ± (' t � ?ZC / J e = , + 8 � � t � i L♦ :6E jam'^ /� p , " / � + — a .+ ` t . + t r r�.�t !a � (t `s• �. !t �ar� , R'� A + ,t�p � ,. IL 10 y' / J a � � ; 1' G r ^*+• µ a _. +• _.ifs ..s_.w.... a._1_ `� 71 i fi' /.' /. 01 �' l,�,; =tr��.V�•a i��:^�:! �� :r }!' }4 j£� Y Ate , •t � �/. t� � 1 +t4 / ;;� �l� as — � � , ,�� ,• � • ' �, ' ! � �£ � �Im all I' i /•♦ .�7• �C,1! 4 r✓t=t / �" !�j! : (''!O f } 1 His i it Q ts c \ �, ~� • i / h ilt i l lfC, sili�l �. r 0 IL CL i,s:.E__tt� j aa ;? f Eir iea� .: $; = y :q)•tt `fit :� Z a Ens i."s �0 •- dt 3a..t w Z r W- AT"FACHMEN'r No. 10, - - - ------- .,- T a A JAL. V1, L/ it is N at 40 I -It C)) ri LLJ r7iz ra, k ATTACHMENT No.11 Access rights may be restricted when necessary where the ultimate right-of-way width is eighty-eight feet or greater, except for approved access openings. (Ord. 5 SI(part), 1982: county Ordinance 460 510.1) °�� ART'ICLE II. DEDICATION OF LAND AND PAYMENT OF FEES FOR PARK AND RECREATION PURPOSES 13,24.020 Author _and purpose. This article is en- acted pursuant toythe authority of Government Code Section 66477 for the purpose of requiring the dedication of land of payment of fees, in lieu thereof, for park and recreational purposes, as a condition to approval of a tentative map or parcel map. (Ord. 77 S2(part), 1985: county Ordinance 460 S10.27(A)) r- 13.24.030 Requirements. A. For residential subdivisions of greater than fifty lots, the subdivider shall dedicate land or pay a fee, or combination thereof, ii such ratio as recommended by the .commission and approved by the council. For residential subdivisions containing fifty lots or less, the subdivider shall pay a fee only. All fee: shall be equivalent to three acres per one thousand popu- lation projected to inhabit said subdivision. B. All dedications shall be equivalent to three acres per one thousand population projected to inhabit said subdi. vision. All fees -shall be based on the average appraised• current market value of the undeveloped land in the subdivi• scion as determined by the city assessor. Projected popu- lation shall be calculated by multiplying the numbers of units to be constructed by the average household size for the entire city as shown on the latest federal census or a census taken pursuant to Section 40200, Chapter 17 of Part of Division 3 of Title 4. C. Subdivisions containing less than five parcels and not used for residential purposes shall be exempted from the r egvirements of this sections provided however, that a con- dition may be placed on the approval of such parcel map that if a building permit is requested for construction of a res• idential structure or structures on one or more of the par- cels within four years the fee may be required to be paid b] the owner of each such parcel as a condition to the issuance of such permit. D. The provisions of this article do not apply to com• mercial or industrial subdivisions; nor do they apply to c:ondorrinium projects or stock cooperatives which consist of the subdivision of airspace in an existing apartment build- ing which is more than five years old when ,no new dwelling units are added. (Ord. 77 S2(part), 1985: county Ordinanci 460 S10.27 (B) ) 281-36 (La Ouinta 6/67) AJ#Z%.V1&4*'-J13.6%.u>o --'- 13.24_.040 Use of land and/or fees. All land to be d for park or recreational purposes shall be fount to be suitable by the commission and the appropriate recri ation agency, subject to council approval, as to locationi parcel size and topography for the park. Park and recrea- tional purposes may include active recreation facilities such as playgrounds, playfields, gardens, pedestrian or bJ cycle paths or areas of particular natural beauty, includ9 canyons, hilltops and wooded areas to be developed or left in their natural state. Also included are land and facil- ities for the activity of "recreational community garden- ing," which activity consists of the cultivation by person other than, or in addition to, the owner of such land, of plant material not for sale. Land to be dedicated may in - elude all or part of a proposed facility. All fees are tc be used for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitatic of existing neighborhood or community park or recreational facilities to serve the subdivision inhabitants. (Ord. 71 S2.(part), 1985: county Ordinance 460 S10.27(C)) u...F... ri. 13.24.050 Credits. A. If the subdivider is require to provide!"park and recreational improvements to the ded- icated land, the value of the improvements together with a equipment located thereon shall be a credit against the pa ment of fees or dedication of land required by this articl . B. planned developments and real estate developments as defined in Sections 11003 and 11003.2, respectively, of the Business and Professions Code, shall be eligible to receive a credit, as deteumined by the council, against th amount of land required to be dedicated, or the amount of the fee imposed, pursuant to this article, for the value o private open space within the development which is usable for active recreational uses. (Ord. 77 S2(part), 1985: county Ordinance 460 S10.27(D)) Chapter 13.28 IMPROVEMMS Sections: 13.28.010 Land divisions improvements. 13.28.020 Plans required. 13.28.030 Improvements for subdivisions. 13.28.040 Schedule A subdivision --Generally. 13.28.050 Schedule A subdivision --Streets. 13.28.060 Schedule A subdivision --Domestic water. 13.29.070 Schedule A subdivision --Fire protection. 13.28.080 Schedule A subdivision --Sewage disposal. 281-37 (La Quinta 6/87) ATTACHMENT No.11 r Access rights may be restricted when necessary where .he ultimate right-of-way width is eighty-eight feet or treater, except for approved access openings. (Ord. 5 :'l(part), 1982: county Ordinance 460 S10.1) ------PARTICLE II. DEDICATION OF LAND AND PAYMENT OF FEES FOR PARK AND RECREATION PURPOSES 13.24.020 Authorily_and Purpose. This article is en- acted pursuant to the authority of Government Code Section C6477 for the purpose of requiring the dedication of land or payment of fees, in lieu thereof, for park and recreational purposes, as a condition to approval of a tentative map or parcel map. (Ord. 77 52(part), 1985: county Ordinance 460 S10.27 (A) ) 13.24.030 Requirements. A. For residential subdivisions of greater than fifty lots, the subdivider shall dedicate land or pay a fee, or combination thereof, in such ratio as recommended by the .commission and approved by the council. For residential subdivisions containing fifty lots or less, the subdivider shall pay a fee only. All fees shall be equivalent to three acres per one thousand popu- lation projected to inhabit said subdivision. ..�..- B. All dedications shall be equivalent to three acres per one thousand population projected to inhabit said subdi- vision. All fees shall be based on the average appraised. current market value of the undeveloped land in the subdivi- sion as determined by the city assessor. Projected popu- lation shall be calculated by multiplying the numbers of units to be constructed by the average household size for the entire city as shown on the latest federal census or a census taken pursuant to Section 40200, Chapter 17 of Part 2 of Division 3 of Title 4. C. Subdivisions containing less than five parcels and not used for residential purposes shall be exempted from the requirements of this section; provided however, that a con- dition may be placed on the approval of such parcel map that if a building permit is requested for construction of a res- idential structure or structures on one or more of the par- cels within four years the fee may be required to be paid by the owner of each such parcel as a condition to the issuance of such permit. D. The provisions of this article do not apply to com- mercial or industrial subdivisions; nor do they apply to condominium projects or stock cooperatives which consist of the subdivision of airspace in an existing apartment build- ing which is more than five years old when ,no new dwelling units are added. (Ord. 77 S2(part), 1985: county Ordinance 460 S10.27 (B) ) 281-36 (La Quinta 6/87) ATTACHMENT No. 12 of the University of California in 1983 entitled "Traffic Safety Evaluation, Enforcement and Engineering Analysis" provides information to guide action in this area. Im 1p ementation Policy: POLICY 7.5.17- INSTALLATION OF ALL NEW TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHOULD BE BASED UPON ESTABLISHED WARRANTS AND PROFESSIONAL ANALYSIS IN ORDER TO ASSURE TRAFFIC SAFETY AND REDUCE POTENTIAL PUBLIC LIABILITY. POLICY 7.5.16 - THE CITY SHALL ESTABLISH A TRAFFIC MONITORING PROGRAM IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE NEED FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES, PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH NEW DEVELOPMENT, POLICY 7.5.19 - TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES SHALL BE INCLUDED WITHIN THE CITY'S INFRA- STRUCTURE FEE PROGRAM. Public Transportation - The Sunline Transit Agency, SunBus, currently provides services in the La Quinta area. Line 4 loops from Palm Desert through the developed areas of La Quinta on a one -hour schedule. Future increased use of bus transportation could provide benefits such as reduced congestion, better air quality, etc. Implementation Policies: POLICY 7.5.20 - PROVISIONS FOR BUS TURNOUTS SHALL BE PROVIDED WHERE POSSIBLE AND BE REQUIRED OF ALL NEW DEVELOPMENTS WHERE APPROPRIATE. _Cgj_ERED_ BUS SHELTERS SHALL BE PROVIDED AT EVERY BUS STOP IN THE CITY, TO BE A CONDITION OF NEW -DEVELOP- MENT, OR TO BE PROVIDED BY THE CITY, IN COOPERATION WITH SUNLINE, WHERE NO DEVELOPMENT EXISTS OR IS PLANNED. POLICY 7.5.21 - EXPANSION OF BUS SERVICE TO LA QUINTA SHOULD BE EXPLORED WITH THE TRANSIT AGENCY. POLICY 7.5.22 THE POTENTIAL FOR A LOCAL "SHOPPER SHUTTLE" BUS SHOULD BE ANALYZED AND GRANT SUPPORT INVESTIGATED. VII-19 CEIVED A+r'rACHMEN'T No. 13 JUN 8 19M CITY OF LA QUINTA PEANNING & KNE:LOPMENT DEFT. L, La la! 1.1 1 .. -t r CA t _• r_ '� 1 - �' - _. = i mot-+ ? h d F ,G. l Ie�.Ec=' c,g =.�.? GL i }}' C!_'vr_ 1a a r cer t y ;`_'E-r;; rl of t "_+[c.! C_ : t i zerf ! ri tE: r'e' ted In pr'i+t-'c} 'I nIg !Ja l l e I i�lP _tJ1 tlJr-a r"_ _ Jr'= c. t -! i _.. i ' e 'G. 1_I U r !r e :• 1 ri t e ! �. t r' G . . ^ �; c .y �! I '� [i.y TL i 7 �� 'y. �. 7. C' ,y' r :: 1 _ I� t' tTl- 6. i b'v a t E� iC -a i i fJ I I I ._t [ C, ri V a ri t- r t r` =. i �! !_; r-I u I ._(¢ i o rI is . The f e L a ' u ! r t a a r' e 0 .ER r• t j 1_ IJ 1 a rh i s a. _. I �. e ci 7 e :': t o ri S I '.i e C a h U 11 1 e. e t t I e r-n e r, t i -_t in t M u c h C! + -IE' _.'! =-t I ', L.!!+�'E liEl [I['i?L LC!rl'Ca ! ri=' u81 Uab' e E L!': GerCE cI7e I r CUT ? {r e . _.._ e t C,_ = 1 = a.r'e r!f:!,i =_I r'e.r'E3 Z,.7! I-g r'a._!!j1; Ir'b tJJc �r e1'-{-'r: F't!t 4'.E '1'h N': t ! _ ::r!ca% that th!D r'I iu gh a. r. c: 1!_. eogi =-aI r',-C;=-`d i 1-1g r c-ovei y and p u b 1 j cat j c4 r''_'IJ i t = be em .ur'ed j r1 the .I �I U E' _' .�, j' . r is -! : LJ i f_ �'I e L • U U I 1 1 t a. C. I t I 1 i _1 rI F !.., e t 1 '..-1 e r F_ I =. r a. t I _' r f t_! r T e t-' c: t i I.•I E- t I• e t '`' .1• I'I ,:j 't �. L T Re I jj _ ,� -1 c'1'�I cr.': :rr-Ui .'e;_ _ _rl 11 e =�!F 1- _ - :t , �. �'. '� t f_i'.'1 I •' E? I 4 y J T r� a.1 T 1_! r. Y. L r' 'J = Cj _ _ I . _ = c F. h. C' t .` ! !'I _. d 1, I + 1 --In 1_ [' E,r! - - e r' �i�`r�- 'o _ + L - .. _ e. C { t _.. _ �J ['y .I� _ 7al TF' _ 1_ _ .. --tc - -s a _ h � r'I_.�(Fi' 1 t t- r 1 ' 1i✓ ... _ _. _ _ _ i .. _ _ - � _ _ _ r .ilp rl� c'.-. _ Ct C- C i- ' j ll f' c', i • _ _. - C' :' I;j C a E' : - : c Ft C' ^ r=1't-!�- C i fr! � + _ _. t I C IT I ! _ -. � .' t ' 7 .r r 1 �. !" �. '". I _ r c. � r• 1_I Ll :y. I i _- nU I Ft a. c.r+d tFlr_ r ,_ ec _=,:.,erase-F i t "c 1J ". v rl 0'- r' r >?'.'.' ? t: s _ = C. s_ : t C, f a r c_ CC-1 C e c i r� t j e - c{ t 'c i B. '. :. i e a r d i e i rrt F '=1 r t a. r! e -' f ' h e _ =s sJ i r! t a. 0 a h Li I a. + '� e i S t CJ r Y ! I t• n c. - F . >t v.. e U '�' � _ t 1 ! r' C I y �: � •a r! r! i rl � t y f -h A rt d c -I u rl C OF =' r t o r't'.' i= G _ F f. C; 1 1' e if ?. L', Q 1,1 e i t C t h e += o r d i t i+--+ n csqu i I"ed t-thG 1'! t I gated rler1=tL! vie _,'eC1,✓rat i onpr'crcess. Pri_1b' sf Clr!s 1 =rd 2 wc_''d et F—i ne th*r r1ece-sity of 'ata recovery =.nd a.r!al.,si=_ c.ta1i C �' - l I i-'L. i r! t_C a. r•' a .y. h a. I I t_, t C� a e rt cC r' '_ L _. t ? '_t ! �-All � Y _ c '-I `• *• I'. �' L. _ 1 t 1 ^*. -! C+ i< _ - Ci -_ ?._c.C, Cal r'a=_UrrE�._ 7'..s=nt. f=tor thi= a. r�lrt +�'G I r C'jirl� i f oF! E i th tE _p 1 r^ i t Of f_EDA i t i s cr' i: i c a I and v,�£ U-'G,e tr!a.t c'. l .rC"'la.ec, GSL F VE;v to requ i r''ed _n prev i ow ° L.Ur'VC- C- r- t=+ the cL:=ir!it,_', tL.d- Cats Gl tt ( i''C'-==sad P-C+ C- t=. F! se re==:r! eridatioi-= i� - rel,ectfU] i Y. s U t m i t this day t-Iadr!e a� -, T' r, E rCE"-e1 D t' e t t F O'J F a e ID C. G i - - I r1 - = - -.. ' C �a.C,r'r: PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO.88-099 AND APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 88-021, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (ALTERED CONFIGURATION) AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL. CASE NO. GPA 88-021 - A.G. SPANOS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing -to consider the request of A.G. Spanos Construction, Inc. to amend the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map from Medium and High Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential (altered configuration) and General Commercial for a site totaling 132.5 gross acres, :Located between Washington Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash, La Quinta, excluding the small triangular area just north of the Wash and ;just south of the east/west Avenue 46 alignment (Westward Ho Drive), more particularly described as: THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all .interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify -the approval of said General Plan Amendment: 1. Traffic impacts caused by the implementation of GPA 88-021 can be mitigated to a large degree. 2. Location of a general commercial land use as proposed by this project would not be viable from a near -term land use inventory perspective. However, development of competitive properties and increased demand after the year 2000 will create commercial demand to support commercial development on this site. MR/RES089.025 -1- :3. The request for commercial land use and a multi -family residential area at a density of +16 units per acre is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. 4. This General Plan Amendment application complies with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside Resolution No. 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5). Mitigation measures can be generated to reduce the impact of General Commercial and High Density Residential land uses on the subject property. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: :1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of General Plan Amendment No. 88-021, consisting of a Land Use Map Amendment as described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of ,June, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CHAIRMAN .ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR MR/RESO89.025 -2- NE-1-l'AL FLAN AMENDMENT 88--021 EXHIBIT A ?Mrtm DENSITY l Ilk *-zItIM IEFlySITY 4--8 MMLM S/AM APPROX. 84 ACRES � 4s cxarrEt, o % 0._... .._ ..�., — . RICH DINSnj eclat, 8-16 DwFunc5/Ams eye APPROX. I 40 ACRES EXISTING ORAL PLAN LAM USE LES 7.60 Ac s fit, i 0 HIGH DMSITY RESIDE MUL ' 49 ACRES � I o , I moo' s 67.25 ACRES C� MMrtM DMSrTy RESIDUMM V ....__ c m e � � e '94%, �I PROMSED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 88-021, A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP FROM MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (ALTERED CONFIGURATION) AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL. CASE NO. GPA 88-021 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider an application to amend the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map from Medium and High Density Residential to Medium and High Density Residential (altered configuration) and General Commercial totaling 132.5 gross acres, located between Washington_ Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash, La Quinta, excluding the small triangular area just north of the Wash and just south of the east/west Avenue 46 alignment (Westward Ho Drive), more particularly described as: THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all :interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the denial of said General Plan Amendment: 1. This is an unsuitable location for a General Commercial area. 2. The request for a High Density area at a density of more than 16 du/ac is inconsistent with the goals and policies Of the La Quinta General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: :L. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend to the City Council denial of General Plan Amendment No. 88-021. IAR/RESO89.026 -1- PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of ,'June, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR MR/RES089.026 -2- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 88-099 AND APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-2-8000 AND R-1 TO C-P, R-2A AND R-1 ON A 132.5-ACRE SITE. CASE NO. CZ 88-035 - A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request for a Change of Zone from R-2-8000 and R-1 to C-P, R-2A and R-1 on a 132.5-acre site, located between Washington Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash, La Quinta, excluding the small triangular area just north of the Wash and just south of the east/west Avenue 46 alignment ,;Westward Ho Drive), more particularly described as: THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of said Change of Zone application: 1. The proposed Change of Zone is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. :2. This Change of Zone application complies with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-21.3, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5). a, Mitigation measures can be generated to reduce the impact of a commercial land use and an R-2A zone on the subject property. b. Mitigation measures can be generated to reduce the impact on the transportation and circulation systems of this area by the introduction of a commercial use on the subject property. 1\IR/RES089. 027 -1- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above described Change of Zone request, and as illustrated on the map labeled Exhibit "A", attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La. Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of Tune, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR IAR/RESO89.027 -2- CHANGES 01 ZONES 88 -035 EXHIBIT A CHANGE Of ZONE EXHIBIT \ TENTATIVE TRACT NO 23.943 vr.a� il xisnNo zoNrNo -4 400 1 CHANGE OF ZON� EXHIBIT TENTATIVE TRACT NO 23."S w. WOW '�•f NfYI —___Tilt/. frf�ll �e.sat .0.7 hr I R— 1 wrap_ °0Kw fffAw M~ W r A'a CP Proposed Zone 7.6 acres i mini R_3 R.1 l� Proposed Zone • .proposed Zone ! 49 acres 67.25 'acres 11: PROPOSED ZONING PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-2-8000 AND R-1 TO C-P, R-3 AND R-1 ON A 132.5-ACRE SITE. CASE NO. CZ 88-035 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request for a Change of Zone from R-2-8000 and R-1 to C-P, R-3 and R-1 on a 132.5-acre site, located between Washington Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash, La Quinta, excluding the small triangular area just north of the Wash. and just south of the east/west Avenue 46 alignment (Westward Ho Drive), more particularly described as: THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the denial of said Change of Zone application: 1. The proposed Change of Zone General Commercial and High Density Residential elements are inconsistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council denial of the above described Change of Zone request. ]SIR/RESO89.028 -1- of the La Tune, 1989, AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of by the following vote, to wit: CHAIRMAN ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR IKR/RESO89.028 -2- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 88-099 AND APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN NO. 88-012 CASE NO. SP 88-012 - A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of A.G. Spanos Construction, Inc. for a commercial, multi -family residential, and single-family residential development for a 132.5-acre site located between Washington Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash, La Quinta, excluding the small triangular area just north of the Wash and just south of the east/west Avenue 46 alignment i;Westward Ho Drive), more particularly described as: THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; and, WHEREAS, said Specific Plan request has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has determined that, although the project could have a significant adverse impact on the environment., the mitigation measures incorporated into the Conditions of Approval will mitigate those project impacts to :Levels of insignificance; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Specific Plan 88-012, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the recommendation for approval of said Specific Plan: 1. The proposed Specific Plan is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan. MR/RES089.029 -1- ?. The Specific Plan is compatible with the existing and anticipated area development. 3. The project will be provided with adequate utilities and public services to ensure public health and safety. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 88-099, indicating that the proposed. Specific Plan will not result in any significant environmental impacts as mitigated by the recommended Conditions of Approval; 2. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above -described Specific Plan request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of Tune, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CHAIRMAN ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR IKR/RESO89.029 -2- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL SPECIFIC PLAN 88-012 PROPOSED JUNE 13, 1989 The development shall comply with Exhibit 1, the Specific Plan for Specific Plan 88-012, and the following conditions, which conditions shall take precedence in the event of any conflicts with the provisions of the Specific Plan. ;?. a. The project shall be limited to access points as illustrated on the Specific Plan, Exhibit 1. b. The following access points will be right-in/right-out only: o Access point off Washington Street; o The minor access point off Miles Avenue into the commercial area; o The northern access into the single-family residential area. C. In the following cases, access points in this project must line up with access points identified by approved tentative tracts located opposite this project: o The most northerly access point on Adams Street; o The easterly access point on Miles Avenue; o The commercial/multi-family area access point onto Miles Avenue. 3. The following conditions apply to the commercial area! a. The commercial area should be broken up into at least three commercial buildings, and not become one linear structure. :MR/CONAPRVL.063 -1- b. Only the following uses shall be allowed in this neighborhood center, provided that they are small in nature, and no outside storage is allowed: o Art supply shops and studios. o Bakery shops, including baking only when incidental to retail sales on the premises. o Banks and financial institutions. o Barber and beauty shops. o Book stores. o Clothing stores. o Confectionery or candy stores. o Delicatessens o Drug stores. o Employment agencies. o Florist shops. o Food markets. o Gift shops. o Hobby shops. o Ice cream shops. o Jewelry stores, including incidental repairs. o Laundries and laundromats, and drycleaners o Locksmith shops. o Music stores. o News stores. o Offices, including business, law, medical, dental, chiropractic, architectural, engineering, community planning, real estate. o Photography shops and studios. o Refreshment stands. o Restaurants and other eating establishments (non -drive -through). o Shoe stores and repair shops. o Stationery stores. o Tobacco shops. o Travel agencies. C. The following uses shall not be allowed on the site: o Automobile repair garages, including body and fender shops or spray painting. o Automobile parts and supply stores. 0 Bakery goods distributors. o Bars and cocktail lounges. o Billiard and pool halls. o Department stores. o Hotels, resort hotels and motels. o Liquor stores. o Theaters, including drive-in. o Tire sales and service, including recapping. o Automobile sales and rental agencies. o Boat and other marine sales. MR/ CONAPRVIJ . 0 6 3 - 2 - o Equipment rental services, including rototillers, power mowers, sanders, power saws, cement and plaster mixers, and other similar equipment. o Golf cart sales and service. o Mobilehome sales and storage, trailer sales and rental of house trailers. o Trailer and boat storage. o Truck sales and service, and rental of trucks. o Outdoor advertising structures d. The Developer shall submit and receive approval for a commercial plot plan for the above -proposed development prior to any development taking place. e. Only 30 percent of the commercial buildings can be two stories. The balance should be one story only. 4. The following conditions apply to the multi -family residential area: a. The Developer shall submit and receive approval for a residential plot plan for the above development prior to any development taking place. b. One parking space provided per multi -family unit must be covered. C. A height limit of two stories will apply to the multi -family residential area. d. Buildings in the multi -family area must be set back 50 feet from the multi-family/single-family residential area boundary. If two story dwellings are located alongside this boundary, they must be oriented away from the single-family residential area. e. Only emergency access shall be taken off Miles Avenue. !i. The Applicant shall provide, within the multi -family housing area, a total of five percent affordable housing. 15. Specific Plan 88-012 shall expire on the same date Tentative Tract 23995 expires. Approval of extension of time for TT 23995 shall constitute extension of time for SP 88-012. :MR/CONAPRVL.053 -3- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 88-099 AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 23995 TO ALLOW THE CREATION OF A COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ON A 132.5-ACRE SITE CASE NO. TT 23995 - A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION, INC. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of A.G. Spanos Construction, Inc. to subdivide 132.5 acres into one commercial lot, three high density residential lots, and 300 single-family development lots, generally located between Washington Street, Miles Avenue, Adams Street and the Coachella Valley Water District Wash, La Quinta, excluding the small triangular area just north of the Wash and just south of the east/west Avenue 46 alignment (Westward Ho Drive), more particularly described as: THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; and, WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California ]Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has determined that the proposed tentative tract will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and, Whereas, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Tentative Tract 24035, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all :interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify -the recommendation for approval of said Tentative Tract Map: IKR/RESO89.030 -1- 1. That Tentative Tract No. 23995, as conditionally approved, is generally consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use density, unit type, circulation requirements, C-P, R-2A, and R-1 zoning district development standards, and design requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. 2. That the subject site has a rolling topography because of the sand dunes, with the overall slope going from the north to the south of the property. The proposed circulation design and lot layouts, as conditioned, are, therefore, suitable for the proposed land division. 3. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 23995 may cause substantial environmental damage or injury to the wildlife habitat of the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard, but mitigation measures in the form of fees for a new habitat area will lessen this impact. 4. That the design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will be developed with public sewers and water, and, therefore, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 5. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 23995 will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through the project, since alternate easements for access and for use have been provided that are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public. 6. That the proposed Tentative Tract No. 23995, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape buffer areas. 7. That the proposed Tentative Tract No. 23995, as conditioned, provides storm water retention, park facilities, and noise mitigation. 8. That general impacts from the proposed tract were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, -the Planning Commission has considered the effect of the contemplated action of the housing needs of the region for purposes of balancing the needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources; MR/RESO89.030 -2- NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 88-099 relative to the environmental concerns of this tentative tract; 3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of the subject Tentative Tract Map No. 23995 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of June, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CHAIRMAN ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR MR/RESO89.030 -3- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 23995 PROPOSED JUNE 13, 1989 ��. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. Tentative Tract Map No. 23995 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. 2. This Tentative Tract Map approval shall expire two years after the original date of approval by the La Quinta City Council unless approved for extension pursuant to the City of La Quinta Land Division ordinance. 3. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering a City-wide Landscape and Lighting District and, by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in the District and to offer for dedication such easements as may be required for the maintenance and operation of related facilities. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis, as required by law. 4. The Developer is subject to the mitigations noted in the archaeological report prepared by the Archaeological Research Unit, University of California at Riverside, Reference W.O.#8810576-01, dated December, 1988. A mitigation and monitoring program shall be required to be submitted, specifying a qualified archaeological monitor, including any assistants and other representatives. The statement shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. MR/CONARPVL.064 -1- 5. The Developer of this subdivision of land shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of the final map without the approval of the City Engineer. Traffic and Circulation 6. The Applicant shall construct or bond for half street improvements to the requirements of the City Engineer and the La Quinta Municipal Code, as follows: a. Washington Street shall be constructed to City standards for a 120-foot right-of-way width (Major Arterial), with a curb -to -curb width of 96 feet, with a 12-foot bike/ sidewalk, and two -percent cross slope to centerline, plus joins. b. Miles Avenue shall be constructed to City standards for a 110-foot right-of-way width (Primary Arterial), with an 18-foot raised median island, six-foot sidewalk, and two -percent cross slope to centerline, plus joins. C. The street identified as Lot S on Exhibit 1 (Tentative Tract Map) shall be designed for a 72-foot right-of-way. d. The Applicant shall construct all private street improvements to the requirements of the City Engineer and the La Quinta Municipal Code. e. The interior public street system shall be designed pursuant to the approved Exhibit 1 (tract map) for TT 23995. The cul-de-sac streets shall be designed for a 50-foot right-of-way with 36-foot width curb -to -curb. A five-foot utility easement shall be granted on each side of the 50-foot right-of-way. All other streets shall have a 60-foot right-of-way, a six-foot sidewalk, and two -percent slope. Any variations to the approved street system design sections shall be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. MR/CONARPVL.064 -2- 7. An encroachment permit for work in any abutting local jurisdiction shall be secured prior to constructing or joining improvements (i.e., County of Riverside). 8. The Applicant shall participate in the construction or bond for part of the improvements to Washington Street Bridge and construction of Adams Street low water crossing of the Whitewater Channel, subject to the requirements of the City Engineer. 13. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO BE FULFILLED PRIOR TO FINAL MAP APPROVAL 9. Prior to final map approval by the City Council, the Applicant shall submit a proposal to the Planning Commission, for recommendation to the City Council, for meeting parkland dedication requirements as set forth in Section 13.24.030, La Quinta Municipal Code. The proposal for dedication, fee -in -lieu, or combination thereof shall be based upon a dedication requirement of 2.63 acres in the single-family residential area, as determined in accordance with said Section. 10. The Applicant shall provide sufficient parkland in the multi -family residential area in accordance with Government Code Section 66477 and Section 13.24.030 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 11. A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise impacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend a-ternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the tract design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming and landscaping, etc_.), and other techniques so as to avoid the isolated appearance given by walled developments. A wall shall be provided around the multi -family residential area in accordance with the above study. 12. Tract phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department and the Planning and Development Department. 13. The subdivider shall make provisions for maintenance of all landscape buffer and storm water easements via one of the following methods prior to final map approval: MR/CONARPVL.064 -3- a. Subdivider shall consent to the formation of a maintenance district under Chapter 26 of the Improvement Act of 1911 (Streets and Highways Code, Section 5820 et seq.) or the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22600 et seq.) to implement maintenance of all improved landscape buffer and storm water retention areas. It is understood and agreed that the Developer/Applicant shall pay all costs of maintenance for said improved areas until such time as tax revenues are received from assessment of the real property. b. The Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department a Management and Maintenance Agreement, to be entered into with the unit/lot owners of this land division, in order to insure common areas and facilities will be maintained. A unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs. The association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. The common facilities to be maintained are as follows: (1) Storm water easements. (2) Twenty -foot perimeter parkway lot along Washington Street (3) Twenty -foot perimeter parkway lot along Miles Avenue. 14. Prior to recordation of a final map, the Applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conversion Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 15. The Applicant shall coordinate with Sunline Transit and the City to provide a future bus turnout and shelter location on Washington Street. A bus turnout shall be provided for in the approved street improvement plans, and shall either be constructed with those improvements for bonded for. Appropriate bonding shall be provided in lieu of a completed bus stop shelter, until such time as service is provided by Sunline. 1KR/CONARPVL.064 -4- Gradina and Drainaae 16. The Applicant shall submit a grading plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer who will be required to supervise the grading and drainage improvement construction and to certify that the constructed conditions at the rough grade stage are as per the approved plans and grading permit. This is required prior to final map approval. Certification at the final grade stage and verification of pad elevations is also required prior to final approval of grading construction. 17. The Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping, and irrigation plans to Coachella Valley Water District for review and comment with respect to CVWD's water management program. 18. A thorough preliminary engineering geological and soils engineering investigation shall be done and the report submitted for review along with the grading plan. The report's recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 19. Any earthwork on contiguous properties requires a written authorization from the owner(s) (slope easement) in a form acceptable to the City Engineer. 20. Drainage disposal facilities shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of the City Master Plan of Drainage, including payment of any drainage fees required therewith. All drainage easements must be shown on the Final Tract Map. 21. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of TT 23995 and EA 88-099, which must be satisfied prior the the issuance of a grading permit. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall prepare and submit a written report to the Planning Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of this TT 23995 and EA 88-099, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of a building permit. Prior to final building inspection approval, the Applicant shall !KR/CONARPVL.064 -5- prepare and submit a written report to the Planning Director demonstrating compliance with all remaining conditions of approval and mitigation measures of this TT 23995 and EA 88-099. The Planning Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. Traffic and Circulation 22. Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the Public Works Department: a. The Applicant shall dedicate all necessary public street and utility easements as required, including all corner cutbacks. b. The Applicant shall submit street improvement plans that are prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements, including traffic signs and markings and raised median islands (if required by the City General Plan), shall conform to City standards as determined by the City Engineer and adopted by the La Quinta Municipal Code (three-inch AC over four -inch Class 2 Base minimum for residential streets). C. Street name signs shall be furnished and installed by the Developer in accordance with City standards. 23. Applicant shall dedicate, with recordation of the tract map, access rights to Washington Street, Miles Avenue, and Adams Street for all individual parcels which front or back-up to those rights -of -way. Tract Design 24. A minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be required along Washington Street and Miles Avenue. Design of the setbacks shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. Setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way lines. a. The minimum setbacks may be modified to an "average" if a meandering or curvilinear wall design is used. b. Setback areas shall be established as a separate common lot and be maintained as set forth in Condition No. 13, unless an alternate method is approved by the Planning and Development Department. MR/CONARPVL.064 -6- 25. The tract layout shall comply with all the C-P, R-2A, and R-1 zoning requirements, including for the R-1 zone minimum lot size and minimum average depth of a lot. The minimum R-1 lot size to be recorded in a final map shall be 7,200 square feet. Walls. Fencina. Screening. and Landscapin 26. Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include, but not be limited to: a. The use of irrigation during any construction activities; b. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and/or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land owner shall comply with the requirements of the Director of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 27. Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and grater erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. 28. Prior to final map approval, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning Division for review and approval a plan (or plans) showing the following: a. Landscaping, including plant types, sizes, spacing, locations, and irrigation system for all landscape buffer areas. Desert or native plant species and drought resistant planting materials shall be incorporated into the landscape plan. ]SIR/CONARPVL.064 -7- b. Location and design detail of any proposed and/or required walls. C. Exterior lighting plan, emphasizing minimization of light and glare impacts to surrounding properties. 29. Prior to final map approval, the subdivider shall submit criteria to be used for landscaping of all single-family individual lot front yards. At a minimum, the criteria shall provide for two trees and an irrigation system. C. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL TO BE FULFILLED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS 30. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or use contemplated by this approval, the Applicant shall obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public agencies: o City Fire Marshal o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o Planning and Development Department, Planning Division o Coachella Valley Water District o Desert Sands Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above -mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 31. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City's adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 32. The Applicant shall comply with the following: a. No buildings in the multi -family area within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of Washington Street and Miles Avenue shall be higher than one story. IAR/CONARPVL.064 -8- b. Seventy-five percent of R-1 zone dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of Miles Avenue shall be limited to one story, not to exceed 20 feet in height. The Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department for approval a drawing showing the location of any single-family units higher than one story located along Miles Avenue frontage. 33. The appropriate Planning approval shall be secured prior to establishing any of the following uses: a. Temporary construction facilities. b. Sales facilities, including their appurtenant signage. C. On -site advertising/construction signs. 34. In the R-1 zone, if a specific dwelling product is envisioned or if groups of lots are sold to builders prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant/ Builder shall submit complete detail architectural elevations for all units. The Planning Commission will review and approve these as a Business Item. The basic architectural standards shall be included as part of the C.C. & Rs. 35. The residential plot plan for the R-2A (multi -family) zone shall show 6.57 acres of private open space within the development which is usable for active recreation space in accordance with Section 13.24.030 of the La Quinta Municipal Code and Government Code Section 66477. Traffic and Circulation 36. The Applicant shall pay a 25 percent share of all fees necessary for signalization costs at the corner of Washington Street and Miles Avenue, and 50 percent of signalization costs at the multi-family/commercial area access point onto Miles Avenue and 25 percent of the signalization costs at the intersection of Miles Avenue and Adams Street. Public Services and Utilities 37. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal. MR/CONARPVL.064 -9- 38. The Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the Coachella Valley Water District, including those related to the storm water channel. Any necessary parcels for District facility expansion shall be shown on the final map and conveyed to the Coachella Valley Water District, in accordance with the Subdivision Map Act. 39. All utilities will be installed and trenches compacted to City standards prior to construction of any streets. The soils engineer shall provide the necessary compaction test reports for review by the City Engineer, as may be required. MR/CONARPVL.064 -10- STAFF REPORT PH-2 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: JUNE 13, 1989 APPLICANT/OWNER: A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION/BORG-WARNER EQUITIES LOCATION: WEST SIDE OF JEFFERSON STREET, BETWEEN FRED WARING AND MILES AVENUE (REFER TO ATTACHMENT NO. 1) PROPOSAL CONSIDERED: CHANGE OF ZONE NO. 89-037; FROM R-2-9600, R-2-2500, AND R-5 TO R-2, R-1, AND C-1, IN CONJUNCTION WITH TENTATIVE TRACT 24230, A DIVISION OF 151+ ACRES INTO 281 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS; 22.58 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL/OFFICE; 10.1 ACRES OF MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, AND A 24-ACRE LAKE. (SEE ATTACHMENT NO. 2) 14ET ACREAGE: +148.7 NET DENSITY: 3.59 UNITS/ACRE (EXCLUSIVE OF COMMERCIAL ACREAGE), 462 RESIDENTIAL UNITS (POTENTIAL) ]SAND USE PLAN; MIXED COMMERCIAL EXISTING ZONING: R-2-9600, R-2-2500, AND R-5 :PROPOSED ZONING: R-1, R-2, C-1 :ENVIRONMENTAL ,CONSIDERATIONS: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT NO. 89-110 WAS PREPARED AS THE INITIAL STUDY TO DETERMINE THE LEVEL OF IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPOSAL. THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT SHOWED THAT NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS WOULD OCCUR PROVIDED THAT ADEQUATE MITIGATION MEASURES ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT APPROVAL. THEREFORE, A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED. THE INITIAL STUDY IS ATTACHED AS PART OF THIS REPORT (ATTACHMENT NO. 3) DRAINAGE CONSIDERATIONS: ON -SITE RETENTION OF 100-YEAR STORM FLOW REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED. RETENTION AREA WILL BE PROVIDED FOR IN THE FINAL LAKE ENGINEERING DESIGN. MR/STAFFRPT.081 -1- ON -SITE CIRCULATION: PUBLIC AND PRIVATE STREETS PROPOSED. THE MAJOR ENTRIES INTO THE SUBDIVISION ARE OFF WASHINGTON STREET, 48TH AVENUE, 47TH AVENUE (PROPOSED), AND ADAMS STREET. STREET LOTS A AND B WILL BE DEDICATED FOR PUBLIC USE; STREET LOTS SERVING THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS WILL BE PRIVATE. ACCESS GATING WILL BE LOCATED AT THE ADAMS STREET ENTRY AND AT BOTH INTERSECTIONS OF LOOP STREET "C" WITH NORTH/SOUTH STREET "B". OFF -SITE CIRCULATION: WASHINGTON STREET - DESIGNATED AS MAJOR ARTERIAL; 120-FOOT TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY, 96 FEET CURB -TO -CURB, 18-FOOT RAISED MEDIAN. ADAMS STREET - 110-FOOT TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY (HIGHWAY 111 BYPASS SEGMENT), VARIABLE CURB -TO -CURB AND MEDIAN WIDTHS. 48TH AVENUE - 110-FOOT TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY (NON -BYPASS), VARIABLE CURB -TO -CURB AND MEDIAN WIDTHS. 47TH AVENUE - 72-FOOT TOTAL RIGHT-OF-WAY (COLLECTOR), 48 FEET CURB -TO -CURB, NO MEDIAN. ANALYSIS: 'Proposal Discussion. The Applicant proposes a subdivision of +151 acres into 281 single-family lots and one +24 acre lake lot. Additionally, -the following parcels are shown for future development: o Three commercial parcels, totaling 20.42 acres. o One recreation lot, 1.8 acres. o One commercial office parcel, 2.16 acres. o One multi -family development parcel, 10.1 acres. o Five passive open space (lake access) lots. This proposal is the latest revision to the original submittal. A zone change request, for residential and commercial zoning designations, was filed in conjunction with this map, and relates to the parcel delineations. Minimum lot sizes are 7,200 square feet; no unit designs have been submitted for the tract at this time. Change of Zone 89-037. 1. The proposed zone change is consistent with the La Quinta General Plan Land Use Map, when considered with the tract map as proposed. MR/STAFFRPT.081 -2- 2. The proposed C-1 zoning would allow some uses which would not be consistent with the proposed Highway 111 Corridor policies. For example, Policy 9 (page 9 of the Draft Policy Preview) speaks to clustering of auto service and motor fuel dispensing facilities in only one location along Highway 111. C-1 zoning would allow such uses as permitted by plot plan. C-P-S zoning would only permit such uses through the Conditional Use Permit process, thereby allowing some degree of discretionary use review. During the interim period of the Highway 111 Specific Plan process, discretionary review of all proposed commercial uses, upon development proposals being submitted for the commercial parcels, is the most viable option at this time. All future commercial uses proposed for this project should be reviewed through the Conditional Use Permit process. Staff also recommends that C-P-S zoning be employed on the site, to be consistent with surrounding commercial zoning. Tentative Tract 24230. I. Improvement to Washington Street: The City is pursuing full improvement to Washington Street in this area, including the frontage road and realignment of Washington as previously approved with the Washington Square project. A condition similar to that imposed on Washington Square has been included to insure that dedication of right-of-way will occur to allow adequate timing for the City widening of Washington Street. ;?. Lake Hydrology: Regarding the lake, several items need to be addressed during and after its development. Conditions have been prepared to address erosion, lake management, water quality monitoring and reporting, and actual use of the lake, among others. These issues are not seen as critical, but do need to be addressed. A preliminary design report was prepared for the lake by a lake design consultant, which set out the basic design parameters for the lake's development, operation, and maintenance. 3. Housing: The multi -family area should be required to provide affordable units as set forth in Policy No. 20 of the draft policies for the Highway 111 Corridor, and the draft 1989 Housing Element of the City. A minimum of 5 percent of the units proposed for the multi -family parcel should be required to be affordable units. 4. 47th Avenue Alignment: The project is directly south of Washington Square, which was approved based on the collector alignment known as 47th Avenue, connecting Washington Street to Adams Street via extension of MR/STAFFRPT.081 -3- Highland Palms Drive to the east. This right-of-way is not -yet in place, and should be obtained at the earliest opportunity to allow construction, either by the Washington Square development or this project. 5. Use of All -American Canal Water for Lake Fill and Operation: It would be desirable, but costly, to utilize canal water for initial fill and maintenance of the lake. The area is within CVWD Improvement. District No. 1, which would allow use of canal water for this purpose, but the nearest delivery point is across Jefferson Street at 48th Avenue, over a mile east of this project. The former Grove project is currently utilizing the canal water for its grading activities. It would be beneficial to encourage the developer to explore possible alternative means for delivery of this source to the project site for use as lake fill and irrigation. water with the old Grove project (now called the Pyramids). 6. Density of Multi -Family Parcel: As shown on the map exhibit,. Lot "Z" is shown at 18.0 units/acre. This parcel will be limited to a base density of 16 units,/acre, as set forth in the Highway 111 policy preview for the Highway 111 Specific Plan. 7. Subdivision Design: An exception request to the Subdivision Ordinance (Title 13, La Quinta Municipal code) has been made by the Applicant to allow intersection offsets of less than 200 feet in the single-family portion of the tract (see Attachment No. 4). It is not seen as critical that this requirement be enforced due to the fact that these streets will be Private, most of the subject intersections are at cul-de-sacs, and the street layout will not be conducive to excessive speeds. The Engineering Department does not have any concerns relative to this request. 8. Parkland Dedication Requirements: Based on the 281 single-family residential lots, this tract is required to allow for 2.46 acres of parkland, through fee or land dedication. A 1.8-acre recreational lot is proposed, with the development of the lot non-specific at this time. Because the ordinance requires parkland dedication for public use and the recreation lot relates to the private (gated) residential subdivision, the Applicant should pay fees in lieu of dedication, pursuant to the Parkland Dedication Ordinance. FINDINGS: Findings for Change of Zone 89-037 and Tentative Tract 24230 can be found in the attached Planning Commission Resolutions 89- and 89- , respectively. MR/STAFFRPT.081 -4- RECOMMENDATION: 1.. By adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 89- , recommend to the City Council adoption of Change of Zone 89-037, as recommended; and, 2. By adoption of Planning Commission Resolution 89- , recommend to the City Council approval of Tentative Tract 24230, subject to conditions. attachments: :L. Location Map e? . TT 24230 3. Initial Study, EA 89-110 4. Exception Request Letter, Dated 6/2/89 5. Planning Commission Resolution, CZ 89-037 15. Planning Commission Resolution, TT 24230, with Conditions MR/STAFFRPT.081 -5- yww /W-44-4 1-4 441INrA o5,1,1o13piNc clww e.. 4: ,..: t ............ .•.e........••...... Q 2 coviv 'RY GL t/0 t 4*07A AV.Fj �I CASE MAP CASE No. 61AW6- 5 12-"Z c6-"a". Al' e ai�- • ORTH SCALE: /V7-.S F !i ; ��ii= If3iz !e 6 € �: l-. �:1°s�� ;° ➢ [�i�! �it�l��li°!'! f , 3 � a a 2 . A 4i c J wu� ! 13�L'1S SWb'Gb' r li II L t d ?• � lit ° 1° I� i 17 1 T.� 3 y n — fz laid "4g � Yror y) -- - _ 133Ld1 S I�I i INITIAL STUDY: CZ 89-037, TT 24230 PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROPONENT: A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION CITY CASE NUMBER: CZ 89-037; TT 24230 I:,OCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER AVENUE 48 ALIGNMENT AND WASHINGTON STREET PROPOSAL CONSIDERED: ZONE CHANGE FROM R-2-9600, R-2-2500, AND R-5 TO R-2, R-1, AND C-1 TO IMPLEMENT A TRACT MAP FOR 281 SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS; 22.58 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL/OFFICE; 10.1 ACRES OF MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AND A 24-ACRE LAKE. NET ACREAGE: +148.7 NET DENSITY: 3.59 UPA (EXCLUSIVE OF COMMERCIAL ACREAGE) 459 RESIDENTIAL UNITS LAND USE PI:,AN: MIXED COMMERCIAL EXISTING ZONING: R-2-9600, R-2-2500, AND R-5 PROPOSED ZONING: R-2, R-1, C-1 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: AS PART OF PRELIMINARY REVIEW, AN AREA -WIDE TRAFFIC STUDY, AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS, HYDROLOGY STUDY, AND NOISE ANALYSIS WERE INITIALLY REQUESTED FROM THE APPLICANT. FURTHER REVIEW OF THE PROPOSAL BY STAFF INDICATED THAT TRAFFIC IMPACTS DID NOT WARRANT FURTHER STUDY. A SUBSEQUENT LAKE AND HYDROLOGY STUDY WERE SUBMITTED. NOISE AND AIR QUALITY STUDIES HAVE BEEN INCLUDED AS MITIGATION. MR/DOCWN.009 O G CITY OF LA QUINTA Date 'Received PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 78-105 CALLE ESTADO LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253 of ROMMAL INFORMATION FORM Please complete Parts I and II of this form and provide ALL of the additional materials requested in Part III. Failure to do so ray delay the reviev and rooess of your proJe, If you are unable to provide the information, or you need assistance, please feel free contact -lie Raviro=ental Quality Section of the Planning Department at (619) 564-2246. PART I. General Information 1. Tahat is the total acreage involved? 151 Acres��._.._..� __.. 2. Is there a previous application filed for the same site? ITA X NO_$ If 'Yes', provide Case Number. Also provide the Snvironment;ff Assessment Number, if known, and Environmental Impact Report Ninber, if applicable. Case NO. --_(Parcel Map, Zone Change, Etc.) EA No. FA (if knows EIR No.. r_ (if ajTliaable) ]?ART II. Rxistin&Corditions RECEIVED 1. Project site area: 6,577,560 Sq. Ft. 151 ± Acres �ze oP grogertwpy �n�Sq.Ft. and acreage�'��A�� 2. E:d.etiang use of the project site: vacant _ _ C17 Y OF 11;�1(UINTA 3. Existinguse on DEP adjacent propartiess(E�es�ipl®::7orth�;pp��0�a�8�� South, Single rami4 Dwellings; East, Vacant, etc.) &I vaLcant except single family dwellings to the north 4. Site topography (describe): (If any portion of the site exceeds 5% slope, attach a topographic display of the proposal site; if less than 5% slope, please provide elevations at corners of site) ,See attached 5. Grading (Estimate timber of cubic 3mrds of dirt being moved): Tb be determined at _final -en eering. 6. Are there any natural or man-made drainage channel areas through or adjacent to the property? No x Yes (If yes, submit a display of such drainage channel areas.) Describe the dispose 1?f tb"eoi-24-89 channels/areas should the proposal be implementeW CASH�i TOTAL 1 703, 7. Are there any known archaeological finds near or on the proposed site? No_ Z,_ Yes 8. Describe any cultural or scenic aspects of the project sites 9. Describe existing site vegetation and their proposed disposition should the proposal be approved: ire hrUg and UM grasses_to be removed upon excavation. _ (If any significant plant materials, e.g., mature trees, exist on the site, please prepare a site plan that illustrates their number, type, size and location.) fIROMMTA.L INFORMATION FORM, City of La Quinta lA. Describe accessibility of proposal site to the following utilities; gas, water and electricity. (If proposal site does not have immediate access, further describe necessary extension of services and provide a graphic display, 8P x 11" that indicates their present location in reference to the subject site): 11. Additional comments you may wish to supply regarding your project. (Attach an additional sheet if necessary) IT III. Additional Materials The following items must be sutritted with this form.: 1.. At least three (3) panoramic pnotograpt.s (color prints) of the project site, or an aerial photo of the site. 2. A clear photocopy (Xerox or similar copy) of the appropriate portion of the U.S. Geoloeaal Smuvey quslrangl.e asap, delineati-ng the boundaries of the project sate. Also, note the title of the map. certify that I have investigated the questions in Parts I and. II and the answers a true emd correct to the best of my laxrrwledge. Name fit Titl 'of P®r C�o pletin Form ST tAW Ap 1roW- it. I. II. c cF ` CITY OF 1A QUINTA Opo`� ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM BACKGR04ND 1. Name of Proponent: `� G, S/�,.y .os lo..�br�.e.�,,,✓��u-v�arvtir 6m S 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: ,qv!? Asa r 3. Date of Checklist: Z�IS-�i39 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ``(�tx•� Z A C? u, (Explanation of all "Yes" and "Maybe" answers is required on attached sheets.) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: Yes 1!!Xbe No a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? X c. Change in topography or ground surface X relief features? _ d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? x e. Any increases in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? X f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach, sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? _ g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud- slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? X _ 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? _ X _ b. The creation of objectionable odors? —_ c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, cr any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X _ 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh x waters? b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? R c. Alterations to the course of flow of flood waters? d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? X e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, in- cluding but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X _ f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? _ X g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or with- drawals, or through interception of an X aquifer by cuts or excavations? (3) h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? is Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants) ? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? c. Introduction of new species of plants into an area, or result in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare, or endangered species of animals? c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: a. Increases in existing noise levels? b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Ph---,r ro vies v- 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a. Increase in the rate of any use of any natural resources? b. Substantial depletion of any renewable natural resource? 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous sub- stances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? Yes Maybe No X x x - -X - X X (4) c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? d., Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered govern- mental services in any of the following areas: a. Fire protection? b. Police protection? c. Schools? d. Parks or other recreational facilities? e. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? f. Other governmental services? 15. Energy Will the proposal result in: a. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or substantial alterations to the following utilities: a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? oil -dirt f. Solid waste and disposal? li. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? La*4 b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 19. Recreaticn. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recrea- tional opportunities? 20. Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? 21. Mandatory Finding of Significance. a. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially re- duce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plan or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Yes Maybe No X 2< Ki X - _X A (5) Yes Maybe No b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, en- vironmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) c. Does the project have impacts which are indi- vidually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION IV. DETERMINATION (To be completed by the Lead Agency) On the basis of this initial evaluation; I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation neasures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. Date: �/Z/0/e9 Signature X (6) ..1--�. � ,�/SGc�SSi.s� Of• ENdi/lo.✓rr.E�rt2. �i��9c- u,rn.xv - �/-� � ��5 � - / / v !/, .�G O/STU/Z!{�^/�f S \�/i`C OGG u2 ii'S G✓aA-O�/✓G- /i-'cv7 ✓� %� Sy?✓�Y�.�/ts � � OT�tt.� GiG'vEcv�rr�T=/lE�o-r Eo �� ✓••; I�.��sie/ Tl� GYG tom, / s1� G,9-.T1rJ7r - /Nove<ni� /r-f�.fct� /i�/ ,�vFi�tt ��/'`ssiC.t-e. /Mioit�3 \Vlri�F* �vF/df .voT �i✓77s2�G y'-*V"776140-,40 6 , A-0 ,+ �J7rrg ��Fi✓r �.D� O✓ �!/Di i✓Gs C��'s/O�/�77d�^� �YitS /4�Od®/�O Vse e,-+r el7eE Tim /✓/$Po,Sip .��1 /S ��P✓SiSi�i� vltrs•* ✓-�rE GG2Gf? \�lr �i✓L f^�f .wG, G �� - ts" O�/S3- e.�...T�a st_ Ac ce r3 Ste; •<�.-ter !�Y ?r�f'i�r ni - /,Sy ,Oflif�orrs�T�a7✓�Ti, "Fs /,e�.�n,�Eo ..v /. 6. /i//.•3�ov�E , C,�.�.�sfo s�.�-�n,.i /�-✓o /A��.o.�vr� �c [a �7v/N(r/��✓}Ti✓/�frf �/�4`iS ILL %�i� /� aAJ� W/ b C. vst-� 7)* AT- ^— v,ep-e /t r719fr-}o-s 7v S44Z,23...•-+ /�/1v .iEB VJ�K G>eC-&' C ///*o2F fd4rzL NO iiCr..I."�Gw /'b/O G�2�yrn c GYC C7H%C e,, �NG.L£r�fi� /.uG�fi'S6S /^✓ �vA,rf2 � \Y��✓O ,�,/LO$/oyv ��/<cc. OGG✓� OL9Zwl✓ /%�✓T/ /�$ �q/lf 43r+Wdn. C+4yC � II.•p�7 �/Z�SfNT^ /y vvi vvE �vs•�a•., _ l-.a'�U Nfd9O /, /T3 6;r-t/fGCV-5-1.,n%i-, A- f/hsiw �,n/Fs2e�L /Ji2�b.�--s �z✓t /'�-/£ s�r7.P� /�/-�aTi�er- S.tcre %/v s°Zry62F SC•+f 49 di SILL- -Ile Eirsr- di-• 7Ls .s54vYZ.GP s<TL . ,�.�s�o.rc wvrz<r� o-ewv?s"r -s S6/�Fs.e. ��►�s5 i'�nS �vr��t7�tt ..�<7�ir,�v..✓ s<rr��.0 /%ivfiC_siON c� ��...a..c,1c R� !7-s+E GrA-.4---•.ems-c /,�E I /rls[.�N�+irTrp �UTN'�/I �Ol�i✓J7.vL /,y.�i�i ��lS.ES /�+�Oo-v ,f'�Olr�f�xTss Any runoff from the streets wi. contain silt, and it will be particularly heavy during storms and t] development of the property itself. A significant portion of San - Rosa Cove and the La Quinta Hotel drain to the lake on the 13th ho of the Dunes Course, and each of these areas has a desilting facili� upstream from the lake. That lake also has an impervious liner, al in the absence of desilting facilities removal of sediments from t lake bottom cannot be done conventionally. i/g --.cv 7�z%' /G,tt.<cln�5 S !� /��vi��vC.O •i✓ Gw�3v.-c<s.•.. w•n, ,I 01, Tsrt�� v«.�. c� so.-,F �►`/�re-.-r_t � ��-u-ems 4� I <s set3s�r- /a G! 4r v� ®a /gnat... Ts� scr <er,�c¢,p/ /S s�L2<.��t«q' l�,i `pq�gscn �C1Yo•+-► �/''!�' � \�le�r*�ca/ ��l-E WL�GG—O�i�.vl� /LP-✓'S'�-vsc � SoI L 5 ! f/,S✓R'GL Y /�"'''/�'�-t��<.+TZr �''�'-� A-tytlGucT1-✓a[ . %/r>a' �il��O - 71'r�s� -✓rS� /yam �lgl&0s vs ez' - T7s^l 4/0-4*49 /iw (/.l£S /�ylL� �Nf/IJi^tLy S✓is�3� l�Yt .F�t/T SudJYc Z. 4/R a, 1..7i�1 Eo c�AQ•.i /'�' Q/�KBCi✓T� �.ct�Qosr�Z, ! /Y� /S �/�/�dGUL, 7?vr c—- A c�,..�%Pc//a2 A ��GG /dam G<veL � �rfo �a✓Z 7r�is /1'✓O /3ASEO z4q�✓ Ti%�—O � "-?� /fl�� CD I I v SCA-Q•rr� /�i.� Qva-Lc r*f i3vy.c , /�i�z� ; ��g � 72> ~A'7 MS �. /�f 'I CdvzO 4E SOMA O/l�e �S /2FG�i� ✓� 77D IA,� W 'oot-y z lavgz,l-r .r�vN_5 Grv�r ooA A 2e Td /fit" ,��smr� f'•�r— cmc 73�fE .��n�v�R� v-4c ry .4�✓,o2�SS nsx H� vrs*�iz /�Jf,✓i7.oG /�..4Lrar- /.Ssu�Es 3E sor�Lr /.��.,t�✓j�z ire®.via— wirr9 . � {��%!%' %a �!/�l7�Di%I'4NS/v//L4"f'?ON /�!9 /�7.Q�J�Z✓L /'?OlSTyyL� %S/Ylfp aiiv�.i /7� C� aSci't2fj�-c.� t � i r , .4✓,..�..� 1.. �'v/i i��v77ranJ �\,. C c aF �4Vsor�r �--,- .. N',.S .fv/�Po2t-raw ,s ,..=.r �i,..77c,,•�s-ZO ,-a gr 6''�+-►•�sC �. Gff�✓if� 1n Ar3�ce'.tP.'=w /lamas � �'�•-��/�a-r�' . ��rl� O�G✓rC bt/S �$s � ^.c/L£4Sf.� /i��'�Rvivvs/�dF� /,��1i'L�Tbtii v� .SlZr 1 �v.✓rs�el�/1 /y�� /Q�i�/t•N�/2 rA� . v'� /'�l�i✓✓/rt?1L' /"ri/�i ��lC �_ iT'GL� I/l.sv�� /��$£ oc" [•�r�£ ` �-E 0 SuCi r� rS� C�,a•-ems ,-a-5, .�•�c /1�J % 3� S/Gw /hl�w•T /�'= / AiQD Gfd-f.O..,G �Zt��'�¢ � LAKE. �Q^'•�/'�WT ��-�^5 /b� / �. /,!a/j-F /�`> .3rr' Ste•-. i .a2. ��Zo^�s /✓ Scg2r�-� %✓G(/%'� �G v>2 S , h'� /!"3 \�! � cL .f S cyr��llL- TL/� 4.��SO ors 7-�rE. 4.4-PK Ar. �`a,�,.✓, T /QT \\!r c.c_ -,-2,11S P-fgvrz- •�'+s° = CY\v S'4-.au owfs/e--,t� 7v 77t w 1\l r,�fil G? c+•rTy l,r- TDB As a- e::P� ••��ccs , s� C P'r/L4i� a.. , G�Zv a ..,r�FIL .mac o..,s , • ,e�.Y £ v eT /S /,>��SG [ic i iti .4-sS��s i'� �£ Sim•/�rta� //'� �,•.,y /�'T /.rzG� O� J�t-rS ��lr.4t �^9oitc-T—. /�.�SS•-ter- � � c 6vYG. ��S f � oYt m G�a,� %%��iZrtin.•� /-yam �yGT'in/i l-Dc /67KJ„T7/P-L, 5 . T/vt 14ve c vw, , c� vim^-•.Jy cK 711'-e R ri rr �.6 Gam+-nno ��r.4r SOv>2 cf� . C, i¢/�� ,S.✓£c.�s r� �co,./S \Yic[ //E l�vf�vo�GEO %S /S svoT lq SlG✓.r /✓I�,�t�!- i/�S �yGs&yam S�u�s G.� rty 4Aw sib 10.4f-- /WO zfi�, Orr S/ L►^-..'e. c-f-117- /Ut._�• SOf c� E5 iM�✓ d c.u£� �cY/L�. t$� C� f cor�.0 fw� n4 /2�v. moo• ^'�� s 5. Animal Life a. ,b., & c. The Coachella Valley fringe -toed lizard (Uma inornata) has been designated a threatened species by the Federal government and an endangered species by the state. The fringe -toed lizard's habitat includes most of the area north of Avenue 50, and any development occurring there must contribute a $600.00 per acre fee for the establishment and maintenance of a preserve near Thousand Palms. This compensation is allowed under the revised Rare and Endangered Species Act (Sec. 10-A). The proposed development is within this mitigation fee area, and will be conditioned to pay the required fees prior to any land disturbance approval, as required by the jkft permit. /O-A 6. Noise It does not appear that significant impacts will occur in short- or long-term considerations. However, there is potential for limited impacts due 70 C&o4r4nrlowV AG77V ?705. TN C&AO'J% t -"dW NV"O phasing plan approval, impacts of noise due to construction activities in subsequent phases shall be considered. A noise analysis, as required by the La Quinta General Plan, will also be required to show that compliance with noise criteria set forth in the plan is met. Noise mitigation reccmmended in the analysis shall be incorporated into those aspects of the project. T.✓E AAMA.Ys.s N,40,k. ,4460 RnpifaSiS i.w.®9us Jm 7»E �3,p�,vr,As. *t¢AJ F.try 1104-5 Srr&"-r, 7. Light and Glare The proposal will add new light and glare potential to the area, as it is currently vacant. The most significant impact relates to street lighting potential. If these are proposed, the development would be the first project to incorporate street lighting in La Quinta. Street lighting plans, if proposed, will be reviewed for general lighting impacts and designed to reduce glare and/or unwarranted or excessive lighting. No 'r, R/t t .�^' ✓�S.w'f/j K i+r y iiva�tE lJK r Fit cn,m✓ Fit.+.-r iwr 4*0.,c Mom. I/Cver If G.N.JE WtQ+S JC O✓/,6WCP ,oiA--r fwt. i 7trJF SAS Development of this proposal will convert vacant J land to urban use. This general impact was recognized in the Master Environmental Assessment prepared in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan as a long-term effect of enactment of the General Plan and the continuing urbanization process. This impact was recognized as one which could not be mitigated in the Statement of Overriding Considerations adopted with the La Quinta General Plan. \I`(!i)1 IM&I►W 7-Z> jNZ Aze NoT Au ctbE Ta Ts-� D/Lf-f'J- PvG I �y vv.2i.-�,S v� THIC /1Wr,-s 7t:) rlf.�rq,.�i.Sr r5 tip' liSt/43�F /57 .✓� /•��5 7Z= Gam/ ;Lt P/ d 4-r Gow,s Xc js ✓S£S e. e� -s. ie{0 1. i�.er�S rt1£✓T I%-,VtTi/ /2,0% 071 /Zi, CTl� p!f p2�' /uzlcy �vi�•Y S�*+� .v GGVSrF,��.-� dr" /4✓ra Sf%+v/ct 10� rg> z 09V+ e \�tl+c/J �ZccAv S✓Gsr liS�s /fiS �filitsr��fD I,- r4coT PA Sw�t OLG>�.e oy� O/slir�7'�.r�A�y �S� �2fu�E�v, /S 72> &-Vwo /.v7 ?�i9Z !o/l�o S� c $ / G 7a g£ /Nc `lyv✓r�T v>< FG ��r/3ic F1`> 1t> fur<CiE .sue - /-/r•" � `>%j0/J t/ GT7 c9�! N i��s �'S!�£l7cr✓/+.�'Y .�✓7�i+�t/ c�j� � L � l�ilc�ovSf� GMnfc4/�'L_ tiyf�s //�•�"� �v/ /.Ko a0o s-tt- S 6Ei 5 ✓ �/7lTiY/! .��a/7 T? f� GJ+"�i'�✓IGIiYL fib¢« i S / /S 1 /+?osT- x"S I /r�✓SITY Ju.�� Ttf'� Qt-vLT1Ir. �S�{.Pc� c J4✓rcc ?F Fftl•t+c+aQ 1 I R /:416/ti /�3T i%��S/%7 !/Ni TS (�R j- /�(vy !!/ /✓c, c/GJ ritt ! r9r L.Q. OAWr,, ✓L E�•�✓� u/�at}fZ► . Wami JI . F. �� ai w i d s o n s E; o. c i a t� a S, Inc. V MAWF°� ENGINEERING PLANNING SURVEYING ARCHITECTURE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE June 2, 1989 W.O. #8810941 Mr. Wallace Nesbit City of La Quinta Planning Department REC � ED 78-105 Calle Estado "`' La Quinta, Ca. 92253 1 JUN � Re: Tentative Tract No. 24230 (Amended No. 4) �,ATA CITY OF LAQ Dear Mr. Nesbit, P1A.NNING & DEVELOPNI NT DEPT' This letter is to request that an exception be made to the Subdivision Ordinance (Title 13, La Quinta Municipal Code) which requires centerline intersection offsets to be no less than 200 feet. As per your letter to Mr. Tom. Allen, dated February 17, 1989, under additional comments, No. 1, you state that offsets be- tween lots G and K, lots K and F, lots D and J, lots O and T, and lots P and Q, do not meet the minimum 2001 standard. Since that time, the site plan has been revised as per Amend- ment #4. The offsets between Lots N, O, Q, R, D, E, F, G, J, and K do not meet the 2001 minimum standard. We again request that an exception to the ordinance be made due to the special circumstances applicable to the unique design of the project. We feel an exception is warranted due to the following reasons: 1. The unique aspect of this project is the proposed 24 acre lake. This amenity provides visual aesthetic qualities rarely seen in the desert. In order to maxi- mize the use and feasibility of this unique and costly feature, it is necessary to maximize the number of lots with lake frontage. Designing the lake front cul-de- sacs as they are proposed allows maximization of lake front lots with dock facilities. 2. The offset distances are all within a minimum of 150 feet (with the exception of lots F and R) the granting of this modification will not be detrimental to public health, safety, or welfare or be damaging to other property in the vicinity. 3. Corner cutoffs and street widths as proposed allow safe and smooth flow of traffic within the proposed lakeside community. The R-1 Zone, as designed with larger lots, will produce lighter traffic loads that are easily accommodated by the circulation plan as proposed. 3880 Lemon Street, Suite 300 1091-0 S. Mt Vernon Avenue 73-080 E� P,.seo, Suite 106 PC Box 493 Colton, CA 92324 Palm Cesert. CA 92260 Riverside, CA 92502 (714) 825-1082 (6191346-569' ;714) 686-0844 FAX 714-825-9583 FAX 619-340-0529 FAX 714-686-5954 RECEIVED Wallace Nesbit June 2, 1989 Page 2 4. Redesign of the project to would reduce the number of project significantly less ducing the aesthetic value Thank you for this opportunity t above referenced ordinance. It with you to resolve this matter possible response regarding this Sincerely, ,'J . F. DAVIDSC)N A�,SOCIATES , INC. Claudia Salvatierra-Gamlin ]Director of Planning I"-SG/bh: PLANNING:AGO C. c. Tom Allen A.G. Spanos +UN 2 1989 CITY OF t.H quINTA PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT DEPT. accommodate the 200' minimum lake front lots making the financially feasible and re - of the project. o request an exception to the is our sincere effort to work and to continue efforts towards matter. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-2-9600, R-2-2500, AND R-5 TO R-1, R-2, AND C-P-S ON A +151-ACRE SITE. CASE NO. CZ 89-037 - A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of A.G. Spanos Construction for a Change of Zone, from R-2-9600, R-2-2500, and R-5 to R-1, R-2, and C-1 for a +151-acre site, :Located at the northeast corner of Washington Street and 48th Avenue, more particularly described as: A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN; WHEREAS, said Change of Zone request has ccmplied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California :Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resclution No. 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that the Planning Director conducted an initial study, and has determined that the :proposed Change of Zone will not have a significant effect on the environment; and, WHEREAS, Staff has recommended that the C-P-S zoning district be employed rather than the C-1 zone district, in order to allow more discretionary review of commercial uses which may be in conflict with the proposed Highway 111 Specific Plan; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been :identified and will be incorporated into the approval conditions for Tentative Tract 24230 in conjunction with this Change of Zlone, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify the approval of said Change of Zone: MR/RES089.032 -1- 1. The recommended Change of Zone to R-1, R-2, and C-P-S is consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General Plan and surrounding properties. 2. R-1, R-2, and C-P-S zoning is consistent with the existing General Plan land use designation of Mixed Commercial, in that the uses permitted will further the intent of this land use category through policies contained in the Highway 111 Specific Plan policy previews. 3. Approval of this Change of Zone will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental Assessment No. 89-110, indicating that the proposed Change of Zone will not result in any significant environmental impacts, and that a Negative Declaration should be filed; 3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the above -described Change of Zone request for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, and as illustrated on the map labeled Exhibit A, attached hereto. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 13th day of June, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: CHAIRMAN ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR MR/RESO89.032 -2- LU Lu a, 0 V,) M N 2: O Lf N 2: 0 aC Z: � A'9/t1- A Vl All lr7! A I I^KIKAcwtT N89'3y'z/" 2 C- 6-6,. e-s' 48th AVENUE PROPONENT: A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION CITY CASE NUMBER: C2 89-037 LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER AVENUE 48 ALIGNMENT AND WASHINGTON STREET CHANGE OF ZONE No. 89-037 EXHIBIT A E LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT A THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS REPORT IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CITY OF LA QUINTA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1: THE EAST 60 ACRES OF THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAS QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDI BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, LYING NORTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF 48TH AVENUE, (60.00 FEET WIDE); AND EAST OF THE EAST LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET (60.00 FEET WIDE), TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHERLY 30 FEET OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30 ABANDONED BY RESOLUTION 75-191 A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED JANUARY 141 1975 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 4956 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, LYING EASTERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID EAST 60 ACRES; EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSID RECORDED SEPTEMBER 14, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 194981 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN ADAMS STREET. PARCEL 2: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF, LYING NORTH OF THE NORTH LINE OF 48TH AVENUE (60.00 FEET WIDE), EAST OF THE EAST LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET (60.00 FEET WIDE), TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHERLY 30.00 FEET OF SAID SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 30 ABANDONED BY RESOLUTION 75-19, A CERTIFIED COPY OF WHICH WAS RECORDED JANUARY 14, 1975 AS INSTRUMENI NO. 4956 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA) LYING WESTERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY PROLONGATION OF THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE EAST 60 ACRES OF SAID PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 301 LYING NORTH AND EAST OF SAID STREETS ABOVE DESCRIBED; 1802851 EXCEPT ANY' PORTION LYING WITHIN THE EAST 60 ACRES THEREOF; ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE RECORDED SEPTEMBER 14, 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 194981 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL_3_ THE SOUTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THF_REOF, LYING EAST OF THE EAST LINE OF WASHINGTON STREET (60.00 FEET WIDE); EXCEPT THAT PORTION DESCRIBED IN THE DEED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE RECORDED SEPTEMBER 141 1979 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 194981 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL _4_ THE WEST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, 'TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDIN BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF. PARCEL-5: THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER AND THE NORTH HALF OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF' THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN: ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF; EXCEPT THE: WESTERLY 30.00 FEET CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, IN DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 21 1919 IN BOOK ;508 PAGE 304 OF DEEDS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL 6: THE EAST HALF OF THE NORTHEAST OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO QUARTER OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF; EXCEPT THE NORTH 230.00 FEET OF THE EAST 330.00 FEET CONVEYED TO THE COACHELLA VALLEY COUNTY WATER DISTRICT BY GRANT DEED RECORDED APRIL 26, 1974 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 49270 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; ALSO EXCEPTING THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN ADAMS STREET. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89-c7..Z1i A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL CONCURRENCE WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 24230 TO ALLOW THE CREATION OF A 281-LOT RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION ON A +154-ACRE SITE. CASE NO. TT 24230 - A.G. SPANOS CONSTRUCTION WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, did., on the 13th day of June, 1989, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of A.G. Spanos Construction to subdivide +151 acres into 281 single-family development lots for sale, one lake parcel, along with three commercial parcels, one recreation parcel, one commercial office parcel, and five passive open space lots, generally :Located at the northeast corner of Washington Street and 48th ;kvenue , more particularly described as: BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 30, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 7 EAST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN. WHEREAS, said Tentative Map has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213, adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that the Planning Director conducted an initial study, and has determined that the proposed Tentative Tract will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment; and, WHEREAS, mitigation of various physical impacts have been identified and incorporated into the approval conditions for Tentative Tract 24230, thereby requiring that monitoring of those mitigation measures be undertaken to assure compliance with them; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts to justify the approval of said Tentative Tract Map: MR/RESO89.031 '1' 1. That Tentative Tract No. 24230, as conditionally approved, is consistent with the goals, policies, and intent of the La Quinta General Plan for land use and density, in that the property is designated for mixed commercial development. 2. That Tentative Tract 24230, as conditionally approved, is consistent with the recommended zoning districts of R-1, R-2, and C-P-S as establis;zed by Planning Commission Resolution 89- in that future development in said districts will be reviewed for compliance with the appropriate development standards. 3. That Tentative Tract 24230, as conditioned, shall be consistent with policies developed for the Highway 111 Corridor, in that development of the commercial parcels shall be reviewed through the Conditional Use Permit process, thereby insuring discretionary approval authority over use allocations. 4. That the granting of an exception to Title 13, pursuant to Chapter 13.12, Section 13.12.010.B., relative -Co the requirements of Section 13.12,060.B. for minimum street centerline intersection offsets, is warranted due to the design of the project around a 24-acre lake, and that the granting of this exception will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or welfare of the community, nor shall it be damaging tc other properties in the vicinity. 5. That Tentative Tract 24230, as conditioned, provides for affordable housing opportunities within the multi -family residential parcel, consistent with the policies of the draft Highway 111 Corridor study and the proposed 1989 La Quinta Housing Element update. 6. That the subject site has a rolling topography due to sand dunes, and the proposed circulation design and single-family lot layouts, as conditioned, are, therefore, suitable for the proposed land division. 7. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 24230 may cause substantial environmental damage or injury to the wildlife habitat of the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard, but mitigation measures in the form of fees for a new habitat area will lessen this impact. MR/RESO89.031 -2- 8. That the design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, will be developed with public sewers and water, and, therefore, is not likely to cause serious public health problems. 9. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 24230 will not conflict with easements acquired by the public at large for access through the project, since alternate easements for access and for use have been provided that are substantially equivalent to those previously acquired by the public. 10. That the proposed Tentative Tract No. 24230, as conditioned, provides for adequate maintenance of the landscape buffer areas, lake area and storm water retention and other common areas. 11. That the proposed Tentative Tract No. 24230, as conditioned, will provide for storm water retention, park facilities, and noise mitigation as required by the La Quinta General Plan. 12. That general impacts from the proposed tract were considered within the MEA prepared and adopted in conjunction with the La Quinta General Plan, and were further considered during preparation of Environmental Assessment No. 89-110 and its required monitoring program to be implemented by the Applicant. WHEREAS, in the review of this Tentative Tract Map, the Planning Commission has considered the effect cf the con.template:d action of the housing needs of the region for ;purposes of balancing the needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City of La Quinta and its environs with available fiscal and environmental resources, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Commission in this case; 2. That it does hereby recommend confirmation of the Environmental Assessment No. 89-110, relative to the environmental concerns for this Tentative Tract; 3. That it does hereby recommend approval to the City Council of the subject Tentative Tract Map No. 24230 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached conditions. MR/RESO89.031 -3- PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held June, 1989, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: PLANNING DIRECTOR at a regular meeting on this 13th day of CHAIRMAN MR/RESO89.031 -4- PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 89- r- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 24230 PROPOSED JUNE 13, 1989 (* = mitigation as identified in EA 89-110) GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL �.. Tentative Tract Map No. 24230 shall comply with the requirements and standards of the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise modified by the following conditions. Development of this tract shall be in substantial conformance with Exhibits A (Amendment No. 4) and B, as contained in the Planning and Development Department file for Tentative Tract 24230, except where these conditions take precedence. 2. Tentative Tract 24230 shall be developed in accordance with applicable provisions of the Washington Street Specific Plan, as adopted by City Council Resolution No. 86-14 on March 4, 1986, except where these conditions shall take precedence in the event of identified conflicts. 3. This Tentative Tract Map approval shall expire twc years after the original date of approval by the La Quinta City Council unless approved for extension pursuant to the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance. 4. * The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering a City-wide Landscape and Lighting District and, by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in the District and to offer for dedication such easements as may be required for the maintenance and operation of related facilities. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis, as required by law. 5. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering an Underground Utilities District along Washington Street, 48th Avenue, and Adams Street, and by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in the District. Any assessments will be done on a benefit basis, as required by law. 6. The Developer of this subdivision of land shall cause no easements to be granted or recorded over any portion of this property between the date of approval by the City Council and the date of recording of the final map without the approval of the City Engineer. MR/CONAPRVL.065 -1- i. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering an Assessment District to finance Washington Street improvements, which will be made by the City in the near future, and by recording a subdivision map, agrees to be included in this District. Assessments will be levied on a benefit basis, as required by law. Drainage and Grading f;. * The Applicant shall submit a grading plan that is prepared by a registered civil engineer who will be required to supervise the grading and drainage improvement construction and to certify that the constructed conditions at the rough grade stage are as per the approved plans and grading permit. This is required prior to final map approval. Certification at the final grade stage and verification of pad elevations is also required prior to final approval of grading construction. 13. * The Applicant shall submit a copy of the proposed grading, landscaping, and irrigation plans to Coachella Valley Water District for review and comment with respect to CVWD's water management program. These plans shall include the landscape and irrigation plans for all perimeter street setback areas, common areas, and retention area. 10. * A thorough preliminary engineering geological and soils engineering investigation shall be done and the report submitted for review along with the grading play... The report's recommendations shall be incorporated into the grading plan design prior to grading plan approval. The soils engineer and/or the engineering geologist must certify to the adequacy of the grading plan. 11. * Prior to issuance of any grading permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department an interim landscape program for the entire tract, which shall be for the purpose of wind erosion and dust control. The land owner shall institute blowsand and dust control measures during grading and site development. These shall include but not be limited to: a. The use of irrigation during any construction_ activities; b. Planting of cover crop or vegetation upon previously graded but undeveloped portions of the site; and C. Provision of wind breaks or wind rows, fencing, and/or landscaping to reduce the effects upon adjacent properties and property owners. The land MR/CONAPRVL.065 -2- owner shall comply with requirements of the Director of Public Works and Planning and Development. All construction and graded areas shall be watered at least twice daily while being used to prevent the emission of dust and blowsand. 1.2. * Graded but undeveloped land shall be maintained in a condition so as to prevent a dust and blowsand nuisance and shall be either planted with interim landscaping or provided with other wind and water erosion control measures as approved by the Planning and Development and Public Works Departments. Traffic and. Circulation 13. * The Applicant shall construct or bond for half street improvements, to the requirements of the City Engineer and the La Quinta Municipal Code, as follows: a. Washington Street shall be constructed to City standards for a 120-foot right-of-way width (Major Arterial), with a curb -to -curb width of 96 feet, six-foot sidewalk, and two -percent cross slope to centerline, including median, plus one lane, plus joins. Construct roadway improvements to Sunline Transit standards for bus shelter and turnout area along Washington Street, north of 48th Avenue. b. 48th Avenue and Adams Street shall be constructed to City standards for a 110-foot right-of-way width (Primary Arterial), with an 18-foot raised median island, six-foot sidewalk, and two -percent cross slope to centerline, plus joins. C. 47th Avenue shall be constructed to City standards for a 72-foot right-of-way width (Collector), with five-foot sidewalk and two -percent cross slope to centerline, plus joins (Applicant/Developer may be responsible for construction of this roadway in its entirety, to be reimbursed by the City for the northerly half width improvement work). d. The interior public/private street system shall be designed pursuant to the approved Exhibit A (tract map) for TT 24230, and the requirements of the City Engineer. Any required or requested variations to the approved street system design sections shall be subject to review and approval by the Public Works Department. Final roadway designs shall be coordinated with other developments adjacent to this project ( see Condition No. 14.d. ) . 14. * Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the Public Works Department: MR/CONAPRVL.065 -3- a. The Applicant shall dedicate all necessary, public street and utility easements as required, including all corner cutbacks. All necessary rights -of -way for Washington Street, 48th Avenue, 47th Avenue, and Adams Street shall be dedicated to the City within 60 days of the tentative map approval date by the City Council for Tentative Tract 24230. Means of dedication shall be determined by the City Engineer. No land disturbance or other permits shall be issued until these dedications have been appropriately executed. b. The Applicant shall submit street improvement plans that are prepared by a registered civil engineer. Street improvements, including traffic signs and markings and raised median islands (if required by the City General Plan) shall conform to City standards as determined by the City Engineer and adopted by the La Quinta Municipal Code (three-inch AC over four -inch Class 2 Base minimum for residential streets only). Street improvement plans shall be prepared in accordance with Condition 13 . C. Street name signs shall be furnished and installed by the Developer in accordance with City standards. d. The Applicant understands that, due to uncertainties such as timing of required improvements relative to this and adjacent projects, there is a need to provide guarantees for reimbursement of costs between these projects. By gaining approval of this map, Applicant agrees to participate in the preparation of reciprocal reimbursements for the adequate completion of these improvements, if necessary. The form of the agreement(s) shall be determined by the City of La Quinta, and shall consider items to include, but not be limited to, median improvement reimbursements, landscaping installation and maintenance, half street joins, intersection improvements/signals, etc. Determination as to the extent of specificity to be contained in the agreement(s) shall be at the discretion of the Public Works Director. Reimbursement for improvements to 47th and 48th Avenues, and construction of Adams Street along APN 617-070-014 (CVWD facility), shall be subject to provisions of this section, and coordinated by the City Engineer. MR/CONAPRVL.065 -4- e. The Applicant shall provide surety, subject to the City Engineer's requirements, in an amount equal to one-third of the cost for traffic signalization at Washington Street and 48th Avenue. 1.5. * Drainage disposal facilities shall be provided as required by the City Engineer. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions of the City Master_ Plan of Drainage, including payment of any drainage fees required therewith. The project shall retain 100-year storm drainage on -site and/or construct piped drainage system to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. All drywell/ sedimentation basins shall be accessible at street locations. 16. Prior to transmittal of the final map to the City Council by the City Engineering Department, any existing structures which are to be removed from the property shall have been removed or there shall be an agreement for the removal which shall be secured by a faithful performance bond in a form satisfactory to the City and granting the City the right to cause any such structures to be removed. 17. A common area lot shall be established for that area between the tract perimeter wall and street right-of-way for 47th Avenue, Washington Street, 48th Avenue, and Adams Street. Landscape maintenance responsibility of the total common lot and street landscape parkway shall be the responsibility of the development. 18. * Development of the lake area shall occur as outlined in the Lake Design and Development Report, prepared by J. Harlan Glenn & Associates, dated May 11, 1989, as incorporated by reference thereto and made part of these conditions. A detailed ecosystem and lake management, maintenance, and operation plan for the lake shall be submitted for review/approval by the City Engineer, to include water quality parameter monitoring, reporting schedules, and procedures to be utilized with responsible agencies (City of La Quinta, CVWD, Mosquito Abatement District, Water Quality Control Board), concise statements as to the actual use of the lake waters for recreational purposes, if any, inventory of species; if any, to be stocked and maintained in the lake and how the ecosystem would operate, etc. This plan shall also include a general analysis of the feasibility for the use of canal water as a lakefill/maintenance/irrigation source, as suggested by CVWD. This requirement shall not preclude the Applicant from utilizing well sources, if use of the canal source is infeasible. MR/CONAPRVL.065 -5- 1.9. An encroachment permit for work in the City of La Quinta shall be secured prior to constructing or joining improvements. 20. Applicant shall dedicate, with recordation of the tract map, access rights to 47th Avenue, 48th Avenue, Washington Street, and Adams Street for all individual parcels which front or back up to those rights -of -way. 21. Tract phasing plans, including phasing of public and off -site improvements, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department and the Planning and Development Department prior to final map approval. 22. * Access to the tract shall be permitted as follows: a. Washington Street access shall be limited to right turns in/out only; b. Adams Street may be permitted a full median break; C. 48th Avenue may be permitted a full median break. Tract Design 23. A Minimum 20-foot landscaped setback shall be required alone Washington Street, Adams Street, and 48th Avenue. A minimum 10-foot landscaped setback shall be provided alone 47th Avenue. Design of the setbacks shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. Setbacks shall be measured from ultimate right-of-way lines. a. The minimum setbacks may be modified to an "average" if a meandering or curvilinear wall design is used. b. Setback areas shall be established as a separate common lot and be maintained as set forth in Condition No. 29 , unless an alternate method is approved by the Planning and Development Department. 24. * Seventy-five percent of any dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of Adams Street shall be :Limited to one story, not to exceed 20 feet in height. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department for apprcval a siting plan showing the location of any units higher than one story located along those frontages. No dwelling units within 150 feet of the ultimate right-of-way of 48th Avenue shall be higher than one story, not to exceed 20 feet in height. MR/CONAPRVL.065 -6- 25. Prior to issuance of any building permits, the appropriate Planning approval shall be secured prior to establishing any of the following uses: a. Temporary construction facilities. b. Sales facilities and/or model homes, including their appurtenant signage. (Model home unit permits will not be issued until the final map has been recorded.) C. Access gates and/or guardhouses. d. On -site advertising/construction signs. 26. If a specific dwelling product is envisioned or if groups of lots are sold to builders prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant/ Builder shall submit complete detail architectural elevations for all units. The Planning Commission will review and approve these as a Business Item. The basic architectural standards shall be included as part of the C.C. & Rs. This item is required prior to any issuance of building permits. :27. * A noise study shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical engineer, to be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to final map approval. The study shall concentrate on noise __mpacts on the tract from perimeter arterial streets, and recommend alternative mitigation techniques. Recommendations of the study shall be incorporated into the tract design. The study shall consider use of building setbacks, engineering design, building orientation, noise barriers (berming and landscaping, etc.), and other techniques so as to avoid the isolated appe&rance given by walled developments. 28. * Prior to approval of any grading or other site disturbance activities or permits, the applicant shall submit an archaeological mitigation plan to indicate the status of any existing archaeological/cultural resources of any potential significance. Said plan shall identify any existing reports done by the University of California, Riverside, Archaeological Research Unit, and shall include methods by which any significant or potentially significant sites (specifically CA RIV-1729) will be inventoried and/or excavated. A mitigation and monitoring program shall be required to be submitted, specifying a qualified archaeological monitor, including any assistants and other representatives. The statement shall provide the current address and phone number for each monitor. The designated monitors may be changed from time to time, but no such change shall be effective unless served by registered or certified mail on the MR/CONAPRVL.065 -7- Planning and Development Department. The designated monitors or their authorized representatives shall have the authority to temporarily divert, redirect or halt grading activity to allow recovery of resources. In the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains, there shall be no further grading, excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent human remains until appropriate mitigation measures are completed. 29. * The subdivider shall make provisions for maintenance of all landscape buffer, storm water retention and lake areas via one of the following methods prior to final map approval: a. Subdivider shall consent to the formation of a maintenance district under Chapter 26 of the Improvement Act of 1911 (Streets and Highways Code, Section 5820 et seq.) or the Lighting and Landscaping Act of 1972 (Streets and Highways Code 22600 et seq.) to implement maintenance of all improved landscape buffer and storm water retention areas. It is understood and agreed that the Developer/Applicant shall pay all costs of maintenance for said improved areas until such time as tax revenues are received from assessment of the real property. b. The Applicant shall submit to the Planning and Development Department a Management and Maintenance Agreement, to be entered into with the unit/lot owners of this land division, in order to insure common areas and facilities will be maintained. The association shall have an unqualified right to assess the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance costs. The association shall have the right to lien the property of any owners who default in the payment of their assessments. The common facilities to be maintained are as follows: (1) Storm water retention system/24-acre lake. (2) Twenty -foot perimeter parkway lots along Adams Street, Washington Street, and 48th Avenue. (3) Ten -foot perimeter parkway lot along 47th Avenue. MR/CONAPRVL.065 -8- o City of La Quinta Public Works Department o Planning and Development Department, Planning Division o Coachella Valley Water District o Desert Sands Unified School District o Imperial Irrigation District Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above -mentioned agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated herewith. 36. Provisions shall be made to comply with the terms and requirements of the City°s adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. 37. * Prior to issuance of any land disturbance permit, the Applicant shall pay the required mitigation fees for the Coachella Valley Fringe -Toed Lizard Habitat Conservation Program, as adopted by the City, in the amount of $600 per acre of disturbed land. 38. * The Applicant shall coordinate with Sunline Transit and the City to provide a bus shelter at the bus turnout location on Washington Street north of 48th Avenue. The bus turnout and shelter shall be provided for in the approved street improvement plans, and shall be constructed with those improvements. 39. * Prior to the issuance of any grading, building, or other development permit or final inspection, the Applicant shall, prepare and submit a written report to the Planning and Development Director demonstrating compliance with those conditions of approval and mitigation measures of TT 24230 and EA 89-110, which must be satisfied prior to the issuance of any permits/final inspections. The Planning and Development Director may require inspection or other monitoring to assure such compliance. Said inspection or monitoring may be accomplished by consultant(s) at the discretion of the Planning Director, and all costs associated shall be borne by the Applicant/Developer. 410. Prior to approval by the City Council of the final map, CZ 89-037 shall be in effect. NIR/CONAPRVL.065 -10- 41. * Lot "'Z" (multi -family parcel) shall be limited to a maximum density of 16 units/acre. Development proposals for 'this parcel shall be reviewed through the residential plot plan process. A minimum of five percent of the total units proposed on this site shall be reserved for low and moderate income housing. 42. * Commercial development(s) proposed on Lots "U", "W", "X", and "Y" shall be subject to review through the conditional use permit process. Development of Lot "V" (recreation area lot) shall be subject to review through the commercial plot plan process. 43. The Applicant/Developer shall pay fees, in lieu of parkland dedication, based upon 2.46 acres of parkland required to be dedicated pursuant to Chapter 13.24 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. This payment shall be made prior- to scheduling the final map, or any portion thereof, for City Council approval. Parcel "Z" (multi -family parcel) shall comply with the requirements of Chapter 13.24 of the La Quinta Municipal Code at the time of submittal/approval of development plans. N[R/CONAPRVL.065 -11- BS-1 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: JUNE 13, 1989 PROJECT: PLOT PLAN APPLICATION 89-414; SIGN APPLICATION 89-088 LOCATION: EXISTING BUILDING SOUTHWEST CORNER OF CALLE TAMPICO AND AVENIDA BERMUDAS, PREVIOUSLY LA QUINTA BUILDERS SUPPLY (SEE LOCALITY PLAN, ATTACHIMENT NO. 1) APPLICANT: ROGER L. JOHNSON, BUILDING CONTRACTOR OWNER: CHESTER DORN APPLICATION: 1. Plot :Plan 89-414 (See Attachments Nos. 2, 3, and 4). The following changes are proposed to the existing building: a. Remove existing glass doors and glass on north side of Calle Tampico and replace with 1" X 6" -tongue and groove vertical redwood siding. b. Remove existing glass doors and glass from south (parking lot) side of store and replace with two sets of automatic opening doors on each side of "T-111" wall. C. Paint exterior of wood, as noted in items 1 and 2, Laramie (sandy/light brown color). d. Install a 3' X 8' metal door on the northeast corner of the building. MR/MEMOPC.023 -1- 2. Sign Application 89-088 (See Attachments Nos. 5 and 6) Sign Application 89-088 comprises one wall -mounted sign. Althol.igh the Sign Ordinance allows the Planning Department to approve an individual permanent sign, it was felt in this instance that the Planning Commission should review this application. Note should be made that only one sign has been proposed, although two have been illustrated on Attachment No. 5. The sign proposed is mounted on the east (Avenida Bermudas) side of the building. The sign proposed has metal channel letters with interior neon illumination (see Attachment No. 6). The word "ACE" is in red and "HARDWARE" a combination of smokey and white face to appear black in the daytime and white when illuminated. The sign is approximately 3'9" high and 25' long, with a total area of 42.02 square feet. EVALUATION: A Plot Plan 89-414 a. The Applicant proposes to remove a secondary, less frequently used, access to the store on the north side of the building. Emergency access will still, however, be provided by the installation of a metal door on the northeast corner of the building. The vertical redwood siding painted the color Laramie proposed to cover the existing glass doors and surrounding glass panels is in keeping with the "desert oasis" theme identified in the Village Specific Plan. b. This plot plan also proposes two sets of automatic opening doors on each side of a "T-111" wall, painted Laramie. The doors and Laramie -colored wall are in keeping with the Village Specific Plan. The "T-111" type material could be classified as a false facade treatment" as identified and discouraged by the Village Specific Plan. In this case, however, the area covered by the "T-111" material is relatively small, not directly adjacent to the street, and will be painted a color in keeping with the desert theme, so would be considered acceptable. C. The metal door will provide an emergency access to the store. It should, however, open in direction of egress and have an exit sign. MR/MEMOPC.023 -2- The Fire Marshal requires that the door be equipped with a panic hardware or an approved special egress -control device. A landing and walkway will be required on the exterior and should connect with the existing sidewalk. The exterior of the door should be painted Laramie to match the adjoining proposed vertical redwood siding, or an an alternative, the same color as the surrounding stucco. The paint finish should be flat as opposed to gloss. d. The Fire Marshal also states that the removal of the fire wall that presently exists inside of the building will require the installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system. e. The present owner has recently removed excess landscaping from the area surrounding the building. In particular, the eastern side of the building now seems monotonous and existing groundcover appears neglected or absent. Section 9.90.060 of the Village Zoning ordinance states the following: "G. Landscaping. Each property on which there is proposed a new or remodeled structure or parking facility shall prepare and submit for design review a landscape plan. Landscaping shall be installed and maintained pursuant to the approved plan. (See VSP, Sections 4.8 and 6.3.1, Table 6-1.) Design standards shall establish a minimum of the site to be landscaped. Effective irrigation systems shall be installed and maintained so that landscaping remains in a healthy growing condition and in compliance with the approved plan." The Applicant needs to comply with the above. The City requires a method of ensuring that the landscaping requirements will be implemented. The Applicant will therefore be requested to bond for these improvements prior to issuance of building permits. f. Section 9.90.060 of the Village Zoning Ordinance requires the following: Ili. All outside storage and all solid waste loading and servicing areas shall be screened by structures and/or landscaping and located to minimize noise or odor nuisance. Solid MR/MEMOPC.023 -3- 2. waste areas, if not screened by the building, shall be screened with an opaque six-foot high fence or wall, and shall have an opaque gate." The Applicant needs to screen the existing waste receptacle located in the parking area of the site. Sign ,Application 89-088 The proposed sign complies with the locational and size requirements of the Sign Ordinance. However, as regards the color utilized and the proposed illumination of the proposed sign, the Village Specific Plan, Section 6.5.1 Building Signs, states the following: "The colors, materials, and lighting of every sign shall be restrained and harmonious with the building and site to which it principally relates." "Back lit (box or can) signs are to be discourages, directly illuminated signs shall be limited to individual letters. Exposed bulb or garish neon lighting is prohibited." "Identification signs of a prototype design and corporation logos shall conform to the criteria for all other signs." The proposed sign could, therefore, possibly be seen to be in conflict with the Village Specific Plan as regards illumination methods and colors. ]RECOMMENDATION/COMMISSION ACTION: 1. Plot Plan 89-414 Staff: recommends that the Planning Commission approve Plot Plan 89-414 by Minute Motion, subject to the following conditions: a. The new metal exit door must swing outward, and be equipped with panic hardware or an approved special egress -control device. A landing and walkway will be required on the exterior and connect with the existing sidewalk. b. Removal of the fire wall that presently exists inside of the building will require the installation of an automatic fire sprinkler system. MR/MEMOPC.023 -4- C. Prior to the issuance of building permits, tenant improvement building plans will be submitted to the Fire Department for review and approval. d. The exterior of the metal door should be painted either the color "Laramie" or the same color as the surrounding stucco. The finish should be flat as opposed to gloss. e. A landscaping and irrigation plan should be submitted to the Planning and Development Department for review and approval prior to issuance of building permits. Particular attention should be paid to the need for some vertical landscape elements along the eastern (Avenida Bermudas) side of the building. Suitable planting is also needed in the parking lot area, and on the north and south side of the building. Existing trees and shrubs should be retained and incorporated into the Plan. In addition to the above, all landscaping requirements of the Village Specific Plan shall be complied with. Furthermore, the Applicant shall bond for the landscaping improvements prior to issuance of building permits. f. The outside trash storage area should be screened from view in accordance with the Village Zoning Ordinance (provide solid decorative gates). g. There shall be no outside storage of materials, trash, equipment, etc. permitted. 2. Sign Application 89-088 Staff: recommends that the Planning Commission either: o Approve Sign Application 89-088; M o Deny Sign Application 89-088. attachments: 1. Locality Plan 2. Proposed Floor Plan 3. Proposed North Elevation 4. Proposed South Elevation 5. Location of Proposed Sign 6. Proposed Sign MR/MEMOPC.023 -5- Orchard Orchard Reside nfla tt 17-1 1- 1 t C!Shiq!� i7a`t�-nly--�,-. Res ld 11-1-A.C[ ic CASE No. lu"Jo ALVENIM U CALLE MALW ATTACHMENT No. 1 North End Vacant Large Lots Plaza Tampico C erclal LO-PA11.10N MAP 17i 1 7 4E- al- CAM x"W" 4, NORTH SCALE: , 1; _Immm m-mA C� 3 vtigy�a+N, q O 0 ATTACHMENT No. 3 t /x6 7-1* GC—� PP 9--414 ATTACHMENT No. 4 5 -7-//.1GF Ti i JSi tLyltt�[1�tLLL:1111�2it iiliat l2itii� � -__ - � - - •--WOE---� �. - _ -_ J u,�s5 cam• r/o'o• d �, d Lo H� :IJ 00 w a 0.6 ce �Z c� s 4 A Y SA 89--0188 AIJACI-i 1. N ' ilu. 6 -4g, wz 7, ATTACHMEN-r No. 1 Orchard Orchard "I CM.L fResidential Lk In itrtments CAUF MUM Residential 17—A Q:_ cpft —T 1DI, --1 AYME 52 KALE UMM" + North End II Large Lots ti Coipniercial ca ered C .; � C61 C:! C '..The ,.!qo-re Desert Club LOCA,riON MAP CASE No. PP 89-414 SA 89-089 Vacant 1 11 — Plaza I Tampico Yh,k se NORTH SCALE: II L- k; ATTACHMENT No. 2 l� n • 1 l` i , 1 a °.N �. DPP 890-414 ATTACHMENT ENT No. 3 ------- ----- -- -- eL�G.l.r = .—art j� _ ra vl tttllla.::.e.i4t�cl.ilai • .1. � � II Il— T�` tl I I I I I- -_- 39-414 ATTACHMENT" No. 4 ram. Ll-rxd 7 770 A i A 89-088 4 �a Z_= a do I� g W Q Q -a t9 at US Y ATTACHMENT No. 6 MEMORANDUM TO: HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION FROM: PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DATE: JUNE 13, 1989 SUBJECT: FENCING REQUIREMENTS IN THE SR ZONE BACKGROUND: The issue of fencing has been before the Commission on two prior occasions. The Commission requested information on reconstruction of fences when destroyed. DISCUSSION: Attached are proposed changes to the existing fencing requirements. A provision has been added regarding reconstruction of destroyed fences. RECOMMENDATION: After review, and making any changes necessary, direct Staff to schedule the matter for Public Hearing. MlZ/MEMOPC . 0 2 2 -1- 9.204.050 RECONSTRUCTION. Notwithstanding any provision of Chapter 9.152 to the contrary, any fence, wall, hedge or landscaping which is destroyed or damaged to the extent of more than 50 percent of its total replacement value or removed in whole or part, may not be reconstructed, repaired, rebuilt or reestablished unless the reconstruction, :repair, rebuilding, or reestablishing is in conformance with 'the requirements and standards set forth by this Title. For ;purposes of this section, the portion thereof, which is in a corner cutback area, shall be considered separately from the rest of any fence, wall, hedge or landscaping to which it is or was attached. F. FENCINCF. 1. Rear and side yards shall be completely enclosed and screened by view -obscuring fencing, walls, vegetation -planted screens, or combination thereof. 2. Fencing along the front property line, or in the front yard setback area, or between any structure and side property line, or along the street side yard setback area, or between any structures and the side or rear property line, shall be constructed of a masonry product such as block, rock, brick, stucco, etc., and/or ornamented iron/tubular steel. 3. Fences, walls, and vegetation screens shall generally conform with the design standards and typical layouts contained within the Manual on Architectural Standards. 4. Vegetation screens must consist of planting materials of a suitable type, size, and spacing, so as to provide a view -obscuring barrier within a reasonable time of planting as set forth in the landscape plan approval, and shall be watered by an automatic irrigation system. The planting plan shall be approved by the Planning and Development Department. 5. All walls and fences shall be continuously maintained in good repair, and vegetation screens shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and viable condition. MR/MEMOPC.022 -2- REQUIREMENTS R AND SIDE YARDS MUST BE COWLETELY r3kLOSED AND EENED BY A MIINIMUM FIVE (5) FOOT HIGH, VIEW- 'URING IP4CE, WALL] VEGETATION SC EN, OR A 3I NATI ON OF Tt-{'ESE [METER CHAIN -LINK FENCING IS PROHI,BITFD UNLESS IS USED PRIMARILY FOR SUPPORT AS A PART OF A :TATION SCREEN. REQUIRED VEGETATION SCREENS MUST CONSIST OF TS OF A SU I TAB1-E TYPE.. SIZE ArM SPACING, SO AS ROVIDE A VIEW-{3BScURING BARRIER WITHIN A DvaE 'CI ME OF PLANTING, AS SET FORTH IN THE SCAPE PI.AIl APPROVAL. THE SCREEN MIDST BE RED BY hN ALTOMATIC IRRIC-ATION SYSTEM, -m ell MINIMJM iaR "-llfntcr'imlunitral ualffnff 3 i i i I i i i i FENCES AND MALLS CAN BE A MAXII' llM OF SIX (6) FEET HIGH ADJACENT TO All THE PROPERTY LINES, D(CEPT IN T}-E CORNER CUT- BACK AREA ON CORNER LOTS V#f-RE Tl-IE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS 31- INCHES ABOVE THE CRC h,N OF THE All FENCES AND WALLS MUST BE MAINTAINED IN GOOD REPAIR, AND ALL VEGETATION SCREENS MUST BE CONTINUOUSLY MAINTAINED IN A HEALTHY AND VIABLE CDNVDITION. CORNER CUTBACK AREA n 9.42.050 3. Rear Yard. All structures shall be set back a minimum of ten feet from the rear property line of the lot. 4. Interior Setbacks. a. Detached Accessory Structures. In addition to the general front, side and rear yard requirements, the following shall be complied with: i. No detached accessory building shall be located closer than ten feet from the principal or main building. ii. No detached accessory building shall en- croach upon the front half of the lot; however, this setback shall not exceed seventy-five feet from the front property line„ b. Residential Buildings. A principal residen- tial building shall not be located less than ten feet from another principal building when both structures are one sto- ry in height, and not less than fifteen feet when one or both structures are two stories or higher in height. c. Swimming Pools. Private swimming pools shall not be located nearer than five feet to any dwelling excepting as provided by Section 9.156.170. 5. Exceptions to Setback Standards. The minimum setback requirements shall apply to all uses, including ac- cessory structures and mechanical equipment, except as pro- vided by the following: a. Fences or walls six feet or less, excepting the twenty -foot corner cutback -area where fence height shall be limited to a maximum of three and one-half feet above the top of curb, or three feet above the nearest pavement sur- face where there is no curb (Chapter 9.204). b. Private swimming pools may be located no nearer than five feet to any property line (Section 9.156- .170)1. When a swimming pool is located within a front set- back area, the appurtenance mechanical equipment may also be located within the front setback area, provided that the equipment is located no closer than five feet from interior side yard property lines and it is enclosed within a masonry block. noise -attenuating enclosure. .c. Outside stairways or landing places, if un- roofed and unenclosed, may be extended into a required side yard for a distance of not more than three feet and/or into the required rear yard a distance of not more than five feet., d. Cornices, canopies, bay windows, chimney chases and other similar architectural features not provid- ing additional floor space within the building may extend into a required side yard not more than one foot and into a required front or rear yard not more than two feet. e. Eaves may extend three feet into a required yard, unless otherwise restricted by the requirements of the Uniform Building Code. 186-40 (La Quinta 6/87) 9.42.080 E. Lighting. All exterior lighting shall be located and directed so as not to shine directly on adjacent prop- erties or otherwise create a nuisance. F. Fencing. 1. Rear and side yards shall be completely en- closed and screened by view -obscuring fencing, walls, vege- tation -planted screens, or combination thereof. 2. Fences, walls, and vegetation screens shall generally conform with the design standards and typical lay- outs contained within the Manual on Architectural Standards. 3. Vegetation screens must consist of planting materials of a suitable type, size and spacing, so as to provide a view -obscuring barrier within a reasonable time of planting as set forth in the landscape plan approval, and shall. be watered by an automatic irrigation system. The planting plan shall be approved by the community development department. 4. All walls and fences shall be continuously maintained in good repair, and vegetation screens shall be continuously maintained in a healthy and viable condition. (Ord. 95 Sl(part), 1986: Ord. 5 Sl(part), 1982: county Ordinance 348 (part)) 9.42.080Buildinq_design standards. All single-family residential uses shall be determined to be in substantial compliance with building standards set forth in the Manual on Architectural Standards as adopted by the Planning Com- mission unless an adjustment is approved pursuant to Section 9.42.110B. A. Manual on Architectural Standards. The planning commission shall, by resolution, adopt a Manual on Architec- tural Standards to be used as a guideline in reviewing ar- chitectural style, exterior building materials, colors, and similar features. B. Architectural Variety. When houses using similar architectural styles are located with two hundred fifty feet of each other, exterior building elevations shall make pro- vision for architectural variety by using different colors, styles, roof treatments, window treatments, garage door treatments, and similar methods. C. Roof Material. Except for flat roof designs, roof material shall be :Limited to clay and/or concrete tile. D. Adjustment. The planning commission may approve an adjustment to a precise plan allowing use of architectural styles, exterior building materials, colors, and similar features not set forth in the adopted manual when the plan- ning commission determines that the adjustment will be com- patible with the surrounding neighborhood. (Ord. 95 §1 (part), 1986: Ord. 5 Sl(part), 1982: county Ordinance 348 (part)) 186-43 (La Quinta 6/87) Chapter 9.204 WALLS, FENCES AND LANDSCAPING Sections: 9.204.010 Generally. 9.204.020 Height standards. 9.204.030 Protection of intersection visibility. 9.204.040 Method of height measurement. 9.204.050 Reconstruction. 9.204.060 Measurement of retaining walls. 186-152 (La Quinta 6/87) 9.204.010--9.204.040 9.204.010 General�y. No person shall erect a fence or wall or visual obstruction, or permit the growth of a hedge or landscaping, on a residentially zoned lot, which is in violation of any of the provisions set out in this chapter. (Ord. 32 §1(part), 1983: Ord. 5 §1(part), 1982: county Ordinance 348 §18.40(part)) 9.204.020 _Height standards. Except as provided in Section 9.204.030, walls or fences not exceeding six feet in height shall be permitted in all side, rear and front yards and along all property lines, excepting the corner cutback areas. (Ord. 32 §1(part), 1983: Ord. 5 §1(part), 1982: country Ordinance 348 §18.40(a)) 9.204.030 Protection of intersection visibility. The following regulations shall apply regarding corner lots at the intersections of streets. A. There shall be no visual obstructions as herein defined within the corner cutback area. The corner cutback area is hereby defined as the triangular area created by a forty -five -degree angle line on a horizontal plane connect- ing two points on intersection property lines as shown on Exhibit "A." B. In the corner cutback area, visual obstructions are hereby defined as any wall, fence, obstacle, mature land- scaping or anything allowed, installed, set out or main- tained which exceeds a height of three and one-half feet above: the joining top of curb at the applicable corner of the street intersection, or three feet above the nearest pavement surface where there is no curb, or the existing traveled roadway where there is no curb or pavement. C. Exceptions. Visual obstructions shall not include existing or future permanent buildings, which are otherwise constructed or maintained in accordance with applicable zon- ing and building regulations; public utility poles, trees trimmed at the trunk at least eight feet above the level of the reference point as defined herein provided trees are spaced so that trunks do not create a visual barrier, and official traffic or other governmental signs. D. In residential zones, the corner cutback area shall consist of a triangular area created by the diagonal con- nection of two points measured twenty feet back from the intersection of the prolongation of the property lines abut- ting the two streets. (Ord. 32 51(part), 1983: Ord. 5 §1(part), 1982: county Ordinance 348 §18.40(b)) 9.204.040 Method of height measurement. The height of walls, fences, hedges and landscaping, as permitted, shall be measured from finish grade as defined in Chapter 70 of the uniform Building Code. In cases where finish grade varies from one face to the other of a wall or fence, the height shall be measured from the lowest point of finish 186-153 (La Quinta 6/87) 9.204.050--9.208.010 grade. In the event that practical difficulties and hard- ships result from the strict enforcement of these regu- lations due to grade problems of abutting street, slope of property, or other site conditions, the applicant requesting a building permit may apply for a variance as provided for in Chapter 9.168 of this title. (Ord. 41 §1, 1983: Ord. 32 §1(part), 1983: Ord. 5 §1(part), 1982: county Ordinance 348 518.40(c)) 9.204.050 Reconstruction. Notwithstanding any pro- vision of ChapterT9.152 to the contrary, any fence, wall, hedge or landscaping which is destroyed or damaged to the extent of more than fifty percent of its total replacement value, may not be reconstructed, repaired, rebuilt or rees- tablished. For purposes of this section, the portion there- of, which is in a corner cutback area shall be considered separately from the rest of any fence, wall, hedge or land- scaping to which it is or was attached. (Ord. 32 §1(part), 1983: Ord. 5 §1(part), 1982: county Ordinance 348 §18.40 (d)) 9.204.060 Measurement of retaining walls. As an ex- ception to the provisions of Section 9.204.040, in cases of retaining walls on the boundaries of lots, where the finish grade varies from one face to the other of such wall, the height of such wall may be increased so as to provide a wall height of not more than forty-two inches above the higher point. of finish grade, where necessary in order to provide "guardrail" protection as to the lot with the higher finish grade. (Ord. 42 §2, 1983: Ord. 32 §1(part), 1983: Ord. 5 §1(part), 1982: county Ordinance 348 §18.40(e)) 1 (i�, lt� FENCES, «C . PERMITTED HEDGES OR WALLS C0FMIE R LOT S,rP.EEY F Cdn. CondS. 9302.00 Diagram -135 A -