2007 02 13 PC
~ of /ffJ.ulJdt
Planning Commission Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-quinta.orq
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Ouinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Ouinta, California
FEBRUARY 13, 2007
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11 :00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED
TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2007-007
Beginning Minute Motion 2007-003
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Flag Salute
B. Pledge of Allegiance
C. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled
for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your
comments to three minutes.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
--'
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
A. Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of January 23, 2007.
;,
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc
V. PUBLIC HEARING:
For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request' to Speak" form must
be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission
. consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested
the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time.
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a
public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the
approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s)
in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised
at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior
to the public hearing.
A.
Item................
Applicant........ .
Location...........
Request .....;.....
Action..............
B.
Item................
Applicant........ .
Location....... ,'"
Request ...........
Action..............
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-573, SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-865 '
CNL Desert Resorts, L.P.
West side of Avenida Obregon, approximately 150-feet
south of Avenida Fernando, within the La Ouinta Resort.
Consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for a
signature pool facility.
Resolution 2007-_, Resolution 2007-_
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-874
Komar Investments
South of Highway 111, at Depot Drive
Consideration of architectural and landscaping plans for
seven commercial buildings.
Resolution 2007-
C. Item.................. SIGN APPLICATION 2006-1078
Applicant...:........ Imperial Sign Company, Inc.
Location.......;...... 79-6401700 Highway 111
Request .............. Consideration of a proposed sign program for permanent
business identification signage and monument sign for
Dunes Plaza
Action..........~...... Minute Motion 2007-
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Item................... CONTINUED - NOTICE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE CASE
2006-5204
Appellants.......... Jeffrey S. and Ardis L. Manning
Location.............. 52-715 Avenida Navarro
Request ............. Appeal of a Public Nuisance Determination regarding the
violation of a recreational vehicle encroaching on the City
right-of-way without a permit, parking in a location not
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\l AgendaW.doc
------.- ..
zoned for vehicular parking, being improperly stored on a
residential property and a patio cover that violates the
exterior side yard setback
Action................ Minute Motion 2007-
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Review of City Council meeting of February 6, 2007
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular
Meeting to be held on February 27, 2007, at 7:00 p.m.
DECLARATION OF POSTING
I, Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary of the City of La Ouinta, do hereby declare
that the foregoing Agenda for the La Ouinta Planning Commission meeting of
Tuesday, February 13, 2007, was posted on the outside entry to the Council
Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at the La Ouinta Cove Post
Office, on Friday, February 9, 2007.
DA TED:
February 9, 2007
ytQ~'Jy
BE . S YER; Executive Secretary
City of La Ouinta, California
G:\WPDOCS\PC Minutes\1 AgendaW.doc
- --.- .-
I BI#A
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
FEBRUARY 13, 2007
CASE NO.:
NOTICE OF PUBLIC NUISANCE CASE NO. 06-5204
APPELLANT:
JEFFREY S. AND ARDIS L. MANNING
REQUEST:
APPEAL OF PUBLIC NUISANCE DETERMINATION
REGARDING THE VIOLATION OF AN R.V. ENCROACHING
ON THE CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY WITHOUT A PERMIT, AN
R.V. PARKED IN A LOCATION NOT ZONED FOR
VEHICULAR PARKING, AN R.V. BEING IMPROPERLY
STORED ON A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY AND A PATIO
COVER THAT VIOLATES THE EXTERIOR SIDE YARD
SETBACK.
LOCATION:
52715 AVENIDA NAVARRO
BACKGROUND:
On October 26, 2006, the Code Compliance Division received a report of an R.V.
being parked in the front yard at 52715 Avenida Navarro (Attachment 1). A site
inspection was conducted on October 30, 2006, and the code compliance officer
observed an R.V. parked on the side yard encroaching into the public right-of-way
(Attachment 2). A Notice of Violation was issued on November 6, 2006,
instructing the appellants to remove the R.V. out of the right-of-way and to correct
any obstruction of emergency entrance and exits of the residence (Attachment 3).
A re-inspection was conducted later that day by the code compliance officer who
noted that the R.V. was removed from the right-of-way and the appellant, Mr.
Manning, informed Code Compliance Staff on November 7, 2006, that the R. V.
was removed from the right-of-way.
On November 8, 2006, Mr. Manning met with Code Compliance staff at his
residence. The inspection on proper egress confirmed that although there were two
windows that were either fully or partially blocked by the R.V., there was adequate
egress from the rear habitable bedroom into to a hallway and also to the rear yard
via a rear sliding glass door. The inspection also confirmed the R.V. continued to
encroach into the right-of-way.
The November 9,2006, Mr. Manning spoke with Building & Safety Department
staff regarding the permit requirement to pour a concrete pad to park his R.V. in the
same location at his residence. Mr. Manning was informed that a building permit
would not be required for the concrete work but that any encroachment into the
adjacent right-of-way would require an encroachment permit. Mr. Manning also
spoke with Public Works Department staff that same day about obtaining an
encroachment permit. Staff explained the application process and advised Mr.
Manning that it would be unlikely that the permit would be approved. The answers
provided to Mr. Manning on this visit were the same answers provided to Mr.
Manning several weeks earlier on his previous inquiry.
On November 15,,2006, Mr. Manning met with the Building & Safety Department
Director and Code Compliance staff at his residence. Measurements were taken
and an encroachment into the public right-of-way was identified. A Notice of
Public Nuisance was issued, instructing Mr. Manning to correct all listed violations
within 21 days (Attachment 4).
On November 20, 2006, Mr. Manning came in to City Hall and inquired about fines
for potential administrative citations for the noted existing offenses and the appeal
process. Community Development staff assisted Mr. Manning with answering
questions regarding the appeal process.
On November 22, 2006, a letter of appeal was submitted by Mr. Manning in regard
to the Notice of Public Nuisance at the City Clerk's officelAttachment 5).
ANALYSIS:
In accordance with Section 11.72.050 IF) of the La Quinta Municipal Code, the
Planning Commission is required to review this matter and 'determine whether the
public nuisance exists. The code provision does not authorize the Planning
Commission to allow any relief from the code requirements. The Planning
Commission's only authority is to determine if there is or is not a violation of the
code based upon the facts presented in this report and at the public hearing.
The violation of Municipal Code is specific to Section 9.60.130(D) in which the
locations allowed' for R.V. Storage is identified (Attachment 6). This Section
states, "R. V. 's parked in the driveway or immediately adjacent to and parallel to
the driveway, may encroach into the right-of-way, provided that no part of the R. V.
extends over any sidewalk, curb or travelway_ " The location Mr. Manning has
chosen to store or park his R.V. does not comply with this allowance. Therefore,
the R.V. cannot encroach into the right-of-way.
In a letter Mr. Manning wrote to the Planning Commission that was attached to the
application for appeal, he references first contacting Community Development and
other city staff in advance of purchasing the R.V. in an effort to confirm that the
location was acceptable. Staff does not recall the referenced conversation that
reportedly occurred in August and all are fully aware .of the Municipal Code
provisions regarding R.V. storage, particularly with reference to right-of-way
encroachment.
--, _.....'--
Mr. Manning's residence is located at the corner of Avenida Navarro and Calle
Nogales. The lot size, residence and driveway configurations do not provide for
alternate locations for Mr. Manning to store his R.V. The distance between the
street right-of-way (south property line) and Mr. Manning's residence does not
provide sufficient space for the R.V. to be stored without encroaching into the
right-of-way and thus the violation of Municipal Code Section 9.60.130 (D).
Therefore, an alternate storage location must be established. .
Additionally, the patio cover directly above the spa encroaches into the ten foot
exterior sideyard setback as depicted in the photograph (Attachment 7) and as
prohibited in La Quinta Municipal Code 9.50.030 (B) Table 9-2 Residential
Development Standards (Attachments 7 & 8). Since this violation previously listed
in the Notice of Public Nuisance remains uncorrected, the patio cover must be
relocated to an approved location or must be removed.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion 2007-_, upholding the determination that a Public Nuisance
exists at the aforementioned address with reference to Case No. 06-5204.
Prepared by:
~ 7J?~
ANTHONY MORENO, Senior Code Compliance Officer
Submitted b
anning Manager
Attachments
1 . Vicinity Map
2. Photos of R.V., Setback Measurement, and Front of Residence
3. Notice of Violation- 11/06/06
4. Notice of Public Nuisance- 11/15/06
5. Appeal of Notice of Public Nuisance and Attached Letter
6. Section 9.60.130 (D)
7. Photo of patio cover encroaching in 10' exterior side yard setback
8. Section 9.50.030 (B) Table 9-2 Residential Development Standards
..
-.--- .-
-
DATE:
CASE NOS:
APPLICANT:
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT:
ENGINEER:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
REVIEW:
, PH#A
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
FEBRUARY 13, 2007
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-573 AND SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-865
CNL DESERT RESORTS, L.L.P. (DAVID URBAN)
EDSA
MDS CONSULTING
CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING
PLANS FOR A SIGNATURE POOL FACILITY
WEST SIDE OF A VENIDA OBREGON, APPROXIMATELY 150 FEET
SOUTH OF AVENIDA FERNANDO ON THE LA QUINTA RESORT
GROUNDS
THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
CAUSED TO BE PREPARED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2006-573 (AN ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (EIR) NUMBER 41 AND TO A SERIES OF SUBSEQUENTLY
APPROVED ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW DOCUMENTS) FOR THIS
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE
REQUIREMENTS OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT OF 1970, AS AMENDED (ATTACHMENT 1 - NOTE:
PREVIOUSLY DISTRIBUTED TO PLANNING COMMISSION).
THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT HAS
DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE LA
QUINTA RESORT DO NOT REQUIRE A SUBSEQUENT EIR,
SUPPLEMENTAL EIR OR A NEGATIVE DECLARATION/MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SINCE THE CIRCUMSTANCES
DESCRIBED IN SECTION 15162. OF THE CALIFORNIA
. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT GUIDELINES DO NOT EXIST, IN
THAT THERE WILL BE NO NEW OR MORE SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS
THAN THOSE DISCLOSED IN THE PRIOR EIR NUMBER 41 AND
THE CEQA COMPLIANCE DOCUMENTS. APPROVED
SUBSEQUENTLY. THE MODIFICATIONS. PROPOSED AND THE
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE MODIFICATIONS WOULD
BE CARRIED OUT DO NOT REQUIRE SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO
THE PREVIOUS EIR, OR THE SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL
DOCUMENTS, DUE TO THE INVOLVEMENT OF NEW SIGNIFICANT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS OR A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN
THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED SIGNIFICANT
EFFECTS. IN ADDITION, THERE IS NO NEW INFORMATION OF
SUBSTANTIAL IMPORTANCE WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE
REQUIREMENT OF A SUBSEQUENT EIR, $UPPLEMENTAL EIR OR
NEGATIVE DECLARATION/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 15162(A)(3). THEREFORE, THE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT IS RECOMMENDING
CERTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2006-573 IF
THE PROJECT IS TO BE APPROVED.
SURROUNDING
LAND USES: NORTH:
SOUTH:
EAST:
WEST:
TENNIS VILLAS AND DATE PALM GROVE
TENNIS COURTS, TENNIS VILLAS, RESORT HOMES
AND SPA LA QUINTA
AVENIDA OBREGON WITH THE HOTEL GROUNDS
BEYOND
TENNIS COURTS AND TENNIS VILLAS
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: CT (TOURIST COMMERCIAL)
ZONING
DESIGNATION: TC (TOURIST COMMERCIAL)
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is on the grounds of the La Quinta Resort which opened in 1926
and is located on the east side of Eisenhower Drive, south of Avenida Fernando. The
site proposed for the "signature pool" facility is on the west side of Avenida Obregon,
south of Avenida Fernando, private streets within the 62 acre resort (Attachment 2).
The La Quinta Resort and Club (originally the La Quinta Hotel) opened in 1926 with 20
casitas, a lobby area and one restaurant. Over the years it has been expanded and
modified to include 62 acres and over 800 rooms. Relevant resort development
modifications and additions over the years have included:
1926 Opened on December 26, 1926.
1927 Installed nine-hole golf course, the first course built in the Coachella Valley.
1937 Added the first swimming pool to the resort.
1940's Constructed the Tennis Club offering 30 courts with a choice of hard, grass and
clay surfaces (presently there are 23 tennis courts).
1980 Constructed two 18-hole golf courses.
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
-
1994
1998
Between 1980 and 1984, constructed 193 casitas and suites with swimming
pools, the original Signature Pool (now replaced with sunken center tennis
court). the Frank Capra Ballroom and two suites.
Constructed its third 18-hole golf course.
Constructed 371 casitas and a number of swimming pools, the retail area (The
Plaza). and two restaurants (Morgan's and Adobe Grill).
Constructed the Flores Ballroom.
Constructed the 23,000 square foot Spa La Quinta and Spa Villas bringing the
guestroom total to a little over 800 guestrooms.
1984
1987
1988
The 7.4:!: acre site of the proposed water feature presently. is developed with resort
recreational facilities, including 10 tennis courts (of the total 23 courts), the main resort
swimming pool, landscaped grounds, a children's playground, the Morgan House, and
other several buildings. Landscaping consists of a large number of mature Palm and
Olive trees. Nine tennis courts, the tennis stadium (center court), a restroom building,
the main oLitdoor swimming pool and playground area will be removed to facilitate the
new water feature.
. Two of the three retained buildings will be used as part of the proposed pool facility.
) The remaining Morgan House which has closed to resort and public use for
approximately one year due to seismic safety concerns will be retained as is with a
safety fence installed around it.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
General
The proposal is to construct a "Signature Pool" water feature on the 7.4 acre site,
fronting on Avenida Obregon, a private 20' wide street. The proposed project would
include of several related water and pool amenities (Attachment 3). Proposed amenities
include two artificial rock formations for a splashdown pool for three slides and a wave
pool, a lazy' river that proceeds in a circular loop, a formal outdoor pool with terraces,
private P091-side cabanas an arrival plaza building, children's outdoor play area and pool,
a game room with first aid center, indoor and outdoor dining areas, and chaise lounge
deck areas. A project description which includes a background on the resort has been
submitted by the applicant (Attachment 4).
The water feature is intended to increase the summer off-season occupancy (48%) at
the resort to levels closer to the in-season's 75%. The water feature will be open only
to resort guests and La Quinta Resort Club paid members and their children under the
age of 23 who are living at home, attending school on a full time basis or in the military.
Member's guests will not be allowed to use the facility. It will not be open to the
general public at any time, nor be available for use by guests of the applicants other
hotels.
The proposed water feature (water slides, wave pool and lazy river) would be open daily
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
between Memorial Day and Labor Day from 10:00 AM to 6:00 PM and on weekends
the remainder of the year. In addition, the proposed project would be open daily during
Thanksgiving week, from Christmas through New Year's Day, on Presidents' Day
weekend, and for one to three weeks during the Spring break period. The formal
swimming pool, spa, and children's pools and playground would be open daily with
varying hours.
The applicant states, as is the case now in the open areas of the project site, the deck
and open areas will continue to be used for special events such as receptions, dinners,
and meetings in conjunction with conference guests.
A ground mounted speaker and music system will be utilized throughout the facility.
During full operation of the water feature, the applicant has estimated staffing to be 48
people, consisting of 19 lifeguards, 8 pool attendants, 15 servers/bartenders, 1
manager, 2 assistant managers and 3 dedicated engineering/maintenance workers.
Site Design
The swimming pools, spas and children's areas will be located on the east side of the
site lot closer to Avenida Obregon. The restaurant building and Morgan House generally
separate these pools from the west side of the site where the water slides, wave pool
and lazy river are proposed to be located.
The project area will be secured by various decorative fencing or structures. Fencing is
proposed to be primarily 6 foot high decorative metal picket fencing. The existing
masonry wall in front of the Morgan House along Avenida Obregon will be retained and
used as part of the perimeter fencing.
The pedestrian entry to the water feature will be on Avenida Obregon in approximately
in the middle of the frontage in the area where an existing turnaround exists. This
turnaround will be maintained and used for loading and unloading of guests using the
facility. All pedestrian entrance and exiting will be at this controlled point.
Presently, between the sunken tennis court and Spa La Quinta to the south, there is an
ungated 20 foot wide emergency Fire Department vehicular access from Avenida
Obregon to the Tennis Club and restaurant area. This ungated access will be maintained
to the north end of the Tennis Club to provide emergency access to this area. At this
point it will be gated to prohibit unauthorized access to the water feature but allow
emergency access.
Also as a part of the proposed project, a raised median (10 feet wide and 50 feet long)
with a turn-around area would be constructed in Avenida Obregon, just south of
Avenida Fernando, to control and facilitate vehicle circulation and access in this part of
the resort. Private. property owners adjacent to Avenida Obregon will still have
unrestricted access through this entry to their properties. An option is to construct
vehicle gates just south of the median now or in the future if needed to control traffic
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
going to the water feature. The private property owners adjacent to Avenida Obregon
would have full access through the vehicle gate if such a gate is required in the future.
This new entry would require removal of 9 perpendicular resort parking spaces and
relocation of the adjacent resort wall on the east side of Avenida Obregon, adjacent to
the new median. . ..,.. '.
The site grading will generally be at the same or in many areas slightly lower than the
adjacent grades. For example, adjacent to the Tennis Villas tothe north in the area of
the current connecting walkway the finish surface next to the lazy river is shown four
feet below the walk on the Tennis Villas site. On the south side of the site next to the
Tennis Villas the proposed grade is approximately the same as the villas side.
Architecture/Buildings/Structures
The existing Tennis Club building near the northwest corner of the site will be expanded
slightly to provide tennis locker rooms and a tennis video pro-shop office. These
facilities are currently within the project site on the west side of the restaurant building.
The current "L" shaped restaurant and bar in the middle of the site will be retained and
used as part of the facility. A portion of the building at the northwest corner containing
restrooms, lockers, library and the tennis video school office will .be removed and
relocated to the expanded Tennis Club building as noted above. Adjacent to the west
side of the restaurant a small one story first aid and game room (45 feet by 34 feet) will
be constructed. A basement will be provided and is noted to be for pool equipment.
A new one story building approximately 117 feet long by 34 feet deep will be
constructed at the facility entry adjacent to Avenida Obregon. The building height will
not exceed 15 feet. .It will function as the secured entry and exit into the facility as well
as housing restrooms, a retail area, office, and maintenance and service rooms.
All new buildings and additions will architecturally match the existing buildings and
utilize white smooth trowel texture plaster, red clay barrel tile roofing, divided light
windows and exposed rafters.
The remaining structures on the project site will consist primarily of trellises and pool
cabanas. The trellises will be constructed of wood (minimum 2"x6") and be supported
by concrete columns or attached to buildings. The pool cabanas will have plaster-
finished walls, a standing seam metal roof, and wood construction and be fitted with
canvas flaps on the fronts which can be opened and closed.
As a part of the project two artificial rock formations will be constructed at the west
end of the site. The larger of the two will be the southernmost formation at 28 feet
high measured from the finish grade. It will house three water slides that empty into an
. adjacent pool which is to the east of the structure. This structure is approximately
180' from the closest one story tennis villa to the north, 28' from the closest two story
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
-- -.-----.--'"
tennis villa to the south and 25' from the tennis court to the west. To the north
outside the adjacent Tennis Villas, small patio areas are provided next to the water
feature property line. To the south there are no outdoor living spaces for the two story
residential units next to the project site. The finish grade at the base of this structure is
approximately .5' lower than the adjacent to the closest tennis villa to the south.
The second rock formation to the north of the above-described structure, and will be
18.5 feet high and will contain wave making equipment for an adjacent pool to the
east. This structure is approximately 62' from the closest tennis villa to the north,
138' from the closest tennis villa to the south and 38' from the tennis court to the
west. The finish grade at the base of this formation adjacent to the Tennis Villas to the
north is approximately 4.5' lower than the villas yards. Movie projector equipment will
also be housed in this structure for use with a removable screen on the outside of the
foundation facing east towards the pool for evening summer movies.
The exterior of these structures will be medium to dark rock colored sculpted gunite
meant to mimic the nearby mountains. Trees and shrubs will be interspersed in planters
at various elevations on the structures.
The lazy river which will allows people to tube along its length will meander in an
irregular circle around the wave pool, its artificial rock structure, and a portion of the
lounging area. This river will meander adjacent to the Tennis Villas to the north with
distances generally ,between 18' to 35' away. The water surface of the river is
proposed to be approximately 6' lower than the grade of the adjacent Tennis Villas
yards to the north.
Morgan House
The Morgan House has been listed on the 1997 Mellon and Associates Historic Survey
as a historic resource that is eligible for listing as a Historic Landmark at the City, State
and Federal levels. A thorough evaluation of the house has been completed by
Architectural Resources Group (ARG) as a part of the Addendum for this report. It is '
located near the northeast corner of the site and proposed to be retained in place but not
used due to its non-compliance with current earthquake standards. A decorative safety
fence is proposed around the house to ensure the publics safety. No changes to the
Morgan House are proposed as part of this proposal, and no future plans have been
indicated for this building. The adjacent freestanding one-story garage and storage
structure at the northwest corner of the Morgan House is not noted by the Mellon and
Associates or ARG reports as an historic structure.
Landscaping
Landscaping plans show an extensive use of trees and shrubs with an emphasis on
color. Planting material are to a great extent low water use plants. Specific tree types
and locations are shown with sizes varying from 24" t048" box size. One of the main
trees to be used throughout the site is Date Palm trees at 15' of clear trunk height.
plreports-pcI200712-13-0,7lsdp 2006-865.doc
_0
1,.____._
.
California Fan palms will be used extensively and be between 15' to 25' clear trunk
height.
Shrub planting species are noted as a mixture of tropical-type color and desert. The
plans do show specific locations for the various shrubs and ground covers. No use of
turf is indicated on the plans.
Parking/Circulation
The applicant is not proposing to provide new parking spaces for the signature pool area.
The applicant states that it is not increasing the number of hotel rooms and users of the
water feature will be resort guests and La QuintaClub members who are already using
the existing facilities.
During in season and busy periods the Resort requires employees to park at an off-site
parking lot on Calle Tampico and provides shuttles to and from the Resort. This will
continue to be utilized when the water feature is in operation. Additionally, shuttles for
guests to the water feature and adjacent Spa La Quinta from the main parking lot to the
east, the valet area aQd other parts of the Resort will be available to reduce the need to
drive cars to the site from other areas of the Resort. The gated or manned station on
Avenida Obregon when in use will direct traffic to the most appropriate parking area to
ensure parking problems in the water feature area are avoided and Avenida Obregon
remains accessible to emergency vehicles and property owners who use the street for
access.
In order to widen a portion of the street to provide a median and controlled access on
Avenida Obregon at Avenida Fernando, 9 perpendicular parking spaces are being
removed on the east side of Avenida Obregon. They are installing five perpendicular
spaces a're shown just south of the adjacent Spa La Quinta, along with new decorative
street paving in front of the spa's entry. This new parking area is presently a landscape
planter.
Avenida Obregon due' to its 20' wide does not allow parallel parking on either side of the
street. With this project that restriction will continue.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS:
As noted, no additional parking facilities are proposed to be provided for this use other
than the five spaces to partially offset the lost of the 9 spaces on Avenida Obregon.
The applicant states there will not be an increased parking demand that will exceed the
existing parking capacity because the pool feature is geared to increasing the resorts
occupancy during the 48% off-season summer month occupancy when parking is
readily available. Also, based on their research relating to resort facility usage, the
applicant states Citrus Club members who potentially could use the proposed water
feature primarily use the resort for golf and fitness and make very minimal use of the
existing pools. Lastly, less than 20% of these members have qualified children who
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
could potentially use the pool feature (Attachment 5).
As a part of the Avedida Obregon entry median area south of Avenida Fernando Staff
, '
is recommending the Community Development Director have the right to require the
gates be installed and operated during periods of increased parking due to high water
feature attendance [Condition of Approval #15(A)(1 )(c)]. Once required by the City and.
until the gates are installed the Resort will provide a person to man the entry and
control traffic allowed to enter the area. During operation of the gates or when it is
manned, this entry area will also become the drop-off turnaround for water feature'
users.
Avenida Obregon is a 20' wide private street that does not allow parallel parking on
either side. It is red curbed and signed as a fire lane with no parallel parking allowed.
During peak use periods, there have been times when guests have parallel parked along
the street violating the fire lane restriction as well as making use of the street difficult.
The City Code Compliance Department has in the past received complaints regarding
parking on the street. As a result, monitoring of the area has resulted in the issuance
of five citations in the last 11 months. Regular monitoring of the street for parking
violations is done by the City Code Compliance Department. The gate requirement
noted above will help to alleviate this problem.
Staff is also recommending that if the City determines they are needed due to parking
problems in the immediate area of the water feature operation, up to three parking
management studies over three years be completed to determine how to resolve any
parking issues. Implementation of improvements recommended by the studies is
required within one year of their requirement (Conditions of Approval #23-25).
As a part of the Addendum, an acoustical analysis of mechanical equipment use and
expected operational conditions was prepared (Attachment 1). In summary, the
findings of the study show that the proposed project will operate in compliance with
City noise standards. ,Furthermore, the amount of noise increase over existing noise
levels near the proposed Signature Pool project will not be significant.
The Morgan House is located within the project area near the northeast corner of the
site. As noted above, the house will remain in place but be fenced off in order to
protect both the public and resort employees from a seismic induced collapse. The
setback of the fencing from the house will be determined by the type of fencing. An
open decorative fence will' require a slightly bigger setback while a solid engineered
fence will allow the fence to be closer to the building. Staff has recommended
Condition of Approval #81 that requires a temporary attractive safety/security fence be
installed with the design and location submitted to the Community Development'and
Building and Safety Directors for approval. Additionally, a historic resources monitor or
structural engineer is recommended to be on site whenever demolition or construction
vibration or noise are occurring within 100 feet of the building to ensure its safety
(Condition of Approval #82).
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
-
The resort presently operates an on-site shuttle service throughout the resort that will
continue when the project is operational. Recommended Condition of Approval #28 in
part requires shuttle service' be available to the water feature to assure guests that
access is readily available if they need to park in the main parking lots to the east or
elsewhere on the Resort site.
The area proposed for the signature pool is presently used almost exclusively for resort
recreation and with the proposed water feature will continue to be used for that
purpose.
In order to provide fire protection access to the two artificial rock structures on the west
side of the project, the Fire Department is recommending as a condition of approval that
a fire truck gate and access be provided on Calle Mazatlan where the tennis court is
'adjacent to the street. The gate will allow fire department vehicles and personnel
access to the artificial rock structures from the west. This would require a 20 foot wide
portion of the existing fences between the three courts be removed or hinged. The net
for the fourth court (#12) adjacent to the water feature will need to be removed (or
operate as a "crash net") to provide a fire vehicle turnaround, unless an alternative (i.e.
removable net poles) is agreed upon by the Fire Department. Fire access through
Avenida Obregon will remain to be provided with or without the entry gates.
ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC):
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of December 6, 2006, and on a 3-0 vote
recommended approval of the request with conditions recommended by staff
(Attachment 6).
HISTORIC PRESERVATION COMMISSION (HPC):
The Historic Preservation Commission on January 18, 2007 reviewed the provisions
proposed to retain the Walter Morgan House at the resort as part of their proposed
water feature. The HPC requested the following additional information be submitted:
o Retrofit costs to make house safe to occupy.
o Future plans for house at this time.
o ,Plan for maintaining house ifnot retrofitted.
o Discussion of how building could be used as part of resort.
This information is required to be submitted and approved by the HPC prior to any
alterations to the Morgan House other than demolition of the adjacent detached
modern- era outbuilding.
PUBLIC NOTICE:
This application was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on January 29,2007. All
property owners in, and within 500 feet of, the site were mailed a copy of the public
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
hearing notice as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code. Other persons sent notices
included those who sent us letters or e-mails prior to the publishing of the hearing
notice. As of this writing, a number of letters have been received and are attached for
your review (Attachment 7). Generally, the correspondence has been negative citing
issues such as, increased traffic and parking probl.ems, increased noise, lost of views,
lost of the Resorts original ambiance, and construction disturbance.
FINDINGS:
The Findings as required by Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits) of the
Zoning Code can be, made as noted below.
1 . Compliance with the General Plan- The project site within the La Quinta Resort
is designated by the General Plan and applicable Specific Plan 1 21 E, Amendment
#5 as Tourist Commercial which includes recreational uses. This designation
permits the resort and related recreational uses such as the proposed Signature
Pool water feature. Furthermore, the project site has been used for various
resort related recreational uses, including a "Signature Pool" where the sunken
tennis courts presently exist. Therefore, the project is,in compliance with the,
General Plan and Specific Plan.
2. Compliance with the Zoning Code- The City Zoning Map and applicable Specific
Plan 121 E, Amendment #5 zone the project site within the La Quinta Resort as
Tourist Commercial. This designation permits the resort and related recreational
uses such as the proposed Signature Pool water feature. Applicable
development standards are complied with based on the proposed plans and
recommended Conditions of Approval.
3. Compliance with CEQA- The La Quinta Community Development Department
has caused to be prepared Environmental Assessment 2006-573 (an Addendum
to Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Number 41 and to a series of
subsequently approved environmental review documents) for this Site
Development Permit in compliance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as Amended.
The Community Development Department has determined that the proposed
modifications to the La Quinta Resort do not require a subsequent EIR,
Supplemental, EIR or a Negative Declaration/Mitigated Negative Declaration, since
the circumstances described in Section 1 51 62 of the California Environmental
Quality Act Guidelines do not exist, in that there will be no new or more
significant impacts than those disclosed in the prior EIR Number 41 and the
CEQA compliance documents approved subsequently. ,The modifications
proposed and the circumstances under which the modifications would be carried
out do not require substantial changes to the previous EIR, or the Subsequent
Environmental documents, due to the involvement of new significant
environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
__.___0- ""
identified significant effects. In addition, there is no new information of
substantial importance which would trigger the requirement of a subsequent EIR,
supplemental EIR or Negative Declaration/Mitigated Negative Declaration in
accordance with Section 15162(a){3). Therefore, upon certification of
Environmental assessment 2006-573 the project is in compliance with CEQA
requirements.
2. Architectural Design- The architectural design of the project, including, but not
limited to the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors,
architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are compatible
with other plans approved for construction in the tract and other surrounding
development in the City.
3. Site Design- The site design of the project, including, but not limited to project
entries, interior circulation, pedestrian amenities, and other site design elements
have been established by the previous development of the project area on the
resort grounds. The center tennis court area has been used for a Signature Pool
in the past and with this project will be again used for that purpose. The project
will be compatible with surrounding hotel development and with the quality of
design prevalent in the City.
4. Landscape Design- Project landscaping includes, but not limited to the location,
type, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials is designed so as to
provide relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design
elements and vistas, screen undesirable views, and provide a harmonious
transition between adjacent land uses. It will provide an overall unifying
influence, enhance the visual continuity of the project, complement the
surrounding project area and comply with City and CVWD water efficiency
requirements, ensuring efficient water use.
5. Sign Programs- A comprehensive sign program, including on-site project and
resort directional signage is required upon approval of this project prior to
issuance of first building permit. Resort area directional signage will include
shuttle routes and stops.
CONCLUSION:
The Resort has grown and continuously evolved over the years. It began with 20
casitas' and one restaurant. Over the years it has been expanded and been modified to
include 62 acres and over 800 rooms, along with extensive recreational activities
including golf, tennis, fitness, biking, and water activities. This proposed project is an
evolution of the recreational activities at the resort.
,
plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp 2006-865.doc
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Adopt Resolution 2007- ,recommending certification of Environmental
Assessment 2006-573 to the City Council;
2.
Adopt Resolution 2007-
Permit 2006-865 to the
Approval.
, recommending approval of Site Development
City Council, subject to the attached Conditions of
Attachments:
1. Addendum (EA 2006-573) Note: Previously distributed to Planning Commission
2. Location Map
3. Plan exhibit booklet - large attachment
4. Signature Pool project description
5. Letter from Paul J. McCormick dated January 11, 2007
6. ALRC minutes for the meeting of December 6, 2007
7. Letters received from public - Separate attachment
Transmitted by:
~6oJ~
Stan Sawa, Principal Planner
. plreports-pcI200712-13-07Isdp .2006-865.doc
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
January 23, 2007
7:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was reconvened at 7:00
p.m. by Chairman Quill who asked Commissioner Barrows to lead the
flag salute.
B. Present: Commissioners Ed Alderson, Katie Barrows, Rick Daniels, Jim
Engle, and Chairman Paul Quill.
C. Staff present: Community Development Director Doug Evans, City
Attorney Kathy Jenson, Planning Manager Les Johnson, Principal
Engineer Ed Wimmer, Principal Planner Wallace Nesbit, Assistant
Planner Yvonne Franco, and Executive Secretary Betty Sawyer.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT:
A. Mr. Robert Ancker, 51-300 Calle Hueneme, asked the Commission to
address the setback issue in the Cove area. This item had been
brought before the Commission and staff was directed to start the
process some time ago. He is unable to complete the work on his
house and pull permits until this issue is decided. Staff stated the
time frame should be April before this amendment could be approved.
Chairman Quill asked if he would be able to submit his house plans for
plan check till this process took place. Staff stated they would work
with the Building and Safety Department to see what could be done.
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed.
IV. CONSENT ITEMS:
A. Chairman Quill asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of
January 9, 2007. There being no changes, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to approve the minutes
as submitted. Unanimously approved.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Environmental Assessment 2006-579, Specific Plan 2006-081,
Tentative Tract Map 23060, and Site Development Permit 2006-873;
G:IWPDOCSIPC MinulesI200711-23-07.doc
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23. 2007
a request of Laing Luxury Homes for consideration of. development
standards and guidelines for the development of 74 single-family
homes, the subdivision of 28.33 acres into 74 residential lots as well
as lots for private streets, retention basins, open space and recreation,
and a site development permit to allow the construction of 74 single-
family residential homes, for the property located on the northwest
corner of Washington Street and Avenue 48 {extended}.
1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Planning Manager Les Johnson presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Engle asked if Washington Street would be
widened with this project. Staff stated there is no proposal to
widen with the exception of a deceleration lane.
3. Commissioner Daniels asked if the Commission had ever
reviewed a project where multiple suites were proposed on a
single residential lot. Staff stated yes, such as The Tradition.
Staff went on to explain some examples. Commissioner Daniels
asked if staff was recommending any amenities be added by the
applicant. Staff stated they had identified some items for their
consideration in the staff report. Something that would be in
harmony with their development that is more than an open area
at one end of the project. Community Development Director
. Doug Evans stated earlier discussions had taken place for active
recreation. Commissioner Daniels stated concern had been
raised that there be no blasting of the mountain. Staff stated
there will be no activity on the adjacent property and there
. would be no blasting of the mountain.
4. Commissioner Barrows asked what will happen on the sand
dune. Staff stated most of the sand dune is on the open space.
There is a small area where the three tier wall will be
,constructed. In order for them to grade and utilize the property
it does require the three tier wall which will require some earth
,work at the base of the dune. Commissioner Barrows asked if
there were any conditions relative to keeping the sand from
moving from the adjacent property.
5. Commissioner Alderson asked if the Big Horn Sheep Habitat
was protected within the Specific Plan. Staff stated it was.
2
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
Commissioner Alderson asked if staff recommendation was
based on there being a resolution with the Church to the north.
Staff stated if the access agreement with the Church is not
resolved it will require a redesign of the project and would allow
only one access, which would be a right-in/right- and would
require a secondary emergency access. Commiss!oner)l,ldersqn.""
noted the cost of the signal will vary depending on whether or
not this access is resolved; will there be a signal at the main
entry with a four-way signal and none at the north end? Staff
stated just the opposite. The signal will be a shared access
with the Church to the north. Commissioner Alderson asked
about the condition regarding the 1 5-footfront yard setback for
,the Hacienda unit garages and questioned if it should read 20
feet. Staff stated Site Development Permit Condition No. 20
would be amended to say "perpendicular";
6. Chairman Quill asked if there was a five foot setback on both
the front, rear, and side yards. Staff stated that was correct.
Chairman Quill stated his concern about the slopes on the
Church property that could not be graded which will cause
some problems with the tract drainage. ' Principal Engineer Ed
. Wimmer stated the applicant has told staff there is a
cooperative agreement with the Church to allow them to submit
. "At Risk" plan checks. Staff has reviewed the plans based on
. this information. Community Development Director Doug Evans
stated that because of the amount of encroachment onto the
Church property, if this plan does not work, it will require a new
map. Chairman Quill asked the distance between this signal
and the one at Avenue 48, and the one to the north. Staff
stated the signal at Lake La Quinta Drive is in the City's.
.program. He does not know the exact ,distance between the
signals. Laing is required to pay 25% of the cost of this signal.
If the access with the Church is not successful, Laing would
still pay 25% of the cost of the signal. Chairman Quill asked
about the retention basins. Staff stated they are required to
dissipate all water within 72 hours. Chairman Quill asked if all
the signals between Eisenhower Drive and Highway 111 will be
coordinated. Staff stated the Public Works Department is
working on a Master Plan for the entire City. Chairman Quill
asked the difference between this project and the Foxx project.
Staff noted the pad elevations is the greatest change. Drainage
issues were discussed further.
3
Planning Commission Mi,nutes
January 23, 2007
7. Commissioner Barrows asked if the sidewalk as designed would
allow bicycle travel. Planning ManagerLes Johnson stated the
sidewalk will be expanded to 12 feet to accommodate a golf
cart. This is different than the sidewalk in front of Laguna de la
Paz which is eight feet.
8. Commissioner Alderson asked if the determination had been
made whether or not there will be a bus stop at this location.
Staff stated it is at the discretion of Sun line Transit.
9. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr. A.
J. Jarvis, representing the applicant, gave a presentation on the
project. He did state that all issues had not been resolved with
,the Saint Francis of Assisi Church. They would like to discuss
Condition 52. The site is as low as it can be. This map is
lower than the previously approved map. It should have a
minimal impact on the adjacent Laguna de la Paz tract. They
, are requesting relief from this condition. The second Condition
is the elevation of the slope and fence along Washington Street.
They request to have the 12 foot height. They are setback
feet and if the wall and berm height are reduced the homes will
be able to see traffic along Washington Street. Lastly, there is
an open fence facing Laguna de la Paz and they would like to
request a four foot fence on top of a four foot berm to protect
,the view for Laguna de la Paz.
10. Commissioner Alderson asked if they were intending to install
an additional fence adjacent to the existing fence with Laguna
de la Paz. Mr. Jarvis stated they intend to remove the existing
wall and build the new one. Their property is lower; this site is
three to nine feet above the adjacent property.
11. Chairman Quill asked how the drainage was to be handled along
this wall. Mr. Jarvis stated they believe there is very little
, drainage and if any part of the slope fails, they will replace it.
12. Commissioner Alderson asked staff's opinion of the perimeter
fence and berm. Staff's opinion was that the wall height was
too high. Commissioner Alderson stated that if the wall was
lowered he would also want the tower lowered. Mr. Jarvis
stated they would want the tower to be in scale with the wall.
4
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
13. Commissioner Barrows commended the applicant on the design
of the project. In regard to the west side of the project, is the
wall system going to address the sand dune. Mr. Jarvis stated
it will be disclosed to the buyers. They are confident there will
be no problems due to the amount of drought tolerant plant
material they intend to use. Commissioner Barrows asked the
applicant to elaborate on the energy efficient design. Mr. Jose
Welty explained the Energy Star Program they intend to use.
14. ,Chairman Quill asked where they were in negotiations with the
Church. Mr. Jarvis stated they anticipated the Church would
build first. Unfortunately, the Church is not ,as far along with
their plans as they are on their plans and they do not know
when the Church will be ready. Their intent is to resolve the
issues with the Church. Chairman Quill asked how they intend'
to install the easement. Mr. Jarvis stated they intend to use the
alleyway. He went on to explain where they would be installed.
Chairman Quill asked about the plant palette along Washington
Street. The landscape architect identified there would be turf
between the sidewalk and curb. The remainder will be drought
tolerant planting.
15. Chairman Quill asked if there was any ()ther public comment.
Mr. Art Drazy, Laguna de la Paz homeowner, stated he agreed
with the Commission that the height of the wall should be
reduced.
16. Mr. David Prest, Prest Vuksic Architects, architect for the
Church stated they are concerned with the grading to
accommodate the grade change on the, Laing property. They
intend to stay close to the existing grades. In regard to access,
they would prefer not to enter into an agreement for an access.
17. Chairman Quill asked why St. Francis was against the joint
access with a signal. Mr. Prest stated that looking at the site
plan, it was determined that anyone wanting to go north would
use the northerly access and it would' become the primary
access. Secondly, the design of the primary access has several
, issues including the turnaround space.
18. Commissioner Alderson asked if the secondary access would
help them with the grade differences: Mr. Prest stated the two
issues are not related. ,They anticipate their future development
, will stay with the existing grade.
5
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
19. Commissioner Daniels asked the timeframe of the Church
development. Mr. Prest stated the parking lot is currently in the
City for review with a retention basin along Washington Street,
and removal of the frontage street. This should be done
sometime this year.
20. Chairman Quill asked if Mr. Jarvis would like to address these
concerns. Mr. Jarvis stated they are concerned that the Church
has changed their site plans. If they do not allow them to grade
on the Church property they would like to construct the
retaining wall similar to the retaining wall at the west property
line.
21. Commissioner Alderson asked about Condition 21. If the
applicant were to redesign the map with a secondary access for
emergency access only, the condition would need to be
changed. As currently designed, a moving van would not be
able to make it in and out of the main entryway. Mr. Prest
stated that given their choice the Church would prefer not to
have the shared access.
22. Chairman Quill stated the sensible right thing to do is to have
the four-way access and he would hope the Church would
consider it.
23. Commissioner Alderson stated that until this decision is made, it
is hard to approve this project as submitted.
24. Commissioner Barrows clarified staff's recommendation for the
wall was eight feet. Staff stated that was correct.
Commissioner Barrows asked if the height of the tower is 28-
feet. Staff stated the tower is identified in the Specific Plan at
28 feet. If the Commission wants to 'change the height, a
condition would need to be added to the Specific Plan.
Commissioner Barrows asked that a condition be added that no
turf be used between the sidewalk and wall.
25. Commissioner Daniels stated his concern regarding the grading.
26. Chairman Quill asked if they do not obtain grading rights from
the adjacent property owner, what is their alternative? City
Attorney Kathy Jenson stated an alternative would need to be
provided; You have an unrealistic elevation plan before the
Commission. If they cannot satisfy the c,ondition, they will not
6
..~._----- ...,
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
be able to final the map. The Commission can provide two
alternatives for the approval.
27. Commissioner Daniels commended the applicant on the design
of the project. He supports lowering the berm. Community
Development Director Doug Evans stated they were unaware of
the problem between the two property owners in regard to the
grading issues.
28. Chairman Quill stated there appears to be enough issues that
cannot be resolved that he would prefer to continue this item.
He would like to confirm that there will be no turf off of
Washington Street, the height of wall shall be eight feet from
the top of curb off Washington Street. He would request the
applicant and the Church get together to resolve this issue or
return with a grading plan to resolve the issue. Community
Development Director stated the grade differential in some
places may be as high as 20 feet on the north property line.
The Commission could approve the project with stipulations to
meet staff's recommendation. Mr. Jarvis stated he believes
they could build a two tier retaining wall to meet staff's
approval.
29.' There being no further discussion or other public comment,
Chairman Quill closed the public participation portion of the
, hearing.
30. Chairman Quill stated the shared access is very important to
him. He asked if there were a way to encourage the Church to
allow the access. Community Development Director Doug
Evans stated there should be the ability to work with the
Church during the site development permit process to resolve
the problem on the access. The challenge will be the timing.
31 . There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded
by Commissioners Engle/Daniels to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution 2007-002 recommending certification of a Mitigated
Negative Declaration for Environmental Assessment 2006-579,
as recommended.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson,
Engle, and Chairman Quill. NOES:
None. ABSTAIN: None.
Barrows,
None.
Daniels,
ABSENT:
7
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
32. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Engle/Barrows
to adopt Planning Commission 'Resolution 2007-003
recommending approval of Specific Plan 2006-081, as
recommended and amended:
a. Condition 3.a. The Specific Plan shall be amended to
allow for the Hacienda units to have a minimum front
yard building setback of 15 feet except for garages,
which shall have a minimum front yard setback of 20
feet. Garages oriented parallel to the fronting street shall
have a minimum front yard setback of 15 feet.
b. Condition 3.f. added: All reference made to the entry
tower height exceeding 22 feet shall be removed limiting
the building height to a maximum of 22 feet.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson,' Barrows,
Engle, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None.
None. ABSTAIN: None.
Daniels,
ABSENT:
33. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Barrows/Alderson to adopt Planning Commission Resolution
2007-004 recommending approval of Tentative Tract Map
35060, as recommended and amended:
a. Condition 21. Replace with: In the event that the
applicant is unable to secure access easement with Saint
Francis of Assisi Church, Tentative Tract Map 35060
shall be redesigned to provide a secondary emergency
access and egress as approved by the Riverside County
Fire Department. Additionally, ingress and egress at the
Primary Entry shall be provided for a 45-foot minimum
design turning radius moving van as approved by the
Community Development Department and Public Works
Department.
b. Condition 26.A.2. Replace with: The applicant shall
install the traffic signal at the proposed shared access
drive at the Washington Street/Lake La Quinta Drive
intersection. The applicant is subject to a maximum of
75% reimbursement from available funds in the City's
Development Impact Fee Program for the cost to design
and construct the traffic signal. The applicant shall enter
into a DIF Reimbursement Agreement with the City of La
Quinta concurrent with the Subdivision Improvement
8
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
Agreement for the Final Map for the amount specified in
the DIF Program in effect at the time the traffic signal is
accepted b the City Council. Associated with the traffic
signal installation, the applicant shall install all necessary
traffic signal equipment and appurtenances to
interconnect the proposed traffic signal with the existing
traffic signals at the Washington Street/Avenue 48 and
Washington Street/Avenue 47 intersections. The traffic
signal shall be designed for an eight phase operation as
split phasing is undesirable.
c. Condition 26.C. Add the following: In the event that the
applicant is unable to secure access easement with Saint
Francis of Assisi Church, Tentative Tract Map 35060
Items 1. and 2. shall not be applicable.
d. Condition 35.1. Add the following to the second to last
paragraph: The accessibility requirements pertain to any
public accessible facilities to include model homes and
recreational amenities provided for the development and
not to single-family residences excluding model homes.
e. Condition 42. Amend second paragraph to read: Of-Site
Improvements should be completed on a first priority
basis. The applicant shall complete Off-Site
Improvements including the traffic signal at the
Washington Street and Lake La Quinta Drive/proposed
shared access drive intersection in the first phase of
construction or by the 20% Building Permit (15th home).
f. Condition 52. Replace with the following: Building pad
elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more than
on foot higher from the building pads in adjacent
development, particularly along the southerly boundary.
Therefore, the applicant shall redesign the southerly
portion of the development to conform with the
aforementioned condition or submit an approval letter
from the Laguna de la Paz Homeowners' Association
accepting the grade differential shown on the approved
Tentative Tract Map 35090, or as approved by the City
Engineer and Community Development Director.
g. Condition 54. Replace with the following: Prior to any
site grading or regarding that will raise or lower any pad
elevations by more than plus or minus three tenths of a
foot from the elevations shown on the approved
Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the
proposed grading changes to the City for a substantial
conformance review.
9
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
h. Condition 56. Replace with the following: The applicant
shall comply with the provisions of Section 13.24.120
(Drainage). LQMC Retention Basin Design Criteria,
Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with
Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain
Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 01-015
Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements,
unless otherwise approved by the, City Engineer. More
specifically, stormwater falling on the site during the 100
year storm shall be retained within the development,
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The
design storm shall be either the three hour, six hour or 24
hour event producing the greatest total run off. The
tributary drainage area shall extend to the centerline of
adjacent public streets and shall also accept upstream
tributary flows for this regional sag location on
Washington Street. Stormwater handling for Washington
Street may require additional drainage facilities to be
constructed.
I. Condition 58. Replace with the following: In design of
retention facilities, the percolation rate will be considered
to be zero, unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer.
J. Condition 59: Deleted
k. Condition 62. Replace with the following: For on-site
above ground common retention basins, retention depth
shall be according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-016 -
Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report
Criteria for Storm Drain Systems, unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. Side slopes shall not
exceed 3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free
ground cover. Additionally, retention basin widths shall
be not less than 20 feet at the bottom of the basin,
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
I. no turf between curb and sidewalk.
m. Condition added: retaining wall that meets the City
approval.
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson, Barrows,
Engle, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None.
None. ABSTAIN: None.
Daniels,
ABSENT:
10
'.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
34. It was moved and seconded by Commissioners Daniels/Alderson
to adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007-005
recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2006-873,
as recommended and amended:
a. Condition 20. The Hacienda units shall have a minimum
front yard building setback of 15 feet except for garages,
which shall have a minimum front yard setback of 20
feet. Garages oriented parallel to the fronting street shall
have a minimum front yard setback of 1 5 feet
ROLL CALL: A YES: Commissioners Alderson, Barrows,
Engle, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None.
None. ABSTAIN: None.
Daniels,
ABSENT:
, B. Continued - Street Vacation 2006-043 a Portion of Public Utility
Easement located within Desert Club Tract Unit 4; a request of the
City to vacate a potion of Main Street north of Avenida La Fonda for
Nispero Properties.
1 . Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer presented the information
'contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the
Community Development Department.
3. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff.
There being no questions of staff, the applicant, nor any public
comment, Chairman Quill closed the public participation portion
of the hearing.
4. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded
by Commissioner Daniels/Alderson ,to adopt Planning
Commission Resolution 2007-006 approving Street Vacation
2006-043, as recommended:
ROLL CALL: AYES: Commissioners Alderson" Barrows,
Engle, and Chairman Quill. NOES: None.
None. ABSTAIN: None.
Daniels,
ABSENT:
VI. BUSINESS ITEM:
A. Notice of Public Nuisance Case No. 2006-5204; a request of Jeffrey
S. and Ardis L. Manning for an appeal of a Public Nuisance regarding
the violation of a recreational vehicle encroaching on the City right-of-
11
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
way without a permit, parking ina location not zoned for, vehicular
parking, being improperly stored on a residential property, and a patio
cover that violates the exterior side yard setback for the property
located at 52-715 Avenida Navarro.
1. Chairman Quill asked for the staff report. Staff asked the
Commission to continue this item to its meeting of February 13,
2007.
2. There being no discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Commissioners Daniels/Alderson to continue Public Nuisance
Case No. 2006-52 to February 13, 2007. Unanimously
approved.
B. Sign Application 2006-1073; a request of. Ultrasigns Electrical
Advertising for consideration of a business identification sign for
PETCO to be located on the north side of Highway 111, west of
Adams Street, within the One-Eleven La Quinta Shopping Center.
1. Chairman Quill opened the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff.'
Commissioner Engle asked why the applicant did not follow the
permit process. Staff clarified they installed the sign while
working with staff for approval. A double fee penalty will be
applied to the permit when issued.
3. C,ommissioner Alderson asked how far they were over the Code
requirement. Staff explained they have worked with applicants
to reach a norm that works.
4. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr.
Howard Hough, representing Ultrasigns Electrical Advertising,
apologized for circumventing the processing procedure and
explained how it happened. They would suggest removing the
logo to have 80 square feet.
5. Commissioner Daniels asked why they were moving the sign
down behind the tree. Mr. Hough stated the grooming
'department is on the right side of the store.
12
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
6. There being no further discussion or other public comment,
Chairman Quill closed the public participation portion of the
meeting.
7. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded
by Commissioners Barrows/Daniels to adopt Minute Motion,
2007-001, approving Sign Application 2006-1073, as
recommended. Unanimously approved.
C. Sphere of Influence - Riverside County SOI-R-02 Tentative Tract Map
34536-Joe Birdsell (County Application); Planning Commission review
and comment on a project proposed in the City's North Sphere of
Influence located at the southwest corner of Darby Road and Adams
Street.
1 . Chairman Quill open'ed the public hearing and asked for the staff
report. Principal Planner Wallace Nesbit presented the
information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on
file in the Community Development Department.
2. Chairman Quill asked if there were any questions of staff.
Commissioner Alderson asked if the 25 foot setback along
Darby Road and Adams Street was the rear yard. Staff stated
Starlight Dunes was originally approved by the City when the
zoning was similar to County standards. If this project were
proposed in the City, they would be required to widen the street
and have a 20-foot rear yard setback. Commissioner Alderson
asked the material to be used on the roof. Staff stated it is tile.
3. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Quill asked
if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Mr.
Douglas Birdsell, representing the applicant stated they were
, !,!vailable to answer questions. Mr. Art Gardner, engineer for
the project, stated the alleyway continuing east along Darby
Road will be redesigned with the development of the tract to
the north. It will be a T-intersection, but modified.
4. There being no further discussion or other public comment,
Chairman Quill closed the public participation portion of the
meeting.
13
___u_
__'I~____-
",.
Planning Commission Minutes
January 23, 2007
5. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded
by Commissioner Daniels/Alderson to adopt Minute Motion
2007-002 confirming staff's recommendations.
VIII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
IX. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Discussion regarding the Minor Use Permit process. Staff informed
the Commission that staff is preparing an Amendment to change this
process.
B. Report on the City Council meeting of January 16, 2006.
C. Chairman Quill asked if the City was submitting a letter on the Avenue
62 project. Staff stated the City was submitting a letter and has
requested a copy of the traffic study.
D. Staff informed the Commission of the next Vista Santa Rosa
Community Workshop on February 3, 2007 at the La Quinta Senior
Center.
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners
Alderson/Daniels to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to a
regular meeting of the Planning Commission to be held on February 27, 2007. This
meeting of the Planning Commission was adjourned at 10:01 p.m. on January 23,
2007.
Respectfully submitted,
Betty J. Sawyer, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
14
--
----
'I
PHIS
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
DATE: FEBRUARY 13, 2007
CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-874
APPLICANT: KOMAR INVESTMENTS L.L.C.
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING
PLANS FOR SEVEN COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.
LOCATION: SOUTH OF HIGHWAY 111 AT DEPOT DRIVE
PROPERTY
OWNER: KOMAR INVESTMENTS L.L.C.
GENERAL PLANI
ZONING
DESIGNATIONS: REGIONAL COMMERCIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION: THE LA QUINTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
HAS DETERMINED THAT THE REQUEST HAS BEEN
PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT 2005-539 PREPARED FOR
SPECIFIC PLAN 2005-075, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2005-
092, SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2005-833 AND TENTATIVE
PARCEL MAP 33960, WHICH WAS CERTIFIED ON JANUARY
4, 2006. NO CHANGES CIRCUMSTANCES OR CONDITIONS
ARE PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION
OF SUBSEQUESNT ANA YSIS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC
RESOURCES CODE 21166 SINCE THIS PROJECT IMPEMENTS
. SPEICIFIC PLAN 2005-075.
SURROUNDING
LAND USES:
NORTH:
SOUTH:
EAST:
WEST:
HIGHWAY 111, REGIONAL COMMERCIAL
COSTCO, COMMERCIAL PARK
VACANT, CITY OF INDIO
VACANT, REGIONAL COMMERCIAL
BACKGROUND:
The project site is located south of Highway 111 and Depot Drive in the City of La
Quinta (Attachment 1). The proposed Komar Desert Center is bounded on the
north by Highway 1.11. The proposed buildings are north of the Costco Wholesale,
which recently opened in November. On December 6, 2006, the Architecture and
Landscape Review Committee reviewed and approved the architecture and
landscaping plans. The Komar Desert Center Specific Plan 2005-075 was approved
by the City Council on January 3, 2006. These buildings are the second phase of
this commercial development and the proposed uses are allowed. The Specific Plan
allows 83,700 square feet maximum, within three building envelope areas.
PROJECT PROPOSAL:
Architectural Plans
Proposed are seven commercial buildings (consisting of approximately 67,000
square feet) in a desert modern architectural style using primarily stucco, split-faced
and precision CMU materials (Attachment 2). The proposed buildings are highlighted
by special architectural features such as an entry rotunda and metal architectural
roof elements, extensive use of canopies and trellises for shade, and large format
graphic art panel to articulate the facades. In ten locations, perforated color metal
panels are proposed to allow tenant signs; the sizes of the proposed sign areas
identified on the plans m~ay exceed Zoning Code requirements and require a sign
program to be approved by the Planning Commission at a later date. The sign areas
noted on the plans are not a part this review. Proposed building colors are dark and
reddish browns and grey tones. A material and color sample board will be available
at the meeting.
BUILDING A
Building A, with a gross floor area of approximately 20,050 square feet and
measuring approximately 1 38-feet by 143-feet, is the largest of all of the proposed
buildings. The design includes a 33-feet high rotunda element at the northwest
corner in a feature color, identified as the main entry. The height of the primary
parapet walls varies, but is generally 26-feet high. The building will be constructed
of reinforced concrete masonry walls, with an engineered wood structural roof
system. The primary exterior shell materials are stucco with feature walls of
alternating split-faced and precision faced CMU. There are feature panels of
perforated metal attached to a painted metal frame, which are cantilevered
approximately 24-inches from the primaryAace of the building and rise 2'-8" above
the parapet height. The front, rear and sides of the building use layering of walls,
materials and colors, as well as large-format graphic art panels to articulate the
facades. The panels that are on the exhibits are place holders since the City will
need to approve the final proposal as "Art in Public Places" by the Community
Services Commission and the City Councilor as graphics acceptable to the ALRC
and Planning Commission. A proposed stucco wall screens the loading area, with
cutouts for vine pockets and landscape trees.
..
_0-
.
Gross square footage: 20,050 square feet
Approximate dimensions: 138' x 143'
Primary parapet height: 26'-0"
Highest point: 33'-0" (at rotunda)
Exterior materials: Stucco, split-faced and precision CMU
Construction type: Reinforced CMU with wood roof framing
Special features: Rotunda entry element, striated CMU feature walls, large-
scale graphic art panels
BUILDING B
Located immediately north of and connecting with Building A, Building B has a
gross floor area of approximately 5,630 square feet and measures approximately
60-feet by 93-feet with a height of 17-feet. Proposed are primary stucco parapet
wall at the front (west elevation) with a metal standing seam mansard roof at 23-
feet in height. .At the rear (east elevation) the stucco parapet wall is 22-feet high.
The building will be wood frame construction. The primary exterior materials are
stucco and a dark bronze standing seam mansard roof. On the parking lot side,
there is an extended shade trellis that extends approximately 12' to 15' from the
face of the building, which has perforated metal screens, secured toa painted
metal frame. The trellis is supported by a row of stone~veneer columns. Pin-
mounted, individually lettered tenant signs will be affixed to the top edge of the
trellis, at the parking lot edge.
Gross square footage: 5,630 square feet
Approximate dimensions: 60' x 93'
Primary parapet height: 17'-0" (west) 22'-0" (east)
Highest point: 23'-0" (mansard roof)
Exterior materials: . Stucco, standing seam metal roof, stone veneer
Construction type: Wood frame
Special features: Deep shade trellis at west elevation (12-15 feet in depth)
BUILDING C
Building C is connected to and immediately north of Building B. Building C
proposes a gross floor area of approximately 6,900 square feet and measures
approximately 60-feet by 116-feet. The proposed height of the primary stucco
parapet wall at the west elevation is 24'-6" and 23-feet at the north. The primary
corner is marked by a rooftop feature element - a horizontal, painted rectangular
steel frame with perforated metal infill panels, hovering above the corner tower.
The top of this element is at 28-feet. This corner features proposes to add shade an
outdoor terrace area, approximately 27-feet x 38-feet, which is defined by stone
columns, stone seat walls, and shade canopies above.
The proposed building will be .wood frame construction. The primary exterior
building materials are stucco, with feature walls of stone veneer and panels of
anodized aluminum storefront windows. At the west elevation, there is an
--
-...---
-'"
extended shade trellis connected to the one shading Building B. At the north side,
shade canopies extend approximately 6'-0" from the face of the building, at each
section of storefront window. They have perforated metal screen, secured to' a
painted metal frame, and are suspended from the building face by steel tension
rods. This shade canopy construction is typical throughout the center
Gross square footage: 6,900 square feet
Approximate dimensions: 116' x 60'
Primary parapet height: 24'-6" (west) 23'-0" (north)
Highest point: 28'-0" (at perforated metal canopy)
Exterior materials: Stucco, aluminum storefront, stone veneer
Construction type: Wood frame
Special features: Deep shade trellis at west elevation (12-15 feet in depth).
shade canopies for north storefronts (5 feet in depth).
corner tower with perforated metal roof, shaded dining
terrace (approximately 27 x 38 feet)
BUILDING D
Located in the northeast corner of the site, Building D proposes a gross floor area
.of approximately 6,570 square feet and measures approximately 58-feet by 124-
feet. The proposed height of the primary stucco parapet wall at the west is 17-
feet, with a metal standing seam mansard roof rising to 23-feet. Parapets heights
vary between 23-feet and 27-feet. The primary corner near Highway 111 is
marked by a rooftop feature element- a curving, painted steel frame with perforated
metal infill panels, hovering above a corner tower. The high point of this element is
proposed at 30'-6". At the parking lot side, there is an extended shade trellis that
extends approximately 10' to 13' from the face of the building, which has
perforated metal screens, secured to a painted metal frame. In plan view, this
building features two shaded, outdoor terrace areas, which is defined by stone
columns, stone seat walls, and shade canopies above. There is a cylindrical tower
that anchors the north east corner of the building. The north and east facades
propose deeply set windows and a series of insets in plan, which articulate the
scale and add interest.
This is the only' building in the project that proposes a drive-thru window.
Landscape berming and screen walls are designed around the drive-thru aisle and
window, which will essentially screen views of queuing cars from passing vehicles
on Highway 111 and limit views from the meandering sidewalk as well
(Attachment 3).
The building will be wood frame construction. The primary exterior materials
proposed are stucco, with multiple colors defining different building volumes, and
feature walls of stone veneer. At the north side, shade canopies extend
approximately 6'-0" from the face of the building, at each section of storefront
window.
...----.- ......
Gross square footage: 6,570 square feet
Approximate dimensions: 124' x 58'
Primary parapet height: 24'-0" (east, south). 18'-0" (west). 23'-0" (west
mansard), 22'-8" (north)
30'-6" (at top of arc of perforated metal canopy)
Stucco, aluminum storefront, stone veneer
Wood frame
Deep shade trellis at west elevation (10 to 13 feet in
depth), shade canopies on south elevation (5 feet in
depth), corner tower with curving, perforated metal roof,
shaded dining terrace (approximately 23 x 23 feet),
corner cylinder
Highest point:
Exterior materials:
Construction type:,
Special features:
BUILDING E
Building E is located at the southwest corner of the site, adjacent to the main drive
and the entrance into the Costco parking lot. A gross floor area of approximately
10,106 square feet measuring approximately 85-feet by 118-feet is proposed. The
height for the primary parapet walls at the west elevation is 20'-8", with
articulated corner parapets between 24-feet and 28-feet high. The primary corner
at the southeast is marked by a curving roof feature element consistent with
Building D. The high point of this element is at 29'-6". Proposed is a feature
signage panel of perforated metal attached to a painted metal frame, at the
northeast corner, which is cantilevered approximately 24-inches from the primary
face of the building and rises one foot above the parapet height. In plan view, this
building proposes an outdoor terrace area, at the northeast corner, which is defined
by stone columns, stone seat walls and a shade tree. There is extensive planting at
the south and west facades for shading and scale and large-format City-approved
graphic art panels on the east fa9ade.
The building will be wood frame construction. The primary exterior materials
proposed are stucco, with multiple colors defining different building volumes, and
panels of stone veneer. Each section of storefront window has the typical shade
canopy.
Gross square footage: 10,106 square feet
Approximate dimensions: 118' x 85'
Primary parapet height: 20'-8" (east, west, south, north)
Highest point: 29'-6" (at top of arc of perforated metal canopy)
Exterior materials: Stucco, aluminum storefront, manufactured stone veneer
Construction type: Wood frame
Special features: Shade canopies (5 to 7 feet in depth). corner tower with
curving, perforated metal roof, dining terrace (no shade
structure). graphic art panels
BUILDING F
Building F is located north of Building E, abuts the main entrance drive to the west,
and is flanked by driveways to the north and south. .A gross floor area of
approximately 6,750 square feet and measurements .of approximately 63-feet by
111-feet are proposed. The primary parapet wall at the west and south elevations
is identified at 23-feet, at the east elevation at 25-feet, and at the north elevation
at 24-feet. Articulated corner parapets are proposed between 24-feet and 25-feet
in height. Proposed at the northeast corner is a signage panel of perforated metal
attached to a painted metal frame, which is cantilevered approximately 24-inches
from the primary face of the building and which rises one above the parapet height.
In plan view, the proposed building outdoor terrace areas, at the northeast and
southeast corners, which are defined by stone seat walls and shade trees. There is
extensive planting at the south and west facades for shading and scale. The rear of
the building uses steps in plan view and large-scale City approved graphic art
panels to help articulate the facade.
,
Similar to the majority of the other buildings, the building will be wood frame
construction. The primary exterior materials proposed are, stucco, with multiple
colors defining different building volumes, and panels of stone veneer and stone
veneer-covered landscape walls. Each section of storefront window has a typical
shade canopy.
Gross square footage: 6,750 square feet
Approximate dimensions: 63' x 111'
Primary parapet height: 23'-0" (west, south). 25'-0" (east). 24'-0" (north)
Highest point: 26'-0" (at top of perforated metal signage canopy)
Exterior materials: Stucco, aluminum storefront, manufactured stone
veneer
Wood frame
Shade canopies at each storefront, outdoor terraces,
large-scale graphic art panels.
Construction type:
Special features:
BUILDING H
Building H. is located at the west end of the property, immediately north of the
Costco fueling station. The building proposes a gross floor area of approximately
10,700 square feet and measures approximately 78-feet by 145-feet. The parapet
wall height at the north elevation is 22-feet, the east and west elevations at 20'-
8" and at the south elevation at 22-feet. Articulated corner parapets are proposed
between 22'-8" and 24-feet in height. The northeast corner of the building is
marked by a rooftop feature element similar to the one at Building C. There is
extensive planting at the south and west facades for shading and scale. The rear
of the building faces the Costco fueling station and proposes large-format graphic
art panels (to be approved by the City) to articulate the fa9ade, and a base of
alternating split faced and precision CMU.
The building will also be wood frame construction. The primary exterior materials
proposed are stucco, with multiple colors defining different building volumes, and
feature panels of stone veneer and anodized aluminum storefront. Each section of
storefront window has the typical shade canopy.
Gross square footage: 10,700 square feet
Approximate dimensions: 78' x 145' ,
Primary parapet height: 23'-0" (west, south). 25'-0" (east). 24'-0" (north)
Highest point: . 28'-0" (at top of perforated metal canopy)
Exterior materials: Stucco, aluminum storefront; stone veneer
Construction type: Wood frame
Special features: Shade canopies (5 to 7 feet. in depth), extended
hardscape at the northeast corner, large-scale
photographic panels.
BUILDINGS G AND J
These building pads will be addressed at a later date under separate site
development permit applications. However, please note that all of the parking and
landscaping surrounding these two pads will be installed as .part of this application.
Staff recently received a site development permit application for Building G, which is
proposed for Mimi's. Cafe.
Landscape Plan
Proposed landscaping for these buildings consist of landscape planters along the
driveways and in the parking lots. Highway 111 landscaping was completed with
the opening of Costco Wholesale. Proposed trees are Desert Museum (36" box).
Sunburst Locust, (24" and 36" box), Texas Mesquite (24". box). and Mexican Fan
Palms dispersed throughout the site. Proposed scrubs include Red Bird of Paradise,
Red Yucca, Texas Ranger, Baja Ruellia, Euonymus, Cassia, and Purple Mexican Bush
Sage. The applicant has selected plants types for this portion of the commercial
center from a larger palette of materials consistent with the approved Specific Plan.
Behind the screen wall for the drive-thru and within the Highway 111 landscape
setback, the applicant proposes to build up the mounding to within a foot of the top
of the screen wall and add additional scrubs and trees to hide the view of vehicles in
the drive-thru lane..
ANALYSIS:
In general, the project as presented is designed well, is consistent with the Specific
Plan, and complies with applicable zoning requirements. Staff has the following
matters for Planning Commission consideration:
Graphic Art Panels
The graphic art panels are an important element to the building design. The panels
are proposed to embellish blank and flat stuccoed walls. The City needs to
determine, when submitted, if the final art/graphic proposal, at these locations, are
appropriate for the Art in Public Places program and integral to the building design
or it may be determined that the graphic panel designs are 'not public art. If not
public art, then the applicant will produce proposed graphics panels as an
architectural enhancement. A Condition of Approval has been recommended that
requires the applicant to bring the graphic panels back to the ALRC and Planning
Commission for approval, in an effort to determine if the final graphic panel
proposal is compatible with the building and site design; no advertising or product
representation will be allowed.
Buildim:l "D" Drive-Thru
Building "D" proposes a drive-thru with a screen wall along Highway 111 and turns
south parallel to the secondary driveway into the commercial center. The proposed
screen wall has been extended to screen a significant portion of the drive thru lane
as well as the utilities located in the landscape planter area. In addition, a minimum
3 foot separation between the drive lane curb and the screen wall has been
provided and landscaping is proposed in this area. The design will provide
screening from Highway 111 traffic for most vehicles and partially screen from
pedestrian traffic as well. A pedestrian connection has been identified near the
drive-thru window providing linkage directly into the project.
BuildinQs A and E - Back of BuildinQ
Building E and F, along the eastern portion of the main entrance drive aisle, face the
internal parking lot and have the back end of the building close to the main
driveway. Building A is set against the eastern driveway with a 5'6" setback. It
is recommended that Building E be pulled back 4' 3" from the main drive allowing
a 15 foot setback. Additional landscaping will be necessary. This would be similar
to the setback for Building F and the additional space needed for trees and shrubs
to be properly placed.
A similar situation exists with Building A. The eastern drive has an "alley" feel.to
it as Buildings A ~ D all essentially have the rear of building facing this drive.
However, with a 5'6" setback, Building A is very close to the driveway and the
setback limits the ability to establish any significant screening, which is often
needed with back of building elevations. Staff recommends shifting Building A
approximately 4'6" west, providing for a 10 foot setback, allowing the additional
landscaping space to help screen the back of building. Additional landscaping will
be necessary.
In addition to the' setback, staff recommends the screen wall for the Building A
loading area be extended an additional 20 feet south so as to help screen this area
from public view. . Sufficient area will remain for delivery trucks to successfully
maneuver and access the loading area.
Buildino "H" - South Elevation
Building "H" is proposed to have only a plaster finishes on the south elevation; the
------
design of this elevation needs to be upgraded. In addition the south elevation (back
of building) needs to be screened. Staff recommends additional landscape
screening be provided along this elevation.
ParkinQ Analvsis
The applicant has identified a total of 464 stalls being provided for the 7 buildings
identified in this application and the two buildings that will be coming forward at a
future date. Though not a part of this application, building square footage
information has been provided by the applicant for Buildings G and J and the
parking calculations include this information. Based upon this information, the site
includes 61 additional stalls. It should be noted that the calculation is based upon a
20% allowance for restaurant space. With two freestanding restaurants and a
drive-thru coffee shop currently proposed, it is possible that the development could
exceed this amount should any additional space be for restaurant use. However,
with an excess of 61 stalls, approximately 9,150 square feet of the retail space
could be designated for restaurant use without exceeding the City's parking
requirements. Though slightly in excess, staff believes the amount of parking is
appropriate for the proposed commercial development.
Access and Circulation Improvements
Two conditions have been recommended to improve access and circulation for the
proposed development. First, a condition is recommended requiring the installation
of a left turn lane on the main drive for southbound traffic utilizing the driveway
between Buildings E and F. This condition will require modification to the median
recently installed by Costco and restriping the northbound lanes.
The second condition involves improving the turning radius at the "T" intersection
of the main drive and the east-west drives, immediately southwest of Building E.
As it currently exists, improvements at the northeast corner of this intersection limit
the turning radius for eastbound delivery trucks making a right turn. The condition
requires a redesign to accommodate a 25 foot turning radius.
ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE (ALRC) REVIEW:
The ALRC reviewed this request at its meeting of December 6, 2006 (Attachment
6). The Committee unanimously adopted Minute Motion 2006-036, recommending
approval subject to the following conditions which have been incorporated into this
review:
1 . The applicant shall bring the graphic panels back to the ALRC and Planning
Commission or approval if it is determined that the graphic panels are not
acceptable as public art. The ALRC and Planning Commission shall
determine if the final graphic proposal is compatible with the building and site
designs; no advertising or product representation will be allowed.
2. The applicant shall extend the proposed screen wall for Building "D" further
south to the entire length of the drive through lane and the transformer units
located in the landscape planter area. In addition, the screen wall, for the
entire length of the drive through lane,' needs to have a minimum 3 foot
separation behind the drive lane curb consisting of a landscaped area.
3. The applicant shall redesign the loading dock and building orientation of
Building "A" to eliminate the conflict with vehicle traffic at driveways.
4. The applicant shall provide a linear hedge for the following elevations:
. East elevation of Building "E"
. South elevation of Building "H"
5. The Gleditsia Tricanthos "Sunburst" trees and Gelsemium Sempervirens
vines shall be deleted and replaced with low maintenance varieties
appropriate for the local climate.
6. All mechanical equipment on roof tops shall be screened from view by
parapet walls; this includes air conditioning units and fans and blower hoods
for food service cooking.
Public Notice
This request was published in the Desert Sun newspaper on February 1, 2007, and
mailed to all affected property owners and occupants within 500 feet of the project
site as required by Section 9.200.110 of the Zoning Code. To date, no letters have
been received.
Public Aaencv Review
A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City
Departments. All' written comments received are on file with the Community
Development Department. Applicable comments received have .been included in the
recommended Conditions of Approval.
STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS:
As required by LQMC Section 9.210.010 (Site Development Permits), findings to
approve Site Development Permit 2006-877 can be made and are contained in the
attached Resolution.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007- ,approving Site Development
Permit 2006-874, subject to Findings and Conditions.
Attachments:
1 . Vicinity Map
2. Site Plan, Planting Plan and Building Elevations
3. Drive-Thru Site Plan and Section Drawings
on, Planning Manager
DATE:
CASE NO:
APPLICANT:
PROPERTY OWNER:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONING:
BACKGROUND:
PH#C
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
FEBRUARY 13; 2007
SIGN APPLICATION 2006-1078
IMPERIAL SIGN COMPANY, INC.
HIGHLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
THE DUNES BUSINESS PARK, LLC.
CONSIDERATION OF A REQUEST FOR A SIGN
PROGRAM TO SERVE THE DUNES RETAIL CENTER
NORTH SIDE OF HIGHWAY 111, BETWEEN JEFFERSON
STREET AND DUNE PALMS ROAD
ON-PREMISE SIGNS ARE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT
UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15311(a)
RC (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
CR (REGIONAL COMMERCIAL)
Dunes Business Park was approved as a multi-phased commercial development on a
6.38 acre parcel through Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) 31143 (Attachment 1). The
project includes four (4) separate one story buildings on each parcel with a common
parking area. The first phase was approved in June of 2005; the approval induded a
36,000 square foot multi-tenant building which is close to completion. The second
phase was approved in August 2006 for three freestanding pad multi-tenant buildings.
SIGN PROGRAM PROPOSAL:
The applicant requests a Sign Program be approved for the Dunes Business Park
(Attachment 2). The proposed Sign Program provides specifications for building
mounted signs, specifications for two monument signs, definitive sign locations, and
general standards and provisions for sign construction, installation and maintenance.
However, all tenants have yet to be secured, so the program,.is designed to be flexible
while providing for some optional approaches for signing.
The proposed sign program is. divided in to two sections. The first section is for the
Phase I building located near the north property line (Attachment 3). Signs for this
building are proposed on all building elevations. Currently, shopping centers adjacent to
the Dunes Business Park do not have building-mounted signs on the north building
P:IReports - PC\2007\2-13-07ISA 2006-1078 Dunes RetaillSA 06-1078 Dunes Retail-STAFF REPORT.rtf
elevations. The second section is for the Phase II buildings located along Highway 111.
Buildina-mounted Sians
Building-mounted signs are proposed to be located on the fascia and tower elements of
the buildings (Attachment 4) and will not exceed 50 square, feet net with logos not
exceeding 25 percent of the total area. National or regional tenants with five or more
outlets will be allowed to use their standard signage. The signs will be individually
illuminated channel letters with single or double lines permitted. Each tenant is allowed
one sign per leasehold front.
Monument Sians .
Two monument signs (Attachment 5) are being proposed for the shopping center at
49.5 square feet total. Each monument sign (Attachment 6) will be approximately five
feet and six inches in height and nine feet wide. The monument sign will have the name
of the shopping center and will have up to six tenant signs. The shopping center only
has one entrance of Highway 111 and should be limited to one monument dose to the
shopping center entrance. At this time, staff does not recommend approval of the
monument sign exhibit until it is designed to be compatible with the architecture of the
buildings and more details are provided by the applicant.
Window Sians
Generally, this type of incidental accessory signing is exempt under the sign code, but is
addressed here for continuity. Each tenant with entry window facings, facing into the
parking lot, is allowed one 18 x 18 inch sign panel area in vinyl letters and the tenant's
business hours. Lettering is to be at least 1 inch in height, color shall be white, and shall
be face or reverse/second surface mounted. Lettering type shall be Helvetica light or a
letter type equal to it.
ANALYSIS:
In the past, the Planning Commission has been asked to consider larger signs for
businesses along Highway 111. There are sign programs that require Planning
Commission review and approval to deviate from the approved sign program. The code
allows the Planning Commission to grant additional sign area, additional numbers of
signs, an alternative sign location, an alternative type of signage, new illumination, and
to consider additional height. Staff feels that a provision should be added in the
proposed sign program that clearly states that any deviation from the sign program will
require the applicant to request Planning Commission approval. .
In the 'General Requirements, Standards and/or Provisions' section, the following
provision should be amended,
No. 11 should read: No live and/or simulated animals or humans may be used on
site or within right-of-way adjacent to the subject property as a sign.
In order to discourage future tenants from proposing a sign that will extend from one
P:IReports - PC\2007i2-13-07ISA 2006-1078 Dunes Retail1SA06-1078 Dunes Retail-STAFF REPORT.rtf
edge of a leasehold frontage to the other, the following changes should be made to the
Sign Program inthe 'Specifications of Building Signs' page 3:
No. 11 should read: One sign per /easehold front. Maximum width of sign shall
not exceed 75% of the lease frontage or wall width upon which the sign is placed,
whichever is smaller.
In the same section; the following provision should be added to keep the proposed sign
program consistent with the sign code:
No. 13 sliould read: Sign area limited to one square foot per lineal foot of lease
frontage up to a maximum of 50 square feet.
The 'Specification for Window Signs' section only allows the tenant to include the hours
of operation. Staff feels comfortable in suggesting that the Planning Commission modify
the second provision to the following to allow for some flexibility:
NO.2 should read: Not to exceed 18" x 18", and include business name and/or
hours of operation.
In the 'Approvals' section of the proposed sign program, staff recommends that the
. applicant amend the provision to include that the tenant's proposal must receive written
approval by the Landlord/Owner or the Management Company prior to submitting a sign
application an prior to issuance of a sign permit by the City of La Quinta.
To date, retail tenants on the north side of Highway 111 have not been granted
permission to place signs on the north building elevations. This decision was based on
the proximity of the buildings to residential areas to the north. Staff recommends that
the sign program be amended to prohibit any type of sign on the north building elevation
of the Phase I multi-tenant building. .
Signs proposed for the Phase 2 Retail 1 building should be allowed on the south
elevation only if tenant has window frontage as shown on the exhibit. Signs proposed
for the Phase 2 Retail 2 building should be limited to one sign per corner tenant for the
south and west elevation. Signs for the Phase 2 Retail 3 building should be limited to
only signs on the west elevation for interior tenants only. In addition, corner tenants
shall be allowed .a sign on the north and south building elevations or east elevation.
Number of signs shall not exceed two per tenant space for corner tenants. Staff feels
that only end tenants or corner tenants should be allowed a sign on the east building
elevation due to its limited visibility from the adjacent shopping'center.
The shopping center only has one entrance of Highway 111.. and should be limited to
one monument. At this time, staff will not recommend approval of the monument sign
until it is designed to be compatible with the. architecture of the buildings and more
details are provided by the applicant.
P:IReports _ PC\2007\2-13-07ISA 2006-1078 Dunes RetaillSA 06-1078 Dunes Retail-STAFF REPORT.rtf
-----"---- -"
FINDINGS:
The following findings can be made in support of Sign Applicatio,n 2006-1015:
A Sign Application 2006-1078, as recommended, is consistent with the purpose
and intent of Chapter 9.160, in that it does not conflict with the standards as set forth in
said Chapter. .
B. Sign Application 2006-1078,. as recommended, is harmonious with and visually
related to all signs as proposed under the Sign Program, due to the common use of
letter type and size, color and location of signs, .
C. Sign Application 2006-1078, as recommended, is harmonious with and visually
related to the subject buildings as the scale of the signs and letter sizes used
accentuate the building design.
D. Sign Application 2006-1078, as recommended, is harmonious with and visually
related to surrounding development, as it will not adversely affect surrounding land uses
or obscure other adjacent conforming signs.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Minute Motion No. 2006 - _, approving Sign Application 2006-1078 with the
following conditions:
1. Prior to issuance of the first sign permit, a revise.d sign program (text and
graphics) shall be submitted to the Planning Manager for review and approval. The
following items shall be incorporated into the revised sign program:
A Building-mounted signs:
a. Phase I
i. Signage shall be prohibited on the north building elevation
of the Phase I building.
ii. Signs proposed on the tower element of the south building
elevation shall be placed mid-way between the corbel and
the arch, .
iii. Only end tenant or corner tenant shall be allowed a sign.
on the west building elevation, No signs shall be placed on
the east elevation. .
b, Phase II
i. Tenant is allowed one sign per window frontage on south
elevation, The south elevation of the Phase 2 Retail 1
building shows multiple locations for signs,
ii. For the Phase 2 Retail 2 building, only end tenants or
corner tenants shall be allowed to place a sign on the side
building elevations. End tenants or corner tenants are
limited to two signs per space
iii. For the Phase 2 Retail 3 building, on the south elevation a
P:IReports - PC\2007\2c13-071SA 2006-1078 Dunes RetaillSA 06-1078 Dunes Retail-STAFF REPORT.rtf
sign shall be permitted on the tower element only, The
only signs permitted on the east elevation will be for the
end tenants or corner tenants, End tenants or corner
tenants are limited to two signs per lease space,
B, Monument Sign: The applicant shall resubmit a design of the monument
sign to be compatible with the architecture of the buildings, include end
elevation detail and material information, The redesign shall require
approval by the Community Development Director. Prior to installation,
the monument sign shall obtain approval from the Public Works
Department for visual dearance,
C. Sign area on exhibits is not to scale. Exhibits shall be submitted to
scale,
Prepared by:
Attachments:
1. Location Map
2. Site Plan
3. Sign Program
4. Building Elevations
5, Monument Sign Proposed Location
6, Monument Sign Elevation
P:IReports - PC\2007\2'13-07ISA 2006-1078 Dunes RetaillSA 06-1078 Dunes Retail-STAFF REPORTrtf
. ~4~~'1 .
~ 0{ ./p; (J.tdJdt
TO:
The Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
,
FROM:
Douglas R. Evans, C~~ Development Director
February 6, 2007 PH--
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Discussion Regarding Sphere of Influence East of City Limit
The purpose of this report is to provide the City Council with.an update on progress
regarding Fiscal Considerations, Memorandum of Understanding with the County,
. Professional Services, Strategic Plan, Vista Santa Rosa Task Force activity, Airport
Land Use Plan for Jacqueline Cochran Airport, and the South Valley Parkway.
City Council Subcommittee
Since the last report of January 16, 2006, the Subcommittee met on January 24,
2007. Meeting topics consisted of an update on the County fiscal discussions and
negotiations, Memorandum of Understanding for the SOl area, and the strategic
planning process.
Fiscal Considerations
City and RSG staff have prepared it series of fiscal models to evaluate three land
use density scenarios to evaluate fiscal consequences of potential annexations.
Fiscal models considered a range of residential land use density ranging from 1.5 to
3.0 dwelling units per acre. Additionally, several annexation options have also
been i modeled including three separate annexation areas (as directed by the City
Council) and a Monroe Street Corridor Plan (Attachments 1 and 2).
All fiscal models result in a significant shortfall of revenue, due to the amount of
residential land and the lack of commercial development opportunities. "Few
options:exist to generate additional revenue for the following "reasons:
. Location of the SOl relative to commercial development opportunities;
. Low property tax rate for areas outside of the Thermal Community
Redevelopment Area ("County RDA");
· The County RDA covers approximately 85% or 6435 acres resulting in
virtually no property tax. In the remaining area, the City would receive
$0.07 per $1.00 of property tax.
l
-
....!
· Cost of public safety services and broad geographic service area; and
· Lack of infrastructure and need to reconstruct virtually all existing roadways
(approximately 33 miles of Arterial and Secondary thoroughfares).
City staff is prepared to present Ii summary of the various fiscal models during the
City Council meeting. As noted above, the fiscal models are complex and are
based upon a number of assumptions.
At the direction of the City Council, staff has met with Riverside County staff on
two occasions to discuss opportunities to enter into a Pre-Annexation Agreement
with the County and the County RDA. City staff initially presented a proposal to
the County staff and requested County financial information in order to conduct a
detailed evaluation of potential annexations. Key elements of the City proposal are
as follows:
1 . La Quinta to receive a percentage of the post annexation tax increment
revenue. T~is revenue would need to be paid into' the La Quinta General
Fund.
2. La Quinta receives 100 percent of the County Fire and Library post
annexation tax increment'revenue credited towards fire and library services.
3. The County 'would commit housing fund tax increment revenue generated in
the annexation area towards affordable housing development that benefits
both the County and La Quinta affordable housing programs.
4. The County., and City mutually explore legislation that provides for both
Redevelopment Agencies to receive credit for affordable housing
development, with La Quinta's RDA receiving a one for one credit for units
that it funds..
5. The County will fund capital improvements in the annexation area with post
annexation tax increment revenue not pledged above.
6. The County Development Impact Fees generated in the Sphere of Influence
to allocated to the SOl/annexed lands.
7. Community Facilities District and/or Road and Bridge Assessments will have
a defined area of benefit to keep funds in the SOl/annexed areas.
8. Capital. Improvement Program records and financial statements to be made
available to the City .
9. The City drafts the agreement(s) that implements the above transactions.
On December 19, 2007, prior to a second meeting with City staff, Supervisor
Wilson sent a letter in response to the City's discussion proposal (Attachment 3).
The letter rejected virtually all of the City's funding options and stated that the
County would work with the City on a case by case ba.sis' 'on RDA capital facility
funding and on future affordable housing opportunities. Supervisor Wilson's letter
indicated the City could receive funding for fire and library services.
City staff scheduled a second meeting with County staff to/discuss this letter and
seek clarification on several points. County staff verified that the funding the city
was seeking would not be available to the City, including ,fire and library funds.
Based upon the Supervisor's letter and follow-up meeting, it is apparent the County
will not assist the City with any direct funding that would assist in providing public
services. Some funds could be available, on a case by (::ase basis, for capital
facilities. Additionally, some of the County revenue including, tax increment, fees,
and possible road and bridge assessment districts, will be utilized to fund
improvements outside of the SOl.
In conclusion, without County assistance, the amount of tax revenue that could be
generated in the SOl cannot support the cost of future City services and capital
expenditures. Reducing density, even dramatically, will reduce costs, but cannot
eliminate the imbalance in revenue versus expenditures.'
The only option available to attempt to reduce the fiscal gap is one-time pre-
annexation fees, community services districts (CSD), community facilities district
(CFD), or special taxes. For residential development the gap may be greater than
the market can accept. In addition, if the City Council directed staff to amend its
current policy prohibiting assessment districts for residential projects, this funding
mechanism has a number of limitations that will need to be evaluated. .
Based upon a very detailed fiscal evaluation, it is apparent that annexations will not
be revenue neutral or positive and the existing General Fund revenue would have to
be committed to this area if it were annexed.
Riverside County -'- Memorandum of Understanding
City and County staff have been working on a number of edits to the proposed
County/Cities MOU Regarding Land Use Planning Standards'and Entitlements. The
City initially submitted comments and County staff responded with concerns that
this document needed to cover all cities and that some of the City's concerns were
specific to the SOl. Staff responded by removing the areas'of cbncern noting that
the County suggested that specific concerns such as fiscal issues could be
addressed in a Pre-Annexation Agreement. Subsequently" the revised document
(Attachment 4) was provided by County staff. This revised document included a
series of additional edits by County staff. Since these are new items, (shown in
blue) City staff has asked if all County Departments have approved these revisions.
County staff indicated additional comments may be forthcoming. Based upon this,
City staff has asledthe County staff to submit all edits soafinal County proposal
can be reviewed and presented to Council.
. A key component is the added language on Page 2, Item II.A.1., by the County
staff as follows: ' "The term 'strict' will be limited density, height requirements."
Staff has expressed concern that this is too limiting and is inconsistent with initial
discussions with County staff. Additionally, on Page 4, Item II.B.2., the City
requested a 45-day review time; the County responded with a 30-day review time
with the option for an additional' 30-days under the project is a Board of
Supervisors "Fast Track" project. Staff suggested 45-days so the Planning'
Commission and City Council would have time to review the SOl development
proposals. County staff has indicated that it will have a revised draft. by next
week.
Professional Services - Budget Implications
Shortly after the L~FCO decision in late April, 2006, City Council directed staff to
proceed with analyzing the potential annexation of the approximately 8,000 acre
SOl. Since then,consultant services have been rendered to assist staff with a
fiscal analysis, strategic planning, and an infrastructure deficiency study. A
summary of each service and associated funding is provided below:
. Fiscal Analysis .~ RSG has been assisting staff with the financial analysis of
annexing the SOl. The analysis has been based upon using three land use
density scenarios. A substantial amount of work has been conducted on this
task. The budgeted amount for this service is $75,000. .
. Strategic Plan -' RBF was retained late last summer to assist city staff with the
development of a strategic plan for the SOl. Following completion of a
community workshop in early December, staff proposed extending the scope to
provide greater detail regarding land use, design and development standards for
the SOl. At the January 16, 2007 meeting, the City Council approved a
contract extension allowing for a process to complete these tasks.
Approximately 40% of the work items have been completed to date with a
second community workshop scheduled for February 3, 2007. Total budget
amount for this service is $120,825.
. Infrastructure Deficiency Study - Katz, Okitsu & Associates was retained in
December to prepare a deficiency study for the road infrastructure within the
SOL A kick-off meeting was recently conducted for this service with only a
limited amount of work conducted to date. Total budget. amount for this
contract is $80,330.
In addition to these three services, an additional work item to establish a plan of
services for LAFCO has also been identified and a budget amount of $100,000
established. This work item has yet to commence.
Strategic Plan- SOl Workshop
A second Community Workshop has been scheduled for ,$aturday, February 3,
2007 from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. at the La Quinta Senior Center. The purpose of
this all day workshop is to provide opportunity for all parties interested in the future
of the SOl to give their input on the future land use, design and development
standards for the SOl area. The workshop agenda includes group presentation
followed by two small group breakout sessions that will focus upon design and
map details. The land use design and development approach for the SOl will be
form based, which relies heavily upon design standards supported by illustrations.
A copy of the meeting agenda is attached (Attachment 5). Staff will provide an
update at the City Council meeting.
Draft County VSR Land Use Plan - VSR Task Force
County staff continues to work with the VSR Task Force members in reviewing the
Draft Land Use Plan for the entire VSR area. Just prior to :the ~anuary 25, 2007
Task Force meeting, County staff provided Task Force members with a revised land
use concept map and specific text further explaining the land use concept, policies
(including planning areas), transitions and buffers, as well as open space and
community amenities. Copies of the map and text are attached (Attachment 6).
Discussion during the meeting focused upon differences between the proposed
concept map and the County's existing land use policy, transitional buffers, and
density transfers. Several members expressed their strong desire to maintain the
current overlay boundaries "as is" and, to see those areas outside the overlay
boundary maintain. a low-density similar to the current density of one unit to five
acres. Concern was also raised with regards to the potential for density increases
or bonuses. Other members questioned the very low-density residential
designation proposed north of Avenue 62 west of the proposed lifestyle corridor.
Task Force members asked County staff to conduct a residential unit and
commercial square footage count for the proposed concept map. Task Force
members also expressed concern with the road infrastructure in VSR; more
specifically regarding design and potential impact from the South Valley Parkway
development proposal. The February 1, 2007 Task Force meeting is devoted to the
South Valley Parkway with emphasis upon the traffic modeling, proposed
transportation infrastructure improvements and funding for the VSR area. The
Task Force draft comments on this planning effort are attached. (Attachment 7).
Airport Land Use Commission - Jacqueline Cochran Airport .'
City staff attended a workshop conducted by the Riverside County Airport Land
use Commission (ALUC) on January 24, 2007. The workshop discussed the
Commission's role in land use decision making process. County staff and ALUC
Commission Chair Housman gave a brief overview of their role in land use policy,
their need to review plans, and their concerns with land uses' around airports.
ALUC staff explained the six airport influence area zones surrounding the airports.
Specific to Jacqueline Cochran Airport and the City's SOl; Zone D influences the
eastern segment of the SOl southwest of the Airport Boule'(ard and Harrison Street
intersection. Zone Drestricts residential densities to over 5 + units per acre or one
unit per five acres. . Commercial density is also constrained; limiting the number of
people per acre to. not exceed 10b. In addition, buildings and uses that would
accommodate large assemblies (schools, hospitals, sports arenas, etc.) are either
prohibited' or discouraged. The development standards for Zone D will impact
future land use in this segment of the SOl and will be incorporated into the
strategic planning effort currently underway.
South Valley Parkway and Land Use Plan
City staff continues to monitor the progression of the South Valley Parkway
development proposal. The City staff is drafting a letter commen;ting on the South
Valley Parkway Traffic Study Preliminary Draft Report expressing concern with the
lack of detailed information necessary to fully assess the potential impact of the
proposed development and the county's pr oposed Phasing Plan.
City staff has received the information made available to the South Valley Parkway
meeting group and is currently in the process of reviewing the material. To date,
the material indudes transportation, parkway design, and agriculture conversion.
City staff has heard that a community phasing and transportation funding program
is tentatively scheduled for presentation to the Riverside County Planning
Commission in March and the Board of Supervisors in April, The City Council may
want to invite Couhty and landowner representatives to make a presentation at an
upcoming Study Session. .
Attachments:
1 . Annexation Option A - Council direction
2. Annexation Option B - Monroe Street Corridor Plan
3. Supervisor Wilson's I etter dated December 18, 2006
4. Revised MOU
5. SOl Work~hop Agenda .
6. County's Revis ed Land Use Concept.fv1ap
7. Task Force draft comments on Traffic Study