1987 08 25 PCAGENDA
V r >
F,
CF'y OF'll'�t'v
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado,
La Quinta, California
August 25, 1987 - 7:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
Flag Salute:
II. ROLL CALL
A. ELECTION OF NEW CHAIRMAN AND VICE CHAIRMAN
III.HEARINGS
A. CONTINUED
PUBLIC: HEARING: CHANGE OF ZONE 87-025, VARIANCE 87-004,
AND PLOT PLAN 87-381
***PLEASE BRING MAPS DISTRIBUTED FOR
JULY 14, 1987 MEETING***
APPLICANT: BENJAMIN URMSTON/WARREN & DIANE JOHNSON
LOCATION: THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF AVENIDA
BERMUDAS AND CALLE CADIZ
PROJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1*++ TO C.P.S.;
PLOT PLAN REVIEW TO CONSTRUCT A
TWO-STORY OFFICE BUILDING ON .23 ACRES;
AND A PARKING SPACE/WALL BUFFER VARIANCE
1. Staff Report
2. :Public Comment
3. Commission Discussion
4. Hearing Closed
5. Motion for Commission Action
B. PUBLIC HEARING: CHANGE OF ZONE 87-026
APPLICANT: ANNA HASSELL REPRESENTING LA QUINTA
DUNES, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
MR/AGENDA.825
LOCATION: THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DUNE PALMS ROAD
AND WESTWARD HO
PROJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1 (ONE -FAMILY
DWELLING) TO R-3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL)
1. Staff Report
2. Public Comment
3. Commission Discussion
4. Hearing Closed
5. Motion for Commission Action
C. PUBLIC HEARING: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 86-014 -
MILES AVENUE
APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA
LOCATION: MILES AVENUE BETWEEN WASHINGTON STREET
AND JEFFERSON STREET
PROJECT: AMEND THE GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION
ELEMENT TO REDESIGNATE MILES AVENUE FROM
A SECONDARY TO A PRIMARY ARTERIAL
1. Staff Report
2. Public Comment
3. Commission Discussion
4. Hearing Closed
5. Motion for Commission Action
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the: time set aside for citizens to address the Planning
Commission on matters relating to City planning and zoning which
are not Public Hearing items.
Persons wishing to address the Planning Commission should use the
form provided. Please complete one form for each item you intend
to address and submit the form to the Planning Secretary prior to
the beginning of the meeting. Your name will be called at the
appropriate: time.
When addressing the Planning Commission, please state your name
and address:. The proceedings of the Planning Commission meeting
are recorded on tape and comments of each person shall be limited.
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
Minutes of the regular Planning Commission meeting of July 14,
1987.
MR/AGENDA.825
VI. BUSINESS
A. Item: Second extension of time for Tentative Tract
No. 20016
Applicant: Mr. & Mrs. Harold Hirsch, owners
Location: Northwest corner of Miles Avenue and Dune
Palms Road
Project: Planned residential subdivision of 130 units
over 30.3 acres, originally approved by City
Council on July 18, 1984; first extension
granted July 1, 1986 by Council.
1. Staff Report
2. Commission Discussion
3. Commission Action
B. Item: Exterior remodel - Plot Plan 87-383
Applicant: Rick Johnson Construction, owner
Location: 77-836 Avenida Montezuma
Project: Enclose the existing covered walkway and use
area as an enclosed public corridor.
1. Staff Report
2. Commission Discussion
3. Commission Action
C. Commission Agenda Items: Identification of future
discussion items
VII.OTHER
Discussion Items:
A. Appointment of Highway 111 Specific Plan Subcommittee
VIII. ADJOURNMENT
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
*** NO STUDY SESSION ON AUGUST 24, 1987 ***
MR/AGENDA.825
11
I09T
FROM:
SUBJECT:
DATE:
® BACKGROUND
11
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF LA QUINTA
THE HONORABLE CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING
COMMISSION
THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLOT PLAN 87-381 AND VARIANCE 87-004 - BENJAMIN URMSTON
AND WARREN JOHNSON
AUGUST 25, 1987
The above -referenced items were continued on July 14, 1987, pending a
response from the City Attorney. The City Attorney was informed of
the following Commission consensus:
1. The Planning Commission did not want to grant a special privilege
or set a precedence; and
2. The Commission is considering requiring a cash mitigation payment
equal to the actual cost of providing the delinquent parking
spaces plus 20 percent for inflation, and/or requiring an
agreement to participate in a future assessment district or other
City -sponsored arrangement to provide parking.
The Attorney's response affirms the City's authority to implement
both options.
ANALYSIS
1. The number of parking spaces required for the Applicant's
development is 13; of this number, the Applicant proposes to
provide nine on -site and the other four off -site, on a temporary
MR/MEMOPC.006
E
basis. The potential revision to traffic movement in the alley
will require the reduction of one on -site parking space.
Therefore, the project is five parking spaces short, which equals
a reduction of 38 percent.
2. An outright approval of the variance could be construed as
granting a special privilege to the property owner.
3. A parking district, if it existed before the request, could have
provided relief to the property owner. However, there is no
guarantee that a district will be created in the future for this
area.
4. The Applicant proposes to develop eight parking spaces along the
north side of the alley and lease four. These four parking
spaces are only temporary.
5. Because of the temporary nature of the proposed off -site parking
spaces and the uncertainty of a parking district being created in
the area of the Applicant's property, up -front mitigation payment
appears to be the best solution.
6. If a parking district were presently in place, it would more than
likely be set up to allow a prospective developer to "buy into
the district:" by means of a cash payment towards the creation of
® public parking improvements.
Attached is a draft agreement permitting the Applicant to make
mitigation payments for parking spaces, as one option for Commission
review. The Commission may also choose to continue the request and
direct the Applicant to balance building floor area with available
onsite parking.
n
Adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-008 granting Variance No.
87-004, and approve by Minute Motion Plot Plan No. 87-381, subject to
attached conditions; and that a Negative Declaration be filed in
conjunction with this project.
attachments: Mitigation Agreement
Revised Variance Conditions
Planning Commission Resolution Granting Variance
Plot Plan Conditions
MR/MEMOPC.006
E
RECORDING REQUESTED BY
And When Recorded Mail to:
Name Murrel Crump, Director
City of La Quinta
Planning & Development
Department
Street P. O. Box 1504
City La Quinta, CA 92253
Space above this line for Recorders
COVENANT TO PROVIDE PARKING OR PAYMENT IN LIEU THEREOF
This covenant and agreement is made this day of ,
1987, between Phineas C. Danner and Betty J. Danner, joint tenants
and J. L. Johnston, hereafter referred to as PROPERTY OWNER and the
City of La Quinta., a municipal corporation, hereafter referred to as
CITY.
RECITALS
The agreement is based upon the following facts:
WHEREAS, PROPERTY OWNER is the owner of real property in the
City of La Quinta., County of Riverside, State of California, more
particularly described as follows:
Lot 1 in Block 7 of the Desert Club Tract, Unit No. 1, as shown
by map on file in Book 19, Page 75 of maps, records of Riverside
County, California, the real property is more commonly known as
78-010 Calle Cadiz, La Quinta, California.
WHEREAS, PROPERTY OWNER desires to construct a commercial
building of approximately 3,250 square footage on said property; and
WHEREAS, PROPERTY OWNER and CITY agree that pursuant to the
provisions of the zoning ordinance of the City as contained in the
Municipal Code of`. the City of La Quinta, the number of required
parking spaces for said building is 13 parking spaces and PROPERTY
OWNER is unable to provide all of said required spaces on the above
mentioned real property; and
WHEREAS, Section 9.160.020 of the Municipal Code of the City of
La Quinta providers that parking spaces may be located on a parcel
across an alley if the nearest boundary of the parking facility is
not more than 300 feet from the use it is to serve and the parcel is
in a commercial zone; and
WHEREAS, PROPERTY OWNER may desire to utilize the provisions of
said parking provisions found in Section 9.160.020 of the Municipal
Code of the City of La Quinta; and
WHEREAS, PROPERTY OWNER is unable to adequately guarantee to the
satisfaction of CITY that the proposed off -site parking will
continue indefinitely into the future and for the life of the
proposed use of said commercial building to be constructed by the
PROPERTY OWNER; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the value
of one parking space constructed to City standards to be $3,375.00;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission by adopting Resolution No.
87-008, has granted a 5 space parking variance to the PROPERTY OWNER
subject to conditions.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed between the parties as follows:
1. The primary purpose of this agreement is to assure that
PROPERTY OWNER either (a) continuously provides 13 parking spaces,
either on site or by a combination of on -site and off -site on a
commercial parcel. located across an alley provided the nearest
boundary of the parking area is not more than 300 feet from the
subject property for the entire period of life of use of the said
proposed commercial building, or (b) makes "in lieu" payment(s) to
the CITY in the event and to the extent PROPERTY OWNER is unable to
provide said required number of parking spaces.
2. PROPERTY OWNER covenants and agrees to continuously provide
and maintain a total of 5 off -site parking spaces within 300 feet
of the real property herein described which parking spaces shall be
utilized for the exclusive use of patrons, customers, and employees
of the commercial. occupants of said real property; said requirement
to provide off -site parking shall continue for the useful life of
the building to be erected upon said real property or for so long as
said building is utilized for commercial purposes, whichever period
is longer, except: as provided in paragraph 3 below.
3. In the event PROPERTY OWNER is unable to continuously
provide and maintain a total of 5 off -site parking spaces within
300 feet of the real property herein described, then and in that
event, PROPERTY OWNER shall make in lieu payment(s) to CITY in
accordance with the above noted provisions to the extent PROPERTY
OWNER is unable to provide said required off -site parking spaces.
4. It is further understood that in the event of a failure to
pay the parking "in lieu" fee as identified, the CITY at its option
will;
AGRMTDAN.JOH
Page 2
(a) establish a lien against said property which may be
foreclosed by the CITY in the same manner as a trust deed
foreclosure, or
(b) the CITY will add to the real property tax bill for
said real property the "in lieu" fee outstanding to be
collected for the next fiscal year.
5. PROPERTY OWNER agrees that this covenant and agreement
pertains to and runs with the real property described in the above
recitals and that the provisions herein shall bind the successors in
interest of PROPERTY OWNER including, all future owners,
encumbrancers, successors, heirs and assigns and shall remain in
effect until released by a written document authorized by the City
Council of CITY.
6. (a) If any provision of this covenant and agreement is
adjudged invalid, the remaining provisions of it are not affected.
(b) This writing contains a full, final and exclusive
statement of the covenant and agreement of the parties.
(c) If there is more than one signer of this covenant and
agreement as PROPERTY OWNER, their obligations are joint and several.
(d) PROPERTY OWNER agrees that if legal action by the CITY
is necessary to enforce any provision of this covenant and agreement,
PROPERTY OWNER will pay the CITY a reasonable sum as attorney's fees
and court costs for the prosecution of said legal action.
CITY OF LA QUINTA PROPERTY OWNER
CITY MANAGER
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
AGRMTDAN.JOH
Page 3
11
11
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE )
On before me, the undersigned, a Notary
Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared
known to me to be the persons whose names are subscribed to the
within instrument and acknowledged that they executed the same.
Notary Public in and for said
County and State
AGRMTDAN.JOH
Page 4
I
Ea
CONDITIONS
VAR 87-004
AUGUST 25,
OF APPROVAL (DRAFT/
iLT-E
EXHIBIT A
Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the Property Owner
must enter into an agreement to provide: a) 13 permanent parking
spaces as required by the La Quinta Municipal Code; or, b) pay a
cash mitigation payment in the amount of $3,375/space for the
construction of up to five permanent paved parking spaces. A
payment schedule may be established, provided the period does not
exceed two years.
The money collected may be released to a City -created parking
district, or, the money collected may be used in the furtherance
of general parking improvements in the Village Commercial area,
at the option of the City; and, further, any financial obligation
issued against said property will be reduced accordingly to the
amount of mitigation money paid at the time.
2. This Variance approval must be used within one year after the
date of approval by the La Quinta Planning Commission unless
approved for an extension, as provided in the La Quinta Municipal
Code. No extension shall be granted unless Plot Plan 87-381 is
also extended. The term "use" shall mean the beginning of
substantial construction of the office building, which
construction must thereafter be diligently pursued to completion.
3. Variance Case No. 87-004 shall not be effective until and unless
CZ 87-025 and Plot Plan 87-381 are approved.
4. The existing wall and oleanders along the eastern property line
shall remain until the adjacent property to the east is rezoned
to commercial.
5. Any offsite parking contemplated is satisfaction of Condition
1, above, shall secure City approval through the plot plan review
process.
IL
MR/CONAPRVL.005 1
11
11
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 87-008
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS AND
GRANTING A VARIANCE FROM PARKING AND PERIMETER WALL
REQUIREMENTS
CASE NO. VAR 87-004
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 14th day of July, 1987, and the 25th day of
August, 1987, hold duly -noticed Public Hearings to consider the
request of Benjamin Urmston/Warren & Diane Johnson for a variance to
Section 9.160.04:0 (L) La Quinta Municipal Code (LQMC), permit 9
permanent on -site parking spaces instead of 13 , and Section
9.160.030 (E) LQMC, requesting relief from requirements regarding a
perimeter wall, for property generally located at the northeast
corner of Calle Cadiz and Avenida Bermudas, more particularly
described as:
Lot 1 Block 7 of Desert Club Tract, Unit #1,
in M.B.19, p.75 of Maps.
WHEREAS, said variance request has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental
40 Quality Act of 1.970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213,
adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that
the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has
determined that the proposed variance will not have a significant
effect on the environment; and
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard,
said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to
justify the granting of said variance:
The strict application of the subject parking requirements
to the subject property will deprive it of privileges
enjoyed by other similarly zoned property in the area, since
the purpose and intent of the parking requirements may be
reasonably attained by special conditions of approval and by
the wall in its existing configuration.
2. Approval of the variance as conditioned will not constitute
the granting of a special privilege inconsistent with
limitations on other similarly zoned property in the area.
3. The circumstances of a one-way alley will require future
angle parking which will eliminate one additional on -site
parking space. Therefore, the approval is to permit eight
permanent on -site parking spaces instead of the required 13
parking spaces.
MR/RESODRFT.008
`}
h
U
4. The conditions of approval will assure that the purpose and
intent of the parking requirements are satisfied without
adversely affecting adjacent parcels.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and
constitute the findings of the Commission in this case;
2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental
Assessment No: 87-072, which indicated that approval of the
variance would not constitute a significant impact on the
environment.
3. That it. does hereby grant said Variance Case No. VAR-004 for
the reasons set forth and subject to the conditions labeled
Exhibit. A, attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this day of 1987,
by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Planning Director
Chairman
MR/RESODRFT.008
® 0
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL (PROPOSED)
PLOT PLAN NO. 87-381
BENJAMIN URMSTON, APPLICANT
AUGUST 25, 1987
GENERAL
1. The development of the project site shall comply in concept with
all approved. exhibits as contained in the Planning Department's
file for Plot Plan No. 87-381 and the following conditions, which
conditions shall take precedence in the event of any conflict
with these exhibits.
2. Plot Plan No. 87-381 shall comply with Conditions of Approval for
Variance Case No. 87-004, where said conditions apply.
3. This approval shall be used within one (1) year after the date of
approval by the Planning Commission unless approved for an
extension, as provided in the La Quinta Municipal Code;
otherwise, it shall become null and void and of no effect
whatsoever. The term "use" shall mean the beginning of
substantial construction of the office building, which
construction must thereafter be diligently pursued to completion.
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any
use contemplated by this approval, the Applicant shall first
obtain permits and/or clearances from the following agencies:
0 City Engineer
e City Fire Marshal
o City Planning and Development Department, Planning
Division
s Riverside County Environmental Health Department
o Coachella Valley Water District
o Imperial Irrigation District
Evidence of said permits or clearances from the above -mentioned
agencies shall be presented to the Building Division at the time
of the application for a building permit for the use contemplated
herewith.
5. This plot plan approval shall not take effect and no building
permits shall be issued hereunder until and unless Change of Zone
No. 87-025 and Variance Case No. 87-004 are approved and become
effective. This plot plan approval shall be subject to all of
the terms and conditions of Variance Case No. 87-004, as if
herein set forth.
LAND USE AND BUILDING DESIGN
6. All roof -mounted equipment shall be adequately screened by the
roof structure, or other approved method.
MR/CONAPRVL.011 1
0
STREETS, CIRCULATION, PARKING AND GRADING
7. The Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the
City Engineer. These conditions contemplate new development
standards, which will be established in the future with the
Village at La Quinta Specific Plan.
a. The Applicant shall dedicate, via irrevocable offer of
dedication per the current City standards, all necessary
public street and utility easements as required by the City
Engineer, including a 44' half -street for Avenida Bermudas,
and 30' half -street width for Calle Cadiz. These
dedications will not be accepted/rejected or modified until
the Village at La Quinta Specific Plan is adopted.
b. The Applicant shall construct street improvements for
one-half street width for Avenida Bermudas, Calle Cadiz, and
the full width alley, including any median island
reconfiguration, to the requirements of the City Engineer
and the La Quinta Municipal Code. Said construction to be
done upon resolution of the Village at La Quinta Specific
Plan development standards.
C. Drainage disposal facilities shall be provided as required
by the City Engineer.
d. The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering a
City-wide Landscape and Lighting District, and agrees to be
included in the District. Any assessments will be done on a
benefit: basis as required by law.
8. Existing walls or other structures and permanent improvements
located within the dedicated street rights -of -way, as required by
this approval, shall be removed at the Applicant's expense at
such time as public street improvements are required.
9. The following modifications shall be made to the parking layout:
a. The alley parking areas shall be designed to accommodate a
future 60-degree angle design, oriented to east -to -west
travel. Interim 90-degree striping and paving is acceptable
until :such time as the alley is closed to two-way traffic.
An appropriate performance guarantee, acceptable to the
City, shall be required to assure future conversion of the
parking area.
b. Design of the parking layout shall substantially conform
with these conditions and as illustrated in Attachment #2 of
the Staff Report for Plot Plan No. 87-381.
MR/CONAPRVL.011 2
ift 10. The required handicap space shall be relocated to space #9, as
shown on Attachment #2. Space #1 shall be moved east to allow
five feet between the dedicated right-of-way line and space #1,
and the alley access to spaces 7 - 9 shall be increased to 24
feet.
11. The sidewalk: connections to the existing public right-of-way are
to be deleted. They may be submitted for review with street
improvement plans upon completion of the Village at La Quinta
Specific Plan.
11
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
12. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the Coachella
Valley Water District. When there are identified conflicts, the
City will withhold the issuance of any building permit until
arrangements; have been made with the District for the relocation
of these facilities.
13. Location and design of any interim septic system shall be subject
to the standards and requirements of the Riverside County Health
Department. The system shall be designed to allow ultimate
hookup to permanent sewer lines.
14. Trash enclosure shall be gated and enclosed by a six -foot -high
wall of the same construction and color as the commercial
building. Location and construction of the enclosure shall
conform to requirements of Palm Desert Disposal Company and the
Planning and Development Department.
15. Prior to the: issuance of building permits, the revised parking
and landscape plans must be submitted to the Planning Commission
for review and approval. At a minimum, the landscape plan shall
enhance the existing landscape, provide canopy shade trees and
conform with the Village at La Quinta Specific Plan.
MISCELLANEOUS
16. Prior to submission of any plans for building permit issuance,
the Applicant shall secure written approval of the landscaping
plan from the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner's Office
relative to the appropriate inspection for pest control. At a
minimum, the plans shall provide the contractor's name, address,
and phone number, and the place of origin of all planting
materials.
17. The approved landscaping and improvements shall be installed
prior to the: issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The
landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and viable condition
for the life of the project.
MR/CONAPRVL.011 3
ri-'9 8= 8= ca
01"Naft2acum,
CASE MAP
CASE No. CZ 87-025
VAR 87-004
PP 87-381
NTS
NORTH
SCALE: NTS
CALLE EST -ADO
rKor Line
lu
ALLEY
R- I (c V)
qu, r
CALLE CADIZ r"= 30,
ATTACHMENT * 1 :
iWsLEjZT -rotLTOE PdrLPo5E OF LOCATING-PARK(N(r
4 9?ACES (N05._101���2,13,-To 8E 1J9E17 As Aster or
(LEQU12E0 OFF�GE PARrc�NG,
0
0
Z
Y
Q
a
w
k
\br
Q
N
V -
J W
r �
N
8
I g
&ALO: 6". I v"
PR4300 LlWt6 Iifo.q'1 ,
44
RELOCATED HANDICAPPED PARKING
I11:I!
11
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DATE: AUGUST 25, 1987
PUBLIC HEARING: CHANGE OF ZONE 87-026
APPLICANT: ANNA HASSELL, REPRESENTING LA QUINTA DUNES, A
CALIFORNIA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
LOCATION: THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF DUNE PALMS ROAD AND
WESTWARD HO
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: CHANGE OF ZONE FROM R-1 (ONE -FAMILY DWELLING)
TO R-3 (GENERAL RESIDENTIAL)
GENERAL PLAN LANE USE
DESIGNATION: HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (8-16 D.U./AC.)
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: AN ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN PREPARED
AS REQUIRED BY THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT. THE INITIAL STUDY EVALUATION
HAS DETERMINED THAT THE CHANGE OF ZONE WILL
NOT PRESENT A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT.
ALSO, THE PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH THE
DESIGNATION OF THIS AREA AS NOTED ON THE
GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP. THE GENERAL
IMPACTS OF THE LAND USE CHANGE WERE ADDRESSED
IN THE MASTER ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WHICH
WAS ADOPTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE GENERAL
PLAN.
A NEGATIVE DECLARATION HAS BEEN PREPARED.
BACKGROUND:
In 1984, a proposed Tentative Tract, No. 19987, which created a
162-unit, single-family, planned -residential development, was
approved by the City Council on June 5, 1984. The approval has
subsequently expired.
In 1985, the: property was designated High Density Residential
(8-16 d.u./ac.) with the adoption of the General Plan.
The subject application, therefore, is a proposal to make the
property zoning consistent with the General Plan. The R-3 zoning
MR/STAFFRPT.010
1
A
is the only district inherited from the County (by City adoption
of the Count.y's Land Use Ordinance) which is available to
implement the General Plan designation.
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT:
The redesignation of the site to R-3 will permit the Applicant to
proceed with, development of the property. A plot plan
application has been submitted requesting approval to construct
472 apartment units. The formal plot plan review will be
conducted at. a Director's Hearing, which will be held after the
effective date of the Change of Zone.
Included with this report are reduced copies of the conceptual
development plan for Commission information.
ANALYSIS:
1. The proposed change from R-1 to R-3 will bring the
Applicant's property into conformance with the General Plan
Land Use Map designation of High Density Residential.
2. The R-3 zoning designation is the most appropriate zone
concurrently available for the High Density Land Use
designation.
3. The environmental impacts have been addressed by the Master
Environmental Report adopted for the General Plan and the
current: environmental review conducted.
4. Development of the site can be accomplished in conformance
with the standards of the La Quinta Municipal Code.
5. Property development will be reviewed in depth at a
Director's Hearing to be conducted after the effective date
of the Change of Zone.
RECOMMENDATION:
By adoption of the attached Planning Commission Resolution No.
87-013, recommend to the City Council approval of Change of Zone
No. 87-026; and, that a Negative Declaration be filed in �(
conjunction with the Change of Zone.
Vk /
attachments: Resolution and Findings CZ 87-026
Conceptual Development Plan
MR/STAFFRPT.010 2
11
Cl u
u
�IdEi.
n _sue:►
m.
10
t�
.igU
4
qowA Dulz`�5
Z:Z; ccAWj .917G
w
11
u',fG
n n
OIX n6c�YLIF�6
OJn� MIMo51�a16
o W�II-�T°tl� ft�
�l.Ub{1t� �-ID�}IYLLb-
G�hl� i�jwIt lol rot,
MI6 Pf�1�.I�onEi}ll�
I-�1coP�Yu.uM ��
�t1�{.Lib G61-1�1�6
h!-I�Vib GL�Y�(.d�lnlf
�►�PfIYT�G P1-6h�Tlr�i�
N�
� u u
�`�IU6}� WIU.ok1 24" I�X
M ( 2W ILoX
n�� PALM I2' Tr�l�l�
"I'mclY %KAt-l-
Jsr- �Pk
HW I rL p6LM
12o" xx
5�¢L.
11
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 87-013
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF CHANGE OF ZONE
FROM R-1 (ONE -FAMILY DWELLING) TO R-3 (GENERAL
RESIDENTIAL)
CASE NO. CZ-87-026
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 25th day of August, 1987, hold a duly -noticed
Public Hearing to consider the request of Anna M. Hassell,
representing La Quinta Dunes, a California limited partnership, for a
Change of Zone from R-1 (One -Family Dwelling) to R-3 (General
Residential) for a 32.27-acre site located in the southwest corner of
Dune Palms Road and Westward Ho, more particularly described as
follows:
A portion of the east half of the northwest quarter
of Section 29, TSS, R7W, S.B.B.M. (Assessor's Parcel
Numbers 617-080-007 and 617-080-009).
WHEREAS, said Change of Zone request has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1.970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213,
adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that
the Planning Director has conducted an initial study and has
determined that the proposed Change of Zone will not have a
significant effect on the environment; and,
WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard,
said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to
justify the approval of said Change of Zone:
1. The proposed Change of Zone to R-3 (General Residential) is
consistent with the goals and policies of the La Quinta General
Plan.
2. The R-3 (General Residential) zoning is consistent with the
existing General Plan land use designation of High Density
Residential (8-16 dwelling units/acre).
3. Approval of this Change of Zone will not result in a significant
adverse impact on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
18 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute
the findings of the Commission in this case;
MR/RESODRFT.013
11
2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental
Assessment No. 87-075, indicating that the proposed Change of
Zone will not result in any significant environmental impacts;
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the
above -described Change of Zone request for the reasons set forth
in the Resolution, and as illustrated in the map labeled Exhibit
A, attached. hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 25th day of August, 1987, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
MR/RESODRFT.013
iE
E
�WE.Sr/y,D.QD y0 D.P/l/E �46�'�'QVE,)
l9
90
h,
0
RANGE OF ZONE CASE +87-026
EXHIBIT "A"
9 9 � 2655.05
SEc, 29�Tss�
20 /327.53� •n /_32%S20 �
'¢•7E S.B,B,�M,
N SIN
�
ti
S'is�
69
C fiery
S'y/ EFO CY 99�
9GF 2 FCOQ O 3.To
oFO O �, �9rEP
/ _ q0[7
SCALE
� \
ril
APPLICANT: Anna Hassel, La Quinta Dunes, a California Limited Partnership
r11
n
U
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
DATE: AUGUST 25, 1987
APPLICANT: CITY INITIATED
PROJECT: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 86-014;
AMENDMENT TO THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN
CIRCULATION PLAN TO UPGRADE MILES AVENUE FROM
A SECONDARY ARTERIAL TO A PRIMARY ARTERIAL.
PROJECT LOCATION: MILES AVENUE ALIGNMENT BETWEEN JEFFERSON
STREET AND WASHINGTON STREET.
BACKGROUND:
On July 15, 1986, City Council unanimously approved Lewis Homes Tract
No. 21433, which. also included establishing Miles Avenue as a Primary
Arterial with a 100-foot width. This street upgrade decision was the
result of a traffic study prepared June 30, 1986 for the North La
Quinta area which incorporated a build -out scenario justifying
increased capacity on Miles Avenue (refer to Exhibit "D:, original
traffic study). This General Plan Amendment request therefore
formalizes the direction of City Council.
General Plan Amendment No. 86-014 was also initiated to review all
major streets in the North La Quinta area relative to adequacy of
their current General Plan circulation classifications. Referring to
Policy No. 7.5.E of the General Plan Infrastructure Element, it is
noted that a study should be undertaken to determine whether Dune
Palms Road and/or Adams Street should be reclassified. At the
direction of the Planning Commission, the City contracted with BSI
Consultants to prepare an updated study of the North la Quinta area,
incorporating two other General Plan Amendment cases: J.C.C.
Enterprises - No. 86-012, and C.W. Meisterlin - No. 86-016 (refer to
Exhibit "C", North La Quinta Traffic Study, dated March 31, 1987).
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS:
Environmental Assessment No. 86-064 was prepared pursuant to the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The
assessment indicated that the project could not have a significant
effect on the environment. Based upon the traffic study completed
for the North La Quinta area, the proposed upgrade to Miles Avenue
would provide adequate circulation capacity at the density ranges
provided in the General Plan Land Use Map at build -out.
MR/STAFFRPT.011
ANALYSIS:
In essence, the most recent traffic study concludes that, excepting
for Miles Avenue, all other North La Quinta area streets are adequate
for the projected build -out capacity, including Dune Palms Road,
Westward Ho Drive, and Adams Street. This study also concludes that
Miles Avenue, upgraded to a Primary Arterial would provide for
adequate circulation capacity given the broad spectrum of density
scenarios offered in the General Plan Land Use Map. However, it also
indicated that, with the inclusion of an "Intensive Transportation
System Management" program for Miles Avenue, under normal and
mid -range density build -out forecasts, Miles Avenue could be
maintained as a Secondary Arterial. Intensive Transportation Systems
Management is a method of enhancing traffic capacity including raised
median islands with restricted left turn movements, spot widening
intersections, and separate bicycle lanes (described in more detail
on page 4 of the March 31, 1987 traffic study). Therefore, the study
still leaves a question of what technically is an appropriate
circulation classification for Miles Avenue. There are obvious
trade-offs to providing for the local community circulation needs and
the regional needs of the Eastern Coachella Valley.
In a regional context (that of viewing Miles Avenue as a bypass to
Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive) the upgrade would provide for
adequate localize circulation at an extreme build -out scenario for La
Quinta as well as potentially reduce traffic congestion on Highway
111 and Fred Waring Drive. Since a major portion of the City's
medium and high density land use designations are within the North La
40 Quinta area, an argument may be made that there will be a greater
tendency to develop moderate income housing such as apartments and
townhouses at the extreme density ranges (density bonus
considerations). In this case, an upgrade to Miles Avenue may be
necessary to provide for adequate traffic capacity.
The City of Indio designates Miles Avenue east of Jefferson Street
as a planned Arterial with 110 feet of ultimate right-of-way. This
expanded version of Miles Avenue, according to the City of Indio
Public Works Department, should adequately accommodate high volumes
of traffic generated from projects such as the "Royal Dunes Resort".
(1,980 condos on 240 acres on the east side of Jefferson Street
between Miles Avenue and Fred Waring Drive.)
In contrast, it is apparent that Miles Avenue does not play a
significant role in the regional circulation system in the Valley as
it is not discussed in the CVATS (Southern California Association of
Governments Coachella Valley Area Transportation Study, March,
1987). Lending credence to this position are Indian Wells tentative
plans to eventually close Miles Avenue to through traffic (discussion
with Paul Kaneko, Indian Wells Planning Director, June 30, 1987).
This would limit: Miles Avenue to function as an effective regional
bypass to Highway 111 through La Quinta. However, the recently
adopted Indian Wells General Plan maintains Miles Avenue through to
Highway 111 as a Collector (50-foot right-of-way).
MR/STAFFRPT.011 2
CIRCULATION DESIGNATION SCENARIOS:
Given the wide range of options for the consideration of this General
Plan Amendment, the following scenarios are offered:
SCENARIO #1:
Description: Maintain Miles Avenue as a Secondary Arterial (88
feet of right-of-way.
Action: Decline to recommend the proposed General Plan
Amendment No. 86-014.
Consequences: Limit Miles Avenue as a local circulation street
and implement an "Intensive Transportation System Management
Program" for the development of Miles Avenue to provide for
adequate circulation capacity.
Comment: City should develop a policy relative to the
development of Miles Avenue which will incorporate an "Intensive
Transportation System Management Program".
SCENARIO #2:
Description: Upgrade Miles Avenue to a Primary Arterial and
limit expansion to 100 feet of right-of-way.
Action: Approve the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 86-014
at the reduced design size.
Consequence;: Provision of additional right-of-way width for
additional traffic capacity while allowing for a reduced design
scale. The smaller scale will, to a certain degree, give the
effect of a community size street.
Comments: Although reduced in size, the smaller scale Primary
Arterial will provide for greater flexibility in terms of land
use intensifications and/or density bonuses within the North La
Quinta area. This scenario was originally directed by the City
Council on July 15, 1986. No additional right-of-way will have
to be acquired.
SCENARIO #3:
Description: Upgrade Miles Avenue to a Primary Arterial (110
feet of right-of-way).
Action: Approve the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 86-014
at the maximum 110-foot right-of-way limit.
Consequences: Expansion will allow for future projected
traffic levels taking into account possible land -use
intensifications and/or density bonuses within the North La
Quinta area.
MR/STAFFRPT.011 3
Comments: This action will also allow Miles Avenue to act as a
regional bypass to Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive and provide
a compatible design width with the City of Indio. Additional
right-of-waywill have to be acquired.
It can generally be projected, based on economics and increasing land
values, that future residential development will occur at the higher
end of the density ranges. Therefore, the appropriate approach to
take in evaluating circulation capacities in the North La Quinta area
is to provide a comfortable margin of roadway capacity. The original
traffic study for General Plan Amendment No. 86-012 recommends that
Miles Avenue should be upgraded to a Primary Arterial, to accommodate
forecasted cumulative traffic generation in the area.
The updated traffic report is somewhat limited in that it only
includes land -use scenarios related to General Plan Amendment Nos.
86-012 and 86-01.6 and possibly would have been more comprehensive if
it had incorporated cumulative projected traffic levels as originally
done in the June 30, 1986 report. In light of the fact that Miles
Avenue already contains a 100 foot dedicated right-of-way alignment,
it would seem appropriate to maintain a consistent circulation
classification, that being a Primary Arterial. As the North La
Quinta area matures with development, specific design criteria for
Miles Avenue as a classified Primary Arterial could be developed
which may either provide for Highway 111/Fred Waring Drive bypass
opportunities or limit scale to a community circulation connector.
Scenario No. 2 allows for greater circulation capacity but yields to
the future design criteria of the City.
CONCLUSION:
1. The upgrade of Miles Avenue from a Secondary to a Primary
Arterial will provide for an adequate circulation capacity within
the North La Quinta area.
2. The upgrade to Miles Avenue is in harmony and designed compatible
with the circulation plans of adjoining jurisdictions.
3. Miles Avenue designated as a Primary Arterial in the General Plan
will provide: a traffic bypass opportunities to Highway 111 and
Fred Waring Drive and potentially reduce traffic congestion on
these parallel facilities.
4. An Environmental Assessment was prepared for the subject project
and it was determined that the redesignations of Miles Avenue to
a Primary Arterial will not result in a significant adverse
effect on the environment.
5. The project proposal will provide for additional development
opportunities in the North La Quinta area.
RECOMMENDATION•
By adoption of the attached Planning Commission Resolution No.
87-014, recommend to the City Council approval of General Plan
Amendment No. 86-014.
MR/STAFFRPT.011 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 87-014
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
NO. 86-014 TO UPGRADE MILES AVENUE IN THE GENERAL
PLAN' FROM A SECONDARY ARTERIAL TO A PRIMARY ARTERIAL
CASE NO. GPA 86-014
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 25th day of August, 1987, hold a duly -noticed
Public Hearing to consider the City -initiated proposal to upgrade
Miles Avenue from a secondary arterial with 88 feet of right-of-way
to a primary arterial with 100 feet of right-of-way, located between
Jefferson and Washington Streets all being within the City of La
Quinta; and,
WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the
requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental
Quality Act of 1.970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213,
adopted by reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that
the Planning Director conducted an initial study and has determined
that the proposed General Plan Amendment will not have a significant
Ah adverse impact on the environment; and,
mr
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and
considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested
persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the
following facts to justify the approval of said General Plan
Amendment:
The redesignation of Miles Avenue from a Secondary to a Primary
Arterial is consistent with the City's goals to reduce traffic
congestion on Highway 111 and Fred Waring Drive.
2. The upgrade will provide a traffic bypass opportunity to Highway
111 and Fred Waring Drive and potentially reduce traffic
congestion on these parallel facilities.
3. The project proposal is consistent with the General Plan
Community Development Element to provide additional development
opportunities by supplementing travel capacity for the provision
of density bonuses and other land use intensification programs.
4. There are no physical constraints which would prevent the
development of Miles Avenue as a Primary Arterial.
5. The upgrade to Miles Avenue is compatible with the circulation
plans of adjoining jurisdictions.
o
MR/RESODRFT.014
1
111
6. Approval of this proposal will not result in a significant
adverse impact on the environment.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute
the findings of the Commission in this case.
2. That it does hereby confirm the conclusion of Environmental
Assessment No. 86-064, indicating that the proposed General Plan
Amendment will not result in any significant environmental
impacts.
3. That it does hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the
above -described General Plan Amendment proposal for the reasons
set forth in this resolution and as illustrated in the map
labeled Exhibit A, attached hereto.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 25th day of August, 1987, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
Ah NOES:
WW ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
MR/RESODRFT.014
FRED WARING DRIVE
...I...................................................................................................................................
®I®I®I®I01I®II®I!®I®II II I®I II�II®I®I®�®I�
--
®�®/® ® ® ARAW
I L jS AVENUE
®'
.,,•.�i w i 1 Cc.
''••� w .,� M
CITY OF LA QUINTAL 1 ja
w: —
o' WESTWARD HO ;Z:
CIRCULATION PLAN / a ® --lo:
DRIVE nuuuunn--- um
I®I MAJOR ARTERIAL
FIN I
I10-FOOT RIGHT Of WAY 1 1 �♦'
W PRIMARY ARTERIAL
100-11STATE HIGHWAY] ',.•'
® ®®®/MINIM IN I MINIM1 1®1®1®I.I®1®:
SECONDARY ARTERIAL ®I fA ISE
00 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY 1 Q 1
1} 1 r
COLLECTOR 1=* 1 ♦♦♦♦
♦ �w
e4-71 FOOT RIGHT OF WAY
®I 12 1
�= AVENUE 48 1 ®:
HIGHWAY III BYPASS
L16:
EXHIBIT "A" N
Aft NTS
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT # 86-014
CITY INITIATED
. Q
Z
D
a
Q
..1
A
10
J O Q < ( `-
u Q FE
° I W ; Q
_OU.
E I W¢ o o ~
W o F-
ir '° I I _m
M ° } cc co
e =
C C p 0 U O W
O O < 'O Z W W LL J
U e J w }
W O ;
CLM Ltj
o
1
Be �
21
' Otl S 23Nf10
m.0.m.m.mm.L
1
I <
C ! C 1uf
0
0
< 1 �o� W'® W■
IL
..ma.a.m •m ........®.v.j.a.m.e.m.m•
i 133tl1S GVWOV
j Xkill
1
1 �•, � W
(. ®...u.unununu.rrm.um �
11! .` W
I
z
2
J
a
J CO
L
®z
J
F—
LI
ZH
J
W
J
W
J
W
U
J
W
iIL
<
w
p
p
0
Ir
i
O
J
ui Z
�-1
ID:
pcc
i
C
p
=
V
u
ui
U
<
J
W
j
<_
U
W
U
p
W
<
cc
W
Z
W
S
>
o)
O
U
ui
Era
'0010
s
Ix
0
r
s
a
1NNY1N NONY7JJNf
0110Y NNIvd ■NOO
1ONY1N ONvOY
1NNYLN NOLONINNVM
L_LJ APR p
a D -AS
PCONSULTANTSANC.
Consultants to Governmental Agencies
March 31, :1987
Mr. Gary Price, Associate Planner
City of La Quinta
78-105 Calle Estado
La Quinta, CA 92253
SUBJECT: AMENDMENT TO TRAFFIC STUDY FOR NORTH LA QUINTA
Dear Mr. Price:
Presented in this letter are responses to your comments of
March 4, 1987. The six issues identified in your letter are
consecutively addressed below.
1. The General Plan Amendment Traffic Scenario, Table III of
the January 29 letter report, was arrived at via three
separate: steps.
First, the original General Plan traffic volume forecasts
provided by the City were modified to reflect the pres-
ence of all roadways planned in the area; and forecasted
traffic was reassigned onto the new roadways included in
the evaluation (as indicated in Table I of the January 29
letter report). This identified deficiencies on Miles
Avenue as a Secondary arterial and on Washington Street
from Fred Waring to I-10 as a Major arterial.
Second, the identified deficiencies were upgraded to
increase: "reserve capacity" (i.e., roadway capacity that
is available to accommodate trips generated by new devel-
opment). As shown in Table II of the January 29 letter
report, the upgrade of Miles Avenue to a Primary makes
available 11,000 average daily traffic (ADT) for new dev-
elopment:, and the Washington Street upgrade makes avail-
able 34,000 ADT capacity.
Third, the average daily trip ends generated by the pro-
posed high density residential land use amendments (i.e.,
12,456 for GPA 86-012 and 4,057 for GPA 86-016 net in-
creases over existing general plan, as quantified in the
first BSI report) was assigned to the upgraded arterial
network. Capacity was found to be deficient on Miles
Avenue between Washington Street and Adams Street, and on
Washington Street between Miles Avenue and Fred Waring
Drive.
1415 East 17th Street Santa Ana, California 92701 (714) 558-1952
A Berryman & Stephenson Industries Company
EXHIBIT C
Mr. Gary Price
March 31, 1987
Page Two
AIL
It is understood that the City desires specific traffic
generation numbers for each general plan land use amend-
ment project. Table I shows the number of dwelling units,
and average daily trip ends generated by project and in
total for nine comparative build out scenarios of the
respective 139 acre and 71 acre projects.
Table I. Trip Generation Information
GPA 86-012:
DESERT ROYALE 139 ACRES
GPA 86-016:
MEISTERLIN'S 71 ACRES
---
COMPARATIVE SCENARIO DWELLINGS
--
AVG. DAILY TRIP ENDS
'---
DWELLINGS
TOTAL
AVG. DAILY TRIP ENDS DWELLINGS
TOTAL AVERAGE
DAILY TRIP ENDS
NORMAL FORECAST
3/ACRE LOW DENSITY 417
3,119
213
1,593
630
4.712
6/ACRE MEDIUM DENSITY 834
2,224
426
2,224
1.260
4,448
12/ACRE HIGH DENSITY 1,6BB
11,009
852
5,623
2,520
16,632
MIDRANGE FORECAST
4/ACRE LOW DENSITY 556
4,159
284
2,124
840
6,283
8/ACRE MEDIUM DENSITY 1,112
2,224
568
2,224
1,680
4,448
16/ACRE HIGH DENSITY 2,224
14,678
1,136
7,498
3,360
22,176
EXTREME FORECAST
5.4/ACRE LOW DENSITY 1,6B8
12,477
852
6,373
2,520
18,850
10.8/AC. MEDIUM DENSITY 2,224
13,811
1,136
7,055
3,360
20,866
21.6/AC. HIGH DENSITY 3,002
19,816
1,534
10,122
4,536
29,938
NOTE: AVG. DAILY TRIP END CALCULATIONS
WERE BASED ON RATES
OF 7.48/LOW DENSITY UNIT; 6.21/MEDILM
DENSITY
UNIT; AND 6.60/HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL UNIT.
2. Nine traffic
scenarios,
based on
trip generation
informa-
tion from
Table I above
and traffic
assignment
percentage
information
documented
in the
January 29,
1987 letter
report (i.e.,
Page four,
Table
III), are reviewed
for
traffic impact as detailed
below.
First :it is necessary to subtract trip ends generated by
build out of the subject properties per the existing gen-
eral plan, so that no "double counting" occurs. GPA 86-
012 average daily trip end forecasts of 14,103 (based on
280 low density units 1,024 medium density units, and 856
high density units) and GPA 86-016 forecast of 3,487
average daily trip ends (based on 12 low density units
and 547 medium density units) total 17,590 average daily
trip ends (ADTEs).
The next step involves comparison of the 17,590 ADTEs
with total ADTEs in Table I above. It is noted that the
three "Normal Forecast" scenarios are less than the ADTEs
generated by build out of the existing general plan.
Mr. Gary Price
March 31, 1987
Page Three
40 Similarly, the "Midrange Forecast" low density and medium
density build out scenarios are less than the existing
general plan. Build out of low and medium density under
both the normal forecast and midrange forecast would re-
sult in significantly less ADTEs, and would not require
Miles Avenue to be upgraded to a Primary.
The differences in ADTEs for the remaining scenarios are
indicated below:
* Midrange High Density = + 4,586.
* Extreme Low Density = + 1,260.
* Extreme Medium Density = + 3,276.
* Extreme High Density = +12,348.
(Note: Land use amendments defined for evaluation in the
June 1986 report totaled an ADTE difference of + 16,513.)
The final step entails comparison of ADT assignments with
"reserve, capacity" (see # 3 below for definition). Given
the existing General Plan land use build out/Miles Avenue
Primary reserve capacity of 11,000 ADT, and the 70 per-
cent assignment of traffic from the subject GPAs onto
Miles Avenue, the task may be simplified to multiplying
the ADTE differences by 0.7 (the Miles Avenue traffic
assignment percentage) to see if it does not exceed the
11,000 reserve capacity. The worst case, extreme high
density, calculates to 8,644. Thus any land use scenarios
evaluated would result in average daily traffic that
could be: accommodated on Miles Avenue as a Primary.
3. "Reserve: Capacity" is simply the roadway capacity avail-
able for new development. Capacity implies the number of
vehicles; which may pass a given point on a roadway over a
given period of time. The time period for this analysis
is an average weekday 24-hour period. Calculation of the
reserve/available capacity involves subtraction of exist-
ing demand from the "assigned capacity". Capacity values
are assigned based on consideration of several factors,
including number of travel lanes, width of travel lanes,
horizontal and vertical sight distance, number and spac-
ing of intersecting driveways and streets, stop controls,
presence: of median islands and/or roadway curbs and
gutters, and amount of pedestrian/bicycle/truck/bus traf-
fic. For this analysis, capacity values were assumed to
be optimized through restrictive site planning procedures
similar to those proposed in the on -going "Highway 111
Specific: Plan".
C11
11
Mr. Gary Price
March 31, 1987
Page Four
"Adjusted Reserve Capacity" describes the amount of
capacity available after adjustment, or "corridor smooth-
ing" was done. This process involved the reassignment of
traffic onto general plan roadways not included in the
Weston Pringle and Associates General Plan travel demand
forecasts, and onto parallel facilities with available
capacity (i.e., on the basis of "capacity restraint").
4. Based on the analysis completed in the preceding pages of
this letter, the previous evaluations were based on GPA
land use densities significantly larger than the nine
scenarios now under consideration. The previous conclu-
sions are no longer appropriate.
If area general plan roadways are constructed with "in-
tensive Transportation Systems Management" (see # 5 below
for definition), then capacity will be available for any
of the build out scenarios.
5. Intensive Transportation Systems Management involves rel-
atively low-cost measures to enhance and preserve capa-
city. For example, rather than widen roadways to 8, 10,
or 12 travel lanes, the following specific Transportation
Systems Management measures may be applied:
* Install raised median islands to restrict left
turn movements to signalized intersections.
* Limit signals to one -quarter mile spacing and re-
quire signal interconnection.
* Spot widen intersections for dual left turn poc-
kets and right turn only lanes of sufficient
lengths.
* Permit right turn in/right turn out driveways to
intersect general plan roadways only when minimum
separation of 200 feet (near edge to near edge)
can be provided.
* Separate bicycle traffic from vehicles by provid-
ing off street (Class I) bikeways.
6. In view of the traffic impacts projected for the nine
land use scenarios evaluated, it is concluded that all of
scenarics could be provided adequate capacity with Miles
Avenue constructed as a Primary, and that low and medium
density scenarios under the normal and midrange forecast
could maintain the Secondary classification of Miles
Avenue.
Mr. Gary Price
March 31, 1987,
Page Five
IN CONCLUSION
I trust the information in this letter adequately responds
to your requested clarifications. Thank you for the opportu-
nity to complete this to your satisfaction.
Sincerely,
BSI CONSULTANTS, INC. I
John Lower, AICP
Project Manger
cc. Jeff Cooper, BSI Consultants, Inc.
Bob Weddle, City of La Quinta
11
11
11
11
46 a
78-105 CALLE ESTADO - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253
March 4, 1987
Mr. John Lower
BSI Consultants, Inc.
1415 East Seventeenth Street
Santa Ana, CA 92701
(619) 564-2246
SUBJECT: Traffic Study for North La Quinta
Re: General Plan Amendment Nos. 86-012, 86-014, 86-016
Dear Mr. Lower:
This letter is intended to identify and clarify needs regarding the
above referenced traffic study.
Relative to the text portion of the study, the following comments and
questions are :raised:
- How was the General Plan Amendment Traffic Scenario arrived at
and incorporated into the report?
Specific traffic generation numbers are needed for each General
Plan land use amendment project.
- Only one (1) traffic scenario was apparently used in the report.
In accordance with our agreement and previous correspondence, the
report must provide a range of three (3) traffic scenarios based
on varying density ranges in the General Plan. This is detailed
in the letter to you dated December 24, 1986 (copy attached).
- The "Methodology" Section of the report needs to be expanded to
clarify "Reserve Capacity" and "Adjusted Reserve Capacity".
Relative to the Conclusions and Recommendation Sections of the
report, the following comments and questions are raised:
- Conclusion No. 2 states that Miles Avenue, if upgraded to a
Primary Arterial, would have a reserve capacity of 11,000 ADT.
This contradicts Conclusion No. 6 which indicates that Miles
Avenue, as a Primary Arterial, would exceed reserve capacity.
The report needs to clarify conclusions and delineate existing
General Plan conditions and proposed amended General Plan
conditions.
MAILING ADDRESS - P.O. BOX 1504 - LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA 92253
Mr. John Lower
BSI Consultants, Inc.
March 4, 1987
Page 2.
Additional information and clarification needs to be provided
for Recommendation No. 2. For example, what is "Intensive
Transportation System Management; what specifically is 'well
spaced' access restrictions?"
- Recommendation No. 3 specifies the need to reduce the number of
units in both General Plan Land Use Amendment projects by
five (5) percent. Although the reserve capacity data provided
indicates an excess in service levels on Miles Avenue, no
specific numbers are given to support the five (5) percent
reduction in project densities. Would it be more appropriate
to further expand Miles Avenue to a Major Arterial to accommodate
projected traffic levels? This comment would also apply to
Recommendation No. 4.
As you should be aware, this series of General Plan Amendments will
be going to public hearing in March of 1987, so timing is of the
essence. We would request a revised traffic study which responds to
these identified concerns to be submitted by March 10, 1987.
Should you have: any questions or comments regarding this matter, or
need any further information, please contact our office.
Very truly yours,
MURREL CRUMP
PLANNING DIRECTOR
Gary W. Price
Associate Planner
Atchs: 1. Ltr. Form Traffic Study, Dated 1/29/87
2. Notice to Proceed W/Traffic Study; Ltr. Dated 1/20/87
3. Traffic Study Proposal by BSI; Ltr. Dated 1/6/87
4. Request for Proposal/Traffic Study; Ltr. Dated 12/24/87
cc: Robert W. Weddle, City Engineer
Wallace H. Nesbit, Assistant Planner
Files, GPA86-012, 86-013, 86-016
TRAFSTYI
11
0 1 Sl�
CONSULTANTS, INC.
Consultants to Governmental Agencies
January 29, 1987
Mr. Murrel Crump, Planning Director
City of La Quinta
78-105 Calle Estado
La Quinta, CA 92253
ATTN. Mr. Cary Price, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE FOR NORTH LA QUINTA - GENERAL
PLAN AMENDMENT NOS. 86-012, 86-014, AND 86-016
Dear Mr. Crump:
This letter report is presented per your authorization of
January 20„ 1987. Separate sections are provided to document
Background,, Methodology, Forecast of Impacts, and Conclu-
sions and Recommendations.
BACKGROUND
In a June 30, 1986 letter report, BSI forecasted traffic
impacts associated with General Plan Amendment 86-012 (i.e.,
Desert Royale 70 acres north of Miles Avenue and 49 acres
south of )Miles Avenue for a proposed net increase of 1,864
units).
The subject letter report also addressed what became General
Plan Amendment 86-016 (i.e., Meisterlin's 71.42 acres north
of Miles Avenue and west of Desert Royale for a proposed net
increase of 584 units).
A major conclusion of BSI's June 30, 1986 report was that
Miles Avenue would need a General Plan designation upgrade
even without the proposed land use intensifications.
General Plan Amendment 86-014 was requested to upgrade Miles
Avenue between Jefferson and Washington streets to a Primary
Arterial. During scoping sessions with the City Planning
Commission and City Council, the need was identified for a
comprehensive evaluation of all three General Plan Amend-
ment cases in terms of impacts to all streets in La Quinta
north of Highway 111.
The City subsequently contracted with BSI for a North La
Quinta Traffic Study Update, which is presented herein.
69-730 Highway 111 • Rancho Mirage, California 92270 • 1619) 324-1111
A Berryman S Stephenson Industries Company
Mr. Murrel Crump
January 29, 1987
Page Two
METHODOLOGY
In the BSI report of June 30, 1986, General Plan traffic
volume forecasts were modified for a more fine-grained
analysis. ]Five links were added to the roadway network, and
the concept of "capacity restraint" was used in the assign-
ment of traffic generated by the General Plan designated
land uses and the traffic generated by net increases associ-
ated with the proposed General Plan Amendments.
The Forecast of Impacts section below was premised on the
concept of "reserve capacity" to evaluate the potential for
increased development. Also, intensive application of
transportation system management measures along all arter-
ials was assumed in order to provide maximum physical carry-
ing capacity.
FORECAST OF IMPACTS
Traffic impacts are best
communicated in
terms
of reserve
capacity. Reserve capacity
may
be defined as the
roadway
capacity available to
new development while maintaining
acceptable service levels
for all
traffic.
Table I shows 16 arterial
link
segments
in the
north La
Quinta area. The arterial
designation,
maximum average
daily carrying capacity,
General Plan forecasted
average
daily traffic (ADT), General
Plan
reserve capacity,
adjusted
ADT and adjusted reserve
capacity
of each link is
listed.
Table I. General Plan and Adjusted
Reserve
Capacity
Values
GEN PLAN
ADJUSTED ADJUSTED
ASSIGNED
MAXIMUM GENERAL
RESERVE
GENERAL RESERVE
LINK ARTERIAL SEGMENT
DESIGNATION CAPAD ITY PLAN ADT
CAPACITY
PLAN ADT CAPACITY
1 HIGHWAY 111 WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
EXPRESSWAY
100,000 125,000
-25,000
100,ODD 0
2 HIGHWAY 111 ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
EXPRESSWAY
100,000 125,000
-25,000
100,000 0
3 HIGHWAY 111 MILES TO WASHINGTON
EXPRESSWAY
100,000 123,000
-23,000
100,000 0
4 WESTWARD HO DRIVE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
COLLECTOR
15,000 0
15,000
15,000 0
5 MILES AVENUE WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
SECONDARY
24,000 25,000
-1,000
25,000 -1,000
6 MILES AVENUE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
SECONDARY
24,000 25,000
-1,000
25,000 -1,000
7 FRED WARING DRIVE WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
MAJOR
54,000 29,000
25,000
54,000 0
8 FRED WARING DRIVE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
MAJOR
54,000 29,000
25,000
54,000 0
9 WASHINGTON STREET HWY 111 TO MILES
MAJOR
54,000 68,000
-12.000
54,000 0
10 WASHINGTON STREET MILES TO FRED WARING
MAJOR
54,DDO 66,000
-12,000
54,000 0
11 WASHINGTON STREET FRED WARING TO 1-10 -
MAJOR
54,000 66,000
-12,000
66,000-12,000
12 ADAMS STREET MILES TO FRED WARING
SECONDARY
24,000 0
24,000
17,000 12,000
13 ADAMS STREET WESTWARD HO TO MILES
SECONDARY
24,000 0
24,000
12,000 12,000
14 ADAMS STREET HWY 111 TO WESTWARD HO
SECONDARY
24,000 0
24,000
12,000 12,000
15 OUNE PALMS ROAD HWY 111 TO FRED WARING
SECONDARY
24,ODO 0
24,000
21,000 3,000
16 JEFFERSON STREET M 111 TO FRED WAKING
MAJOR
54,000 75,000
-21,000
54,000 0
11
11
Mr. Murrel Crump
January 29, 1987
Page Three
The final two columns in Table I, adjusted General Plan ADT
and adjusted reserve capacity, were derived by application
of capacity restraint - i.e., vehicles restrained by con-
gested traffic conditions were diverted to parallel facili-
ties with less congestion. In this process, Link 1 was
matched with Link 7; Link 2 with Link 8; Link 9 with Links
13 and 14; :Link 10 with Link 12; and Link 15 with Link 16.
It should be noted that Highway 111 was designated as an
Expressway in view of preliminary recommendations of the
Highway 111 Specific Plan to limit turning movements to sig-
nalized locations, thereby reducing the number of vehicular
conflict points and increasing capacity to near -freeway
values.
Reference to Table I shows, in the final column, that the
existing General Plan land use build out is forecasted to
exceed reserve capacity of Miles Avenue (as a Secondary
Arterial) from Washington Street to Jefferson Street (links
5 and 6), and to exceed the reserve capacity of Washington
Street from Fred Waring Drive to I-10.
This indicates a need to upgrade Miles Avenue's General Plan
designation to a Primary Arterial, and to upgrade Washington
Street between Fred Waring Drive and I-10 to an Expressway.
The resulting reserve capacity values are shown in Table II.
Table II. Reserve Capacity of Proposed Arterial Upgrades
GEN PLAN ADJUSTED ADJUSTED
ASSIGNED MAXIMUM GENERAL RESERVE GENERAL RESERVE
LINK ARTERIAL SEGMENT DESIGNATION CAPACITY PLAN ACT CAPACITY PLAN ACT CAPACITY
1 HIGHWAY 111 WASHINGTON TO ADAMS EXPRESSWAY 100,000 125,000-25,000 100,000 0
2 HIGHWAY 111 ADAMS TO JEFFERSON EXPRESSWAY 100,000 125,000-25,000 100,000 0
3 HIGHWAY 111 MILES TO WASHINGTON EXPRESSWAY 100,000 123,000-23,000 100,000 0
4 WESTWARD HO DRIVE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON COLLECTOR 15,000 0 15,000 15,000 0
5••"MILES AVENUE WASHINGTON TO ADAMS PRIMARY 36,000 25,000 11,000 25.000 11,000
6.... MILES AVENUE AD" TO JEFFERSON PRIMARY 36,000 25,000 11,000 25,000 11,000
7 FRED WAR ING DRIVE WASHINGTON TO ADAMS MAJOR 54, 000 29,000 25,000 54,000 0
8 FRED WARING DRIVE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON MAJOR 54,000 29,000 25,000 54,000 0
9 WASHINGTON STREET HWY 111 TO MILES MAJOR 54,000 66,000 -12,000 54,000 0
10 WASHINGTON STREET MILES TO FRED WARING MAJOR 54,000 66,000-12.000 54,000 0
11'•"WASHINGTON STREET FRED WAR ING TO 1-10 EXPRESSWAY 100,000 66,000 34,000 66,000 34,000
12 ADAMS STREET MILES TO FRED WARING SECONDARY 24,D00 0 24,000 12,000 12,000
13 ADAMS STREET WESTWARD HO TO MILES SECONDARY 24,DDO 0 24,000 12,000 12,000
14 ADAMS STREET HWY 111 TO WESTWARD NO SECONDARY 24,000 0 24,000 12.000 12,000
15 DUNE PALMS ROAD HWY 111 TO FRED WARING SECONDARY 24,000 0 24,000 21,DOC 3,000
16 JEFFERSON STREET HWY 111 TO FRED WAR NO MAJOR 54,000 75,000 -21,000 54,000 0
Mr. Murrel Crump
January 29, 1987
Page Four
As noted in Table II, the proposed arterial upgrades would
result in reserve capacities of 11,000 ADT on Miles Avenue
and 34,000 ADT on Washington Street north of Fred Waring
Drive to the I-10. Adams Street maintains a reserve
capacity of 12,000 ADT without an upgrade in designation.
The average daily trip ends forecasted for the net increase
in proposed development, as calculated in the BSI June 30,
1986 report, is 12,456 for General Plan Amendment 86-012,
and 4,057 for General Plan Amendment 86-016 (i.e., a total
net increase of 16,513 average daily trip ends).
Determination of traffic impacts is keyed to the distribu-
tion and assignment of the 16,500 (rounded) average daily
trip ends generated by the proposed General Plan land use
amendments. Based on distribution assumptions of 20 percent
orientation to/from the south, 20 percent to/from the north,
30 percent 'to/from the east and 30 percent to/from the west,
assignments were made as noted in Table III. Table III also
shows the resulting increase in traffic and impact in terms
of reserve capacity on affected links.
Table III. General Plan Plus Proposed Amendments ADT
40
ASSIGNMENT PERCENTAGES
--------
NET GP AMEND-
20%
20%
30%
30%
MENT ASSIGNED
CUMULATIVE
RESERVE
LINK
ARTERIAL
SEGMENT
NORTH
SOUTH
EAST
WEST
TRAFFIC (ADT)
FORECAST
CAPACITY
1
HIGHWAY 111
WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
100,000
0
2
HIGHWAY 111
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
100,000
0
3
HIGHWAY Ill
MILES TO WASHINGTON
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
100,000
0
4
WESTWARD HO DRIVE
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
15,000
0
5
MILES AVENUE
WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
0%
10%
30%
30%
11,550
36,550
-550
6
MILES AVENUE
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
0%
0%
30%
30%
9,900
34,900
1,100
7
FRED WARING DRIVE
WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
54,000
0
8
FRED WARING DRIVE
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
54,000
0
9
WASHINGTON STREET
HWY 111 TO MILES
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
54,000
0
•l0
WASHINGTON STREET
MILES TO FRED WARING
20%
0%
0%
30%
8,250
62,250
-8,250
11
WASHINGTON STREET
FRED WARING TO I-10
20%
0%
0%
30%
8,250
74,250
25,750
12
ADAMS STREET
MILES TO FRED WARING
0%
20%
0%
0%
3,300
15,300
8,700
13
ADAMS STREET
WESTWARD NO TO MILES
0%
20%
0%
0%
3,300
15,300
8,700
14
ADAMS STREET
HWY 111 TO WESTWARD HO
0%
20%
0%
0%
3,300
15,300
8,700
15
DUNE PALMS ROAD
HWY 111 TO FRED WARING
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
21,000
3,000
16
JEFFERSON STREET
HY ill TO FRED WARING
0%
0%
0%
0%
0
54,OG0
0
11
Mr. Murrel Crump
January 29, 1987
Page Five
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Major conclusions reached in this report are noted below.
1. Build out of existing General Plan land uses are pro-
jected to result in average daily traffic volumes in
excess of planned maximum physical carrying capacity on
Miles Avenue between Washington Street and Jefferson
Street, and on Washington Street between Fred Waring
Drive and Interstate 10.
2. If Miles Avenue were built out to Primary Arterial stan-
dards (upgraded from a Secondary Arterial), a reserve
capacity of approximately 11,000 average daily trips
would result.
3. If Washington Street were built out to near -expressway
standards, as is being planned for all of Highway 111
through La 4uinta, a reserve capacity of 34,000 average
daily trips would result.
4.
Adams Street is forecasted to provide a reserve capacity
of 12,000 average daily trips upon build out of the ex-
isting General Plan.
5.
The proposed General Plan land use amendments are fore-
casted to generate approximately 16,500 additional
average daily trip ends.
6.
The additional trip ends would exceed the reserve capa-
city provided by Miles Avenue as a Primary Arterial, and
would exceed the reserve capacity of Washington Street
built out as a Major Arterial.
Recommendations developed from the conclusions follow.
1.
Approve General Plan Amendment 86-014 to upgrade Miles
Avenue to a Primary Arterial.
2.
Provide intensive Transportation System Management meas-
ures along Washington Street between Highway Ill and the
Interstate 10 interchange, with emphasis on access
restrictions to (well spaced) signal locations.
3.
Require a minimum five percent reduction in units pro-
posed in the General Plan land use amendments.
4.
If General Plan Amendments 86-012 and 86-016 are approv-
ed (after reduction of five percent of units), consider
no other amendments for land use intensification.
5.
Initiate study of the Washington Street Interstate-10
interchange to provide acceptable service levels.
Mr. Murrel Crump
January 29, 1987
Page Six
IN CLOSING
BSI Consultants,
duct this Study.
please feel free
Sincerely,
Inc. thanks you for
If any questions
to call.
BSI CONSULTANTS, INC.
�eiFeJ
John Lower, AICP
El
the opportunity to con -
arise upon your review,
CONSULTANTS, NC.
Consultants to Governmental Agencies
June 30, 1986
Mr. Larry Stevens, AICP
Planning Director
City of La Quinta
78-105 Calle! Estado
La Quinta, California 92253
SUBJECT: TRAFFIC IMPACTS FORECASTED FOR GPA 86-012
Dear Mr. Stevens:
This letter report addresses forecasted traffic impacts of
the proposed General Plan Amendment No. 86-012 and the 71
adjacent acres also being proposed for amendment.
The following sections detail Background Information, Travel
Demand Forecast, Traffic Impacts and Conclusions.
BACKGROUND ]INFORMATION
The project site is south of Fred Waring Drive between Wash-
ington Street and Adams Street. At issue is a request to
increase the: current land use designation of 198 acres from
2,160 low to medium density residential units to 4,024 high
density residential units - a total increase of 1,864 units.
Also under consideration is the 71 acres immediately west
for which an increase of 584 units (i.e., from 559 low to
medium density residential units to 1,143 units of high den-
sity residential units).
Roadway Infrastructure
Roadways that could be impacted by these developments were
subdivided :into "links" to facilitate analysis. Each roadway
link was assigned the maximum number of cars (its' capacity)
that it can carry on an average daily basis at an acceptable
level of service (LOS).
This process involves consideration of the number of lanes
and configuration (e.g. median islands, lane widths, etc.)
of the roadway. Table I indicates the arterial link seg-
ments, their general plan designation, and LOS "C" capacity
for general plan buildout of each roadway link segment.
69-730 Highway 111 • Rancho Mirage, California 92270 • (619) 324-1111
A Berryman 6 Stephenson Industries Company EXHIBIT D
Mr. Larry Stevens
June 30, 1986
Page Two
Table I. Roadway Infrastructure Data
GENERAL PLAN LOS 'C'
LINK ARTERIAL SEGMENT DESIGNATION CAPACITY
1 FRED WARING DRIVE WASHINGTON TO ADAMS MAJOR 45,000
2 FRED WARING DRIVE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON MAJOR 45,000
3 JEFFERSON STREET FRED WARING TO HWY Ill MAJOR 45,000
4 HIGHWAY Ill JEFFERSON TO ADAMS MAJOR 45,000
5 HIGHWAY Ill ADAMS TO WASHINGTON MAJOR 45,000
6 HIGHWAY Ill WASHINGTON TO MILES MAJOR 45,000
7 WASHINGTON STREET HWY 111 TO MILES MAJOR 45,000
8 WASHINGTON STREET MILES TO FRED WARING MAJOR 45,000
9 WASHINGTON STREET FRED WARING TO I-10 MAJOR 45,000
10 MILES AVENUE WASHINGTON TO ADAMS SECONDARY 20,000
II MILES AVENUE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON SECONDARY 20,000
12 WESTWARD NO DRIVE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON COLLECTOR 10,000
13 ADAMS STREET FRED WARING TO MILES SECONDARY 20,000
14 ADAMS STREET MILES TO WESTWARD NO SECONDARY 20,000
15 ADAMS STREET WESTWARD NO TO HWY Ill SECONDARY 20,000
16 DUNE PALMS ROAD FRED WARING TO HWY Ill SECONDARY 20,000
Levels of Service
Midblock volume to capacity (V/C) ratios for the link seg-
ments were calculated to determine the roadway level of ser-
vice. V/C ratios are simply average daily traffic divided by
the assigned capacity - as the ratio approaches 1.00 the
roadway approaches capacity. General Plan traffic estimates
for average daily traffic, as provided by the City, were
divided by assigned buildout capacity values. Table II below
indicates that all roadway segments except Fred Waring Drive
would be fax- over general plan design capacity.
Table II. General Plan Average Daily Midblock V/C Ratios
GENERAL PLAN
LOS 'C' GENERAL PLAN LOS C
LINK ARTERIAL SEGMENT CAPACITY ADT V/C RATIO
------------------- -------- ------------ ------------
I FRED WARING DRIVE WASHINGTON TO ADAMS 45,000 29,000 .64
2 FRED WARING DRIVE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON 45,000 29,000 .64
3 JEFFERSON STREET FRED WARING TO HWY 111 45,000 75,000 1.67
4 HIGHWAY Ill JEFFERSON TO ADAMS 45,000 125,000 2.78
5 HIGHWAY Ill ADAMS TO WASHINGTON 45,000 125,000 2.78
6 HIGHWAY Ill WASHINGTON TO MILES 45,000 123,000 2.73
7 WASHINGTON STREET HWY Ill TO MILES 45,000 66,000 1.47
8 WASHINGTON STREET MILES TO FRED WARING 45,000 66,000 1.47
9 WASHINGTON STREET FRED WARING TO I-10 45,000 66,000 1.47
10 MILES AVENUE WASHINGTON TO ADAMS 20,000 25,DDO 1.25
11 MILES AVENUE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON 20,000 25,000 1.25
12 WESTWARD NO DRIVE ADAMS TO JEFFERSON 10,000 N/A
13 ADAMS STREET FRED WARING TO MILES 20,000 N/A
14 ADAMS STREET MILES TO WESTWARD NO 20,000 N/A
15 ADAMS STREET WESTWARD NO TO HWY Ill 20,000 N/A
16 DUNE PALMS ROAD FRED WARING TO HWY Ill 20,000 N/A
N/A - DATA HOT AVAILABLE
E
Mr. Larry Stevens
June 30, 1986
Page Three
It is important to note, however,
general plan buildout traffic volume
clude five links (links 12 through
account was made for the concept o
Capacity restraint implies that, rath
gested travel conditions, drivers
roadways in the area.
that the City provided
forecasts did not in-
16). In addition, no
f "capacity restraint".
er than experience con -
will reroute to other
Table III denotes estimated buildout traffic volumes with
application of capacity restraint. Even with these adjust-
ments, 13 of the 16 links exceed capacity. Of most concern
is State Highway 111, where the 100,000 plus average daily
traffic volumes will require freeway design/limited access
standards to provide adequate operation.
Table III:. Adjusted General Plan Midblock V/C Ratios
GENERAL PLAN
LOS T
GENERAL PLAN
LOS C
DESCRIP
LINK
----
ARTERIAL
--------
SEGMENT
-------
CAPACITY
--------
ACT
------------
V/C RATIO
____.----
NORTH PI
1
FRED WARING DRIVE
WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
45,000
44,000
.99
Lax Den
2
FRED WARING DRIVE
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
45,000
44,000
.9B
Medium I
J
JEFFERSON STREET
FRED WARING TO HWY 111
45,000
60,000
1.33
4
HIGHWAY III
JEFFERSON TO ADAMS
45,000
100,000
2-22
5
HIGHWAY III
ADAMS 10 WASHINGTON
45,000
100,000
2.22
6
HIGHWAY III
WASHINGTON TO MILES
45,000
IOB4O00
2.40
SOUTH PI
7
WASHINGTON STREET
HWY III TO MILES
45,000
46,000
1.02
Medium 1
0
WASHINGTON STREET
MILES 10 FRED WARING
45,000
46,000
1.02
High Dei
9
WASHINGTON STREET
FRED WARING TO 1-10
45,000
46,000
1.02
10
MILES AVENUE
WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
20,000
25,000
1.25
11
MILES AVENUE
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
20,000
25,000
1.25
12
WESTWARD NO DRIVE
ADAMS 10 JEFFERSON
10,000
10,000
1.00
MEISTERI
13
ADAMS STREET
FRED WARING TO MILES
20,000
20,000
1.60
Low Den!
14
ADAMS STREET
MILES TO WESTWARD NO
20,000
20,000
1.90
Medium I
IS
ADAMS STREET
WESTWARD NO TO HWY 111
20,000
20,000
1.00
16
DUNE PALMS ROAD
FRED WARING TO HWY 111
20,000
16,000
.90
TRAVEL DEMAND FORECAST
Circulation impacts associated with the proposed general
plan amendment were projected via the travel demand forecast
process. Trip generation, the first step in travel demand
forecasting,, was based on generation rates documented by Car
Counter Company and the Institute of Transportation Engi-
neers Trip Generation - An Informational Report, Third
Edition.
Table IV depicts the number of average daily trip ends that
would be generated under the current general plan and the
number of grip ends generated by the amended general plan.
The final column indicates the additional trip ends that
would be generated from the amendment.
E
11
Mr. Larry Stevens
June 30, 1986
Page Four
Table IV. Trip Generation Information
CURRENT GENERAL PLAN
AMENDED
-'
GENERAL PLAN
--------------------
TWO -NAY
TWO-WAY
DAILY
DAILY
TRIP ENDS
DESCRIPTION
UNITS
RATE
TRIP ENDS
---------
DESCRIPTION
-----------
UNITS
-----
RATE
-------
TRIP ENDS
---------
DIFFERENCE
-""""---
-----------
NORTH PHASE 86-012 AREA
-----
-------
NORTH PHASE 86-012 AREA
Low Density Residential
280
7.49
2,094
High Density Residential
1,904
6.60
12,566
Medium Density Residential
392
6.21
2,434
672
4,529
8,039
SOUTH PHASE 86-012 AREA
SOUTH PHASE 86-012 AREA
Medium Density Residential
632
6.21
3,925
High Density Residential
2,120
6.60
13,992
High Density Residential
856
6.60
5,650
1,488
9,574
4,418
MEISTERLIN AREA
MEISTERLIN AREA
Low Density Residential
12
7.48
90
High Density Residential
1,143
6.60
7,544
Medium Density Residential
547
6.21
3,397
559
3,487
4,057
These trip ends were then distributed in terms of direction-
al orientation (on the basis of the relative attractiveness
of travel to and from the project area), and assigned to the
respective :roadway links.
Trip assignment percentages were determined based on a
recommended access change for the South Phase from Adams
Street to Westward Ho Drive and assuming one access for the
Meisterlin project on Miles Avenue. Table V indicates the
link assignment percentage for each proposed development.
Table V. Trip Distribution/Assignment Percentages
DAILY
TRIP ENDS
NORTH PHASE GPA 86-012 8,038
SOUTH PHASE GPA 86-012 4,418
MEISTERLIN
4,057
LINK ASSIGNMENT PERCENTAGES
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 l4 15 16
25 10 15 0 0 0 0 40 50 75 25 0 5 15 15 0
10 0 10 0 0 5 5 45 50 75 25 10 10 45 15 0
0 0 15 0 0 0 15 50 20 100 35 0 0 0 0 0
Average daily traffic volumes forecasted for the individual
links as calculated based on the Table V percentages and
trip ends generated by each proposed development, are shown
in Table VI.
Mr. Larry Stevens
June 30, 1986
Page Five
Table VI. Trip Assignment
DAILY
DAILY
TRIP ASSIGNMENT FOR
EACH LINK
TRIP ENDS
1
2
3
4
5
6
7.
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
IS 16
NORTH PHASE SPA 86-012 8,038
2,010
804
1,206
0
0
0
0
3,215
4,019
6,029
2,010
0
402
1,206
1,206 0
SOUTH PHASE SPA 86-012 4,418
442
0
442
0
0
221
221
1,988
2,209
3,314
1.105
442
442
1,980
663 0
SUBTOTAL
2.451
804
11648
0
0
221
221
5,203
6,228
9,342
3,114
442
844
3,194
1,868 0
NEISTERLIN 4,057 SUBTOTAL
0
0
609
0
0
0
609
2,029
811
4.057
1,420
0
0
0
0 0
TOTAL
2,451
804
2,256
0
0
221
829
1,232
2,039
13,399
4,534
442
844
3,194
1,868 0
TRAFFIC IMPACTS
Traffic impacts associated with the proposed general plan
amendment development increments were quantified by volume
to capacity (V/C) ratio recalculations.
Table VII shows per link general plan forecasted daily traf-
fic volumes (as modified via capacity restraint application
in Table III) plus additional traffic resulting from GPA 86-
012; and plus the Meisterlin project. In addition, recalc-
ulated V/C ratios (with capacity values assuming buildout of
existing General Plan arterial designations) are indicated
in Table VII.
Table VII. GPA Average Daily Traffic Impacts
GENERAL PLAN
GENERAL PLAN
GP + GPA 86-012
GP + GPA 86-012
LOS 'C'
ADT + GP
ADT+GP 86-012
LOS C
+ NEISTERLIN
LINK
ARTERIAL
SEGMENT
CAPACITY
AMEND 86-012
+ HEISTERLIN
VIC RATIO
LOS C VIC RATIO
---
I
--------
FRED WARING DRIVE
-------
WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
--------
45,000
---------
46,451
-----------
46,451
-------------
1.03
---------------
1.03
2
FRED WARING DRIVE
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
45,000
44,804
44,804
1.00
1.00
3
JEFFERSON STREET
FRED WARING TO HWY 111
45,000
61,648
62,256
1.37
1.38
4
HIGHWAY III
JEFFERSON TO ADAMS
45,000
100,000
100,000
2.22
2.22
5
HIGHWAY Ill
ADAMS TO WASHINGTON
45,000
100,000
IOO,OOD
2.22
2.22
6
HIGHWAY Ill
WASHINGTON TO MILES
45,000
108,221
108,221
2.40
2.40
7
WASHINGTON STREET
HWY Ill TO MILES
45,000
46,221
46,829
1.03
1.04
8
WASHINGTON STREET
MILES TO FRED WARING
45,000
51,203
53,232
1.14
1.18
9
WASHINGTON STREET
FRED WARING TO 1-10
45,000
52,228
53,039
1.16
1.18
10
MILES AVENUE
WASHINGTON TO ADAMS
20,000
34,342
38,399
1.72
1.92
11
MILES AVENUE
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
20,000
28,114
29,534
1.41
1.40 -
12
WESTWARD NO DRIVE
ADAMS TO JEFFERSON
10,000
10,442
10,442
1.04
1.04
13
ADAMS STREET
FRED WARING TO HILES
20,000
20,844
20,844
1.04
1.04
14
ADAMS STREET
MILES TO WESTWARD NO
20,000
23,194
23,194
1.16
1.16
15
ADAMS STREET
WESTWARD NO TO HWY Ill
20,000
21,868
21,868
1.09
1.09
16
DUNE PALMS ROAD
FRED HARING TO HWY Ill
20,000
18,000
18,000
.90
.90
Mr. Larry Stevens
40 June 30, 1986
Page Six
As indicated in Table III and Table VII, buildout of the
General Plan. designated arterial network will not adequately
service buildout of existing General Plan land uses, let
alone additional traffic generated by higher intensity dev-
elopment.
The ongoing Highway 111 Specific Plan will need to minimize
the number of intersecting streets and driveways, and
provide for major intersection widening.
Parallel facilities to Highway 111, especially Miles Avenue,
should be upgraded in general plan designation to provide
some relief to Highway 111 traffic.
In addition to general plan arterial designation upgrades,
only intensive trip consolidation measures could mitigate
the traffic impacts associated with the proposed GPA. For
example, as a condition of approval, it may be required that
occupants of the high density residential development parti-
cipate in employee rideshare programs (which would require
that occupants work at the same or closely located major
employers) and shopping/recreation trips.
IN CLOSING
This letter report documents the traffic impact generated by
the proposed general plan amendments. As indicated, the
General Plan designated system of streets will already be so
overloaded that to allow further development intensification
without the upgrading of arterial designations is not feasi-
ble.
If any questions arise upon your review of this information,
please feel free to call me at (714) 558-1952.
Sincerely,
BSI CONSCANTS, INC.
V.j `+c .
John Lower, AICP
Project Manager
JL:dj
11
E
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta, California
July 14, 1987
7:00 p.m.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. The meeting was called to order by Thomas Thornburgh at 7:00
p.m. The Flag Salute was led by Kimberly Brandt.
II. ROLL CALL
A. The Secretary presented Resolutions of Recognition from the
Commission to outgoing Commissioners Thornburgh and Brandt,
who them stepped down.
B. City Clerk Ron Kiedrowski administered the Oath of Office to
new Commissioners John Bund and Peter Zelles, and to
reappointed Commissioner John Walling.
C. The election of a new Chairman and Vice Chairman was
continued to the next regular meeting.
Commissioner Walling asked the Secretary to call the roll.
Present: Commissioners Steding, Moran, Walling, Bund, and
Zelles..
Staff Present: Planning Director Murrel Crump, Principal
Planner: Jerry Herman, and Department Secretary Mariellen
Ratowski.
III. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Commissioner: Walling, acting as Chairman of the Meeting,
introduced the first Public Hearing item as follows:
A. Change of Zone 86-024 and Tentative Tract Map 21939 with Lot
Size Variance - A request by Cody & Brady, Architects to
change zone from W-2-20 to W-2-10; subdivide 126.8 acres
into 12 custom home lots and one open space lot; and a
variance to the minimum lot size requirements of the W-2
zone on property generally located along the west side of
the All American Canal and south of Avenue 54.
1. Principal Planner Jerry Herman reviewed the request per
the information contained in the Staff Report, a copy
MR/MIN07-14.DFT
1
IJI
of which is on file in the Planning and Development
Department.
2. Commissioner Walling opened the Public Hearing. The
Applicant, Mr. John Cody, gave a brief summary of the
proposed project.
There being no further public comment, the Public
Hearing was closed.
3. Commissioner Walling then opened the matter for
Panning Commission discussion. The Commission members
discussed the request as submitted.
4. A motion was made by Commissioner Steding and seconded
by Commissioner Moran to approve CZ87-024, VAR 87-003
and TT 21939, subject to the attached conditions. Upon
a roll call vote, the motion was unanimously adopted.
Commissioner Walling introduced the next Public Hearing item as
follows:
B. Change of Zone 87-025, Variance Request 87-004, and Plot
Plan 87-381; a request by Banjamin Urmston/Warren Johnson to
change zone from R-1*++ to C-P-S; a request to reduce the
number of required permanent on -site parking spaces from 13
to 9, and the elimination of the wall of separation
requirement between commercially- and residentially -zoned
property; and the construction of a two-story +3250 square
foot office building.
1. Planning Director Murrel Crump reviewed the requests
per the information contained in the Staff Report, a
copy of which is on file in the Planning and
Development Department. Mr. Crump also offered to the
Commission the additional alternative of requiring a
cash payment rather than bonding for the mitigation of
request VAR 87-004.
2. Commissioner Walling opened the Hearing for public
comment. Mr. Benjamin Urmston, Applicant, addressed
the Commission. Mr. Urmston spoke in favor of allowing
the use of a bond as a mitigation measure for the
parking issue.
Mr. Warren Johnson, Applicant, then addressed the
Commission. Mr. Johnson also spoke in favor of the
bond idea and answered various questions from the
Commissioners.
Mr. Urmston spoke again, requesting clarification for
® favoring a cash payment over a bond.
MR/MIN07-14.DFT 2
Ms. Diane Johnson, Applicant, spoke in opposition of a
cash requirement and asked that the Commission give
serious consideration to the bond option.
There being no further public comment, the Public
Hearing was closed.
3. Commissioner Walling then opened the matter for
Planning Commission discussion. Following a lengthy
discussion, it was the consensus of the Commissioners
that, although they felt favorably toward the Variance,
the City Attorney would be requested to review the
proposed mitigation measures and comment thereon.
4. A motion was made by Commissioner Zelles and seconded
by Commissioner Walling to approve CZ 87-025, PP 87-381
and VAR 87-004, accepting a bond as a mitigation
measure. A roll call vote was as follows: AYE -
Commissioners Zelles and Walling; NOES - Commissioners
Steding, Moran and Bund. The motion was defeated by a
majority vote.
A motion was made by Commissioner Bund and seconded by
Commissioner Walling to approve CZ 87-025 by adoption
of Planning Commission Resolution No. 87-007. Upon a
40 roll call vote, the motion was unanimously adopted.
A motion was made by Commissioner Steding and seconded
by Commissioner Moran to continue VAR 87-004 to allow
the City Attorney opportunity to comment. Upon a roll
call vote, the motion was unanimously adopted.
A motion was made by Commissioner Steding and seconded
by Commissioner Walling to continue PP 87-381 to such
time as the Variance Request again comes before the
Commission. Unanimously adopted.
IV. PUBLIC COMMENT
Ms. Audrey Ostrowsky addressed the Commission regarding the
parking plans of the Village at La Quinta Specific Plan.
V. CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Commissioner Moran and seconded by
Commissioner Steding to approve the Planning Commission
minutes of June 23, 1987. Unanimously adopted.
VI. BUSINESS
A. The Commission determined to appoint new subcommittee
members for the Highway 111 Specific Plan at a future
meeting. The Planning and Development Department will
MR/MIN07-14.DFT 3
IR
I
LJ
VII.
VIII
supply all available information to the new Commissioners to
update them on the matter.
B. Two items were identified for future discussion:
1. A policy statement discussion - trade-offs of
enhancements versus parking agreements.
2. Policy dealing with architectural designs that take the
climate into consideration, i.e., energy -efficient
buildings.
OTHER
A. Planning Director Crump gave a brief address regarding Dark
Sky Regulations. Additional information will be provided to
the Commission for future discussion.
B. The Commission accepted information regarding CVWD Capital
Improvement Program.
C. Copies of the Final Draft Sign Regulations were provided to
the Commissioners for their information.
D. A copy of Chapter 5.64 "Special Advertising Devices" was
provided to the Commission for information.
ADJOURNMENT
A motion was made by Commissioner Moran and seconded by
Commissioner Bund to adjourn to a regular meeting on July
28, 1987, at 7:00 p.m., in the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105
Calle Estado, La Quinta, California. This meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission was adjourned at 9:20 p.m., July
14, 19137.
MR/MIN07-14.DFT
4
E
11
DATE:
APPLICANT:
OWNER:
PROPOSAL:
LOCATION:
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONING:
ENVIRONMENTAL
ASSESSMENT:
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
AUGUST 25, 1987
HAROLD HIRSCH
HAROLD HIRSCH
TT 20016 (DUNE PALMS; SECOND EXTENSION OF
TIME REQUEST FOR A 130-UNIT PRD ON 33.3+
ACRES
NORTHWEST CORNER OF MILES AVENUE AND DUNE
PALMS ROAD (SEE ATTACHMENT #1)
MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (4-8 UNITS/ACRE)
R-1-11,000 PD (ONE -FAMILY DWELLINGS, 11,000
SQUARE FEET PER UNIT REQUIRED, APPROVED FOR
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
Environmental Assessment No. 84-020 was
prepared and a Negative Declaration was
adopted in conjunction with the original
tentative tract map approval.
On July 17, 1984, the City Council approved the original
Tentative Tract No. 20016. The first time extension was granted
on July 1, 1,986, by the City Council.
The Applicant is requesting a second time extension to record the
final map. If approved, the new expiration date would be July
18, 1988.
Tentative Tract Map No. 20016 proposes a 130-unit statutory
(airspace) condominium project on 33 acres (see Exhibit A). The
units are arranged in clusters around a collector loop street
(36-feet wide) which has smaller cul-de-sacs and loop streets
(24-feet wide) extending off it. The units are detached,
single-family houses and have the following minimum setbacks from
the property boundaries: Miles Avenue = 20 feet; Dune Palms Road
= 22 feet; north and west boundaries = 20 feet. The perimeter
wall along the public streets has staggered setbacks with 0 to 20
foot setbacks along Dune Palms Road and 5 feet or greater along
Miles Avenue. The main entrance will be on Miles Avenue, with a
MR/STAFFRPT.009
1
El
secondary or emergency access on Dune Palms Road. Existing
conditions of approval make minor modifications to these
standards.
There will be one large central recreation area with six tennis
courts and a large swimming pool. Three smaller recreation
areas, each with a swimming pool, will be dispersed on the site.
Existing conditions require review of a recreation plan by the
Planning and. Development Department.
Three house designs are proposed (see Attachments #2-#4). Plan
"A" is a twc-bedroom/two-bath unit with 1,175 square feet
(gross); Plan "B" is a two-bedroom/two-bath unit with 1,450
square feet (gross; Plan "C" is a three-bedroom/two-bath unit
with 1,450 square feet (gross). All the units have attached,
two -car garages. All the dwellings are one story in height
(19'-20') and Spanish -style. The exterior walls have stucco
siding and the roof is covered with Spanish tile. The unit mix
is as follows: 39 "A" units, 39 "B" units, and 52 "C" units.
No final map activity has taken place since the original approval.
STAFF COMMENTS AND ANALYSIS:
Consistencv with the General Plan
® The State Subdivision Map Act (Section 66473.5) requires that a
tentative map, including provisions for its design and
improvements:, be consistent with the adopted General Plan. Since
the conditions of approval for the first extension of time
brought the existing approval into compliance with the General
Plan, no amendments to the General Plan have been approved which
would substantially change the existing conditions. Some minor
additional conditions relative to landscaping and infrastructure
fees are proposed; however, staff proposes no major additions or
amendments to the existing conditions, other than revising their
format to reflect only those which still apply to the project.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
By adoption of the attached Planning Commission Resolution No.
87-015, recommend to the City Council approval of the second time
extension for Tentative Tract No. 20016, subject to attached
conditions.
Attachments:
1.
Location
2.
Approved
3.
Approved
4.
Approved
5.
Exhibit
6.
®
Planning
Map
Plan "A"
Plan "B"
Plan "C"
"A" Approved Site Plan
Commission Resolution No
87-015 with Conditions
MR/STAFFRPT.009 2
E
CASE MAP
CASE No. TT # 2 0 01 6
ORT
0
SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME SCALE: NONE
K
r
r
r
11
L I
m
x
D
Z T <
a + �
o j O m
c < O
s r z
c Z
z
� Z
o 0
a o
X
a
S
z
DUNE PA[46 ROAD
140
n w �
w
P1
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 87-015
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CIT`.t OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, ANNOUNCING FINDINGS
RECONFIRMING THE ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS AND
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20016
TO ALLOW A SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME.
CASE NO. TT 20016, AMENDED NO. 1 - SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California, did on the 21st day of June, 1984, hold a duly -noticed
Public Hearing recommending confirmation of the environmental
analysis and approval of the request of Psomas & Associates to
subdivide 33.3 acres into a 140-unit single-family detached planned
residential development, generally located at the northwest corner of
Miles Avenue and Dune Palms Road, more particularly described as
follows:
A portion of the southeast quarter of
the northwest half of Section 20, Township
5 South, Range 7 East, S.B.B.M.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of La Quinta,
California, did, on the 17th day of July, 1984, hold a duly -noticed
Public Hearing to consider the Applicant's request and recommendation
of the Planning Commission concerning the environmental analysis and
Tentative Tract Map No. 20016, Amended No. 1; and
WHEREAS, said Tentative Map complied with the requirements
of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act
of 1970" (County of Riverside, Resolution No. 82-213, adopted by
reference in City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 5), in that the Planning
Director determined after initial study (Environmental Assessment No.
84-020) that the project would not have a significant adverse impact
on the environment and that a Negative Declaration should be filed;
and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and
considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested
persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did make findings to
justify the approval of said Tentative Tract Map; and,
WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, said Tentative Tract Map
No. 20016 was approved by the La Quinta City Council based on said
findings and subject to certain conditions; and,
WHEREAS, on July 1, 1986, the City Council did extend the
original expiration date to July 18, 1987, based upon findings made
by the Planning Commission and subject to additional conditions; and,
MR/RESODRFT.015
WHEREAS, the owner, Mr. Harold Hirsch, has applied for a
second extension of time for TT 20016, in accordance with Section
13.16.230 of the La Quinta Municipal Code relating to time extensions
on tentative maps; and,
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Planning Commission did find the
following facts to justify approval of said extension of time:
1. The Tentative Tract No. 20016, as conditionally approved, is
generally consistent with the goals, policies and intent of the
La Quinta General Plan, and the standards of the Municipal Land
Division and. Land Use Ordinances.
2. The subject site is physically suitable for the proposed
subdivision.
3. Adherence to the current conditions of approval will ensure that
the project will not be likely to cause substantial environmental
damage and that impacts on wildlife habitat will be mitigated to
the extent feasible.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Planning Commission
of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute
the findings of the Planning Commission in this case;
2. That it does: hereby reconfirm the conclusion of Environmental
Assessment No. 84-020;
3. That it does: hereby recommend to the City Council approval of the
above -described Second Extension of Time for Tentative Tract Map
No. 20016 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and
subject to the attached conditions.
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission held on this 25th day of August, 1987, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
PLANNING DIRECTOR
MR/RESODRFT.015
11
COMPOSITE OF APPLICABLE CONDITIONS APPROVAL
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 20016, AMENDED #1/JULY 18, 1984;
FIRST EXTENSION OF TIME/JULY 24, 1987; AND
NEW CONDITIONS FROM SECOND EXTENSION OF TIME/AUGUST 25, 1987
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20016, Amended No. 1, shall comply with
standards and requirements of the State Subdivision Map Act and
the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance, unless otherwise
modified by the following conditions.
2. Tract phasing plans (if any), including any proposed phasing of
public improvements, shall be submitted to the City Engineer and
Planning and. Development Department for review and approval.
3. Prior to the: issuance of a building permit for construction of
any use contemplated by this approval, the Applicant shall first
obtain permits and/or clearances from the following public
agencies:
Riverside County Environmental Health Department
a City Engineer
e City Fire Marshal
o Planning and Development Department
e Dessert Sands Unified School District
Evidence of said permit or clearance from the above agencies
shall be presented to the Building Section at the time of the
application for a building permit for the use contemplated
herewith.
4. Development of Tentative Tract Map No. 20016 shall comply with
the approved Exhibits A, B, C, and D as contained in the Planning
and Development Department's file for Tentative Tract Map No.
20016, and the following conditions which shall take precedence
in the event: of any conflicts with the provisions of the
Tentative Tract.
5. Development of Tentative Tract Map No. 20016 shall comply with
the La Quint:a General Plan and City standards in effect at the
time of final map recordation.
Building Design Review
6. The floor plans (Exhibit B) for Unit "C" shall be revised to
provide all bedrooms with minimum 10-foot width and depth
dimensions and a minimum 100 square feet of livable area.
MR/CONAPRVL.009 1
11
7. The floor plans (Exhibit B) shall be revised to provide the
single -car garages with minimum 12' x 20' interior dimensions. A
pedestrian door leading from the garage directly into the house
or onto a covered walkway shall be provided.
Streets, Grading and Drainage
8. The Applicant shall comply with the following requirements of the
City Engineer:
a. Miles Avenue, Dune Palms Road and all interior private
streets; shall be improved in accordance with City standards
and the provisions of the La Quinta General Plan in effect
at the time of final map recordation.
(1) The main private loop street shall be a minimum 32-feet
wide (curb -to -curb) with parking on one side only, and
all other private streets shall be a minimum 28-feet
wide (curb -to -curb) with no on -street parking.
(2) The Applicant shall construct and landscape center
medians on the adjacent public streets in accordance
with the General Plan provisions.
b. The Applicant shall dedicate any additional required
rights -•of -way along Dune Palms Road and shall provide a
corner cutback at the intersection of Dune Palms Road and
Miles Avenue, in accordance with City standards.
C. Prior to final map recordation, the Applicant shall submit
grade studies for Miles Avenue and Dune Palms Road to the
City Engineer for review and approval.
d. The project entrance on Miles Avenue shall have acceleration
and deceleration lanes and a left -turn lane in accordance
with City standards.
e. The Applicant shall submit soils report and grading plan to
the City Engineer for review and approval.
f. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Applicant
shall submit a hydrology study to the City for review. All
pads shall be protected from a 100-year storm.
g. An emergency or secondary access shall be provided on Dune
Palms Road.
h. The Applicant shall install bike lanes or pedestrian
walk/bicycle paths along all perimeter public streets in
accordance with City standards in effect at the time of
development.
MR/CONAPRVL.009 2
9. The Applicant shall submit detail plans showing the location and
design of the entry gate and gatehouse (if any) to the Planning
and Development Department for review and approval. All gates
shall have a. City -approved radio receiver which will accept
signals from the emergency transmitters of the Riverside County
Sheriff and Fire Departments, and which will activate the gates
to provide emergency access. Prior to the submittal of building
plans for the installation of entry gates to the project, the
Applicant shall submit a traffic analysis demonstrating that
adequate stacking space and turn lanes are being provided to
accommodate the anticipated traffic.
10. The Applicant shall agree to pay the proportionate or prorata
share, or agree to participate in any assessment district or
other funding means determined by the City, to install public
street lighting and to underground existing high voltage overhead
utility liners not exceeding 12KV on the adjacent public street
rights -of -way, provided that such improvement districts or
projects have been approved and in effect prior to the
recordation of the final map.
11. A plan showing proposed parking along the private road system
shall be submitted for review and approval by the Planning and
Development Department. The plan shall designate any "no
parking" areas and indicate the method of identifying them.
12. A plan showing non -automotive means of transportation within the
project, including bicycle and pedestrian paths, shall be
submitted for review and approval by the Planning and Development
Department prior to final map recordation.
Public Services and Utilities
13. Fire protection shall be provided in accordance with the Uniform
Fire Code and City standards and requirements in effect at the
time of development.
a. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the following
conditions shall be met/certified to:
(1) Fire Hydrants - Install super fire hydrants located no
less than 25 feet nor greater than 165 feet from any
portion of exterior walls of proposed building(s),
spaced 330 feet apart, as measured along approved
vehicular travelways. Installation shall be on a water
system capable of delivering 1500 GPM fire flow for a
two-hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure
in accordance with ordinance No. 7, Section 10.301c.
(2) Developer shall furnish two copies of water system
plans to the Fire Department for review and approval.
Plans shall conform to fire hydrants types, location
and spacing; the water system shall meet fire flow
MR/CONAPRVL.009 3
11
requirements. Plans shall be signed by a registered
civil engineer and approved by the water company with
the following certification:
"I certify that the design of the water system in
Tentative Tract No. 20016 is in accordance with the
requirements prescribed by the Riverside County Fire
Department."
(3) Prior to arrival of combustible materials on the
construction site, the above (1) fire protection must
be operating.
(4) Provide written certification from the water company
that hydrants will be installed and will produce the
required flow.
b. Cul-de-sac turning circles must have a minimum unobstructed
90-foot: turning diameter.
C. Cul-de-sac streets shall be no longer than 550 feet, unless
alternate emergency access is provided in accordance with
the requirements of the City Fire Marshal and City Engineer.
14. The water and sewage disposal systems shall be installed in
accordance with the requirements of the City and of Coachella
is Valley Water District.
15. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Coachella
Valley Water District as follows:
a. Domestic water and sanitation service shall be provided in
accordance with the requirements of Coachella Valley Water
District.
b. The developer shall provide land on which to locate
additional facilities for the expansion of the water
system.. These sites shall be shown on the tract map as lots
to be deeded to the District for such purpose.
C. The area shall be annexed to Improvement District No. 55 of
CVWD for sanitation service.
16. The Applicant shall provide all necessary easements for public
utilities. All on -site utilities shall be placed underground.
17. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of Imperial
Irrigation District as follows:
a. The Applicant shall provide 10-foot-wide public utility
easements on both sides of all interior streets and a
10-foot-wide public utility easement along the north and
40 west sides of the project site from Dune Palms Road to Miles
Avenue,.
MR/CONAPRVL.009 4
11
b. Electric service shall be extended underground from adjacent
power facilities into the site.
18. As mitigation for the impact on the public schools, the Applicant
shall comply with the following:
a. Prior to recordation of a final map, the Applicant shall
complete a school impact mitigation agreement with Desert
Sands Unified School District.
b. Prior to the issuance of any building permits for
construction of dwellings, the Applicant shall provide the
Planning and Development Department with written clearance
from Dessert Sands Unified School District.
Mangement
19. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall
submit to the Planning and Development Department the following
documents which shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City
that the open space/recreation areas and private streets and
drives shall be maintained in accordance with the intent and
purpose of this approval:
a. The document to convey title;
b. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions to be recorded; and
C. Management and maintenance agreement to be entered into with
the unit/lot owners of this land division.
The approved Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall be
recorded at the same time that the final subdivision map is
recorded.
A Homeowners Association, with the unqualified right to assess
the owners of the individual units for reasonable maintenance
costs shall be established and continuously maintained. The
association shall have the right to lien the property of any
owners who default in the payment of their assessments. Such
lien shall not be subordinate to any encumbrance other than a
first deed of trust, provided that such deed of trust is made in
good faith and for value and is of record prior to the lien of
the homeowners association.
Miscellaneous
20. Prior to the: recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall
provide for mitigation of the impact on the fringe -toed lizard by
complying with requirements of the mitigation fees.
21. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall
submit to the Planning and Development Department for review and
approval a plan (or plans) showing the following:
MR/CONAPRVL.009 5
L�' J
a. Landscaping, including plant types, sizes, spacing, and
locations as required by these conditions, or proposed by
the Applicant.
b. Landscape irrigation system.
C. Location and design of any proposed and/or required walls.
d. Location and design of sidewalks on -site and on adjacent
streets.
e. Exterior lighting plan.
Location and design of any and all proposed trash
enclosure(s) and signed approval of same by Palm Desert
Disposal.
The approved landscaping and improvements shall be installed
prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy. The
landscaping shall be maintained in a healthy and viable condition
for the life; of the project. Landscaping within 10 feet of all
driveway approaches shall not exceed 30 inches in height.
Landscaping shall not interfere with vehicle overhang areas.
Prior to submission of any plans for building permit issuance to
the Planning and Development Department, the Applicant shall
secure written approval of the landscape plan from the Riverside
County Agricultural Commissioner's Office relative to the
appropriate inspection for pest control. At a minimum, the plans
shall provide the contractor's name, address and phone number,
and the place of origin of all planting materials.
22. Desert or native plant species and drought -resistant planting
materials shall be incorporated into the landscaping plans for
the project and the public street parkways.
23. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee program in effect at the time of
issuance of building permits. This fee may include drainage
fees, provided that an areawide drainage plan has been adopted
and is in effect prior to the recordation of the final map.
Thirty (30) days prior to the approval of a final map, the
Applicant/Subdivider shall have submitted to the City Manager any
and all claims or requests for credit toward Infrastructure Fees
attributable from the development of this tract. The City
Manager's report shall be made a part of the Council's
deliberation on a final map, and the action of the City Council
in the acceptance or rejection of any such claim or request shall
constitute the complete understanding between parties as to the
disposition of infrastructure fees as it may relate to any future
credit.
MR/CONAPRVL.009
24. Provision shall be made to improve Dune Palms Road as it crosses
the Whitewat:er Storm Channel. The amount of contribution to and
timing of the construction of these improvements shall be
determined by the City Council.
a. Plan Preparation: Improvement plan drawings and cost
estimates for these improvements shall be prepared by the
City Engineer.
b. Method of Financing: Applicant shall contribute an amount
to be determined for these improvements. In conjunction
with review of improvement drawings, the method of financing
shall be determined and may include a per -unit "up -front"
contribution for the entire project with reimbursement from
other affected developments, an assessment district, or
similar financing techniques.
C. Timing of Improvements: Upon establishing a method of
financing these improvements, it shall be determined when
they are to be installed. The improvements may be required
with other road improvements at time of final map
recordation, may be tied to a percentage of occupancy
permits within the project, or may be related to some other
time criteria.
d. Final Map: If requirements set forth in a., b., and c.
above are not completed prior to map recordation, the
Applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City and
provide appropriate performance guarantees to assure
compliance with this condition.
e. Notice: Applicant shall be provided adequate notice of any
City Council consideration of these requirements.
25. The Applicant shall submit a recreation plan for review and
approval prior to issuance of a building permit. The recreation
plan shall :show all recreational amenities, including, but not
limited to:
o Pools S, Spas (dimensions and square footages)
e Recreat:ion and Community Buildings
• Tennis Courts
e Playgrounds and/or "Tot Lots" (include equipment used)
o Volleyball, Basketball and Handball Courts (if any)
Additional facilities may be required if the plan does not
include adequate facilities for the private recreational needs of
residents.
MR/CONAPRVL.009 7
26. Perimeter security walls and fences shall be subject to the
following standards:
a. Setbacks for perimeter walls and fences shall be a minimum
of ten (10) feet from the Miles Avenue and Dune Palms Road
rights -of -way, or in accordance with the provisions of the
General. Plan as in effect at the time of construction,
whichever is greater.
b. Portions of the perimeter walls shall have wrought iron (or
similar open fencing) to provide views from the street into
the project.
C. A modification of these standards may be permitted,
dependent upon the overall location and design of the
fencing/wall.
d. All fencing designs, including location and materials, shall
be subject to City review and approval
The Applicant acknowledges that the City is considering a
City-wide Landscape and Lighting District and, by recording a
subdivision map, agrees to be included in the district. Any
assessments will be done on a benefit basis as required by law.
The Applicant shall pay the required processing, plan checking,
and inspection fees as are current at the time the work is being
accomplished. by City personnel or subcontractors for the
Planning, Building, or Engineering Divisions.
MR/CONAPRVL.009 8
jj,ll
E
®
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: AUGUST 25, 1987
APPLICANT: RICK JOHNSON CONSTRUCTION/MARGARET MIELE
PROJECT LOCATION': 77-836 AVENIDA MONTEZUMA
PROJECT PROPOSAL: PLOT PLAN NO. 87-383 - A REQUEST TO
ENCLOSE THE OPEN PORCH AREA OF THE
EXISTING MIELE COMMERCIAL/OFFICE
BUILDING, AND ADD A WALL -MOUNTED SIGN
ZONING DESIGNATION:
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION:
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATIONS:
PROPOSAL DISCUSSION:
PLANNING REVIEW
AUTHORITY:
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS:
SCENIC HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL (C-P-S)
VILLAGE COMMERCIAL
CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM THE PROVISIONS
OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT, GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15301, CLASS
l(a), MINOR ALTERATIONS OF EXISTING
PRIVATE STRUCTURES
ENCLOSURE OF 930 SQUARE FEET OF FLOOR
AREA (FRONT PATIO/CORRIDOR), AND
ADDITION OF NEW PLAZA IDENTIFICATION
WALL SIGN.
PURSUANT TO CITY ORDINANCE NO. 104,
COMMERCIAL PROJECTS WHICH INVOLVE A
REMODELING OF AN EXISTING BUILDING
AFFECTING EXTERIOR APPEARANCE SHALL BE
REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION IN
ACCORDANCE WITH THE CRITERIA SET FORTH
IN THE CITY'S PLOT PLAN PROCEDURES.
REQUIRED/PERMITTED
Setbacks: Front - None
Sides -
East- None
West- None
Rear - None
Building Height: 35 Feet
Building Coverage: 100%
Parking Spaces: 12 required
MR/STAFFRPT.012
E
PROVIDED/PROPOSED
5 Feet
12 Feet
None
40 Feet
24 Feet
30% approximately
12 provided
11
LANDSCAPING: PERIMETER LANDSCAPING PROVIDED WITH PALM
STREET TREES, LAWN, PERENNIAL AND
SEASONAL PLANTING.
COLOR/DESIGN: ENCLOSURE IS DESIGNED TO MATCH THE
EXISTING BUILDING COLORS WITH WHITE
STUCCO SIDING AND CHARCOAL BLACK WOOD
TRIM. THE CHARCOAL BLACK TRIM WILL ALSO
EXTEND TO THE WINDOW FRAMES.
ANALYSIS:
1. The project is located in the Village at La Quinta, for which a
specific plan is currently being prepared. The Village
Commercial land use designation is intended to accommodate a
pedestrian -oriented downtown. The enclosure of an open
walkway/corridor is not consistent with the design objectives for
the Village at La Quinta as it eliminates a significant
pedestrian feature.
2. A concern is whether or not the proposal represents an acceptable
architectural approach. The proposed enclosure is an attempt to
continue the Contemporary style of architecture. This may be
considered out of place or in conflict with the objectives of the
Village at la Quinta Design Concept.
The Applicant has expressed a concern for the liability of
maintaining the public corridor completely open and, therefore,
proposes the enclosure.
other methods are available to achieve the same purpose, while
not compromising pedestrian orientation and allowing for reduced
liability. For example, enclosing the corridor with attractive
wrought iron or similar open viewing material and a system of
gates at the: main and side entrances would both maintain the
integrity of the overall architecture of the building and
minimize the liability problem. The use of this technique would
also provide continued pedestrian opportunities.
3. Currently, an unscreened refuse bin is located in the rear
alley. As part of this design review, the provision of a
separate trash bin enclosure should be required to be consistent
with City policy.
4. The Applicant proposes a 52-square-foot non -illuminated main wall
identification sign. There currently exists a freestanding
multi -tenant: identification sign along with several attached
tenant signs. Rather than review each sign, it would be more
desirable to review an overall sign program for the "Parkside
Plaza". In this case, all signage at the site would relate to
each other and be in harmony with the Village at La Quinta Design
Concept. Si.gnage could be designed around a consistent theme
with sandblasted wood or raised letters on wood, having sizes and
MR/STAFFRPT.012 2
11
shapes that create a consistent overall sign program. Relative
to signage colors, the sign program should incorporate a color
scheme which. is complementary to the building's existing color
palate.
ACTION SCENARIOS:
The Planning Commission has a variety of options available in making
a determination on this project. Four options are outlined below:
1. Deny Plot Plan No. 87-383 with the following findings:
a. The proposed remodel is not consistent with the goals and
policies of the La Quinta General Plan.
b. The proposal does not facilitate the objectives of the
Village at La Quinta Design Concept.
C. The proposal does not provide sufficient opportunities for
pedestrian orientation.
2. Continue for, redesign consistent with the design objectives for
the Village at La Quinta with the following findings:
a. The proposed remodel is not consistent with the goals and
policies of the La Quinta General Plan.
b. The proposal does not facilitate the objectives of the
Village at La Quinta Design Concept.
c.. The proposal does not provide sufficient opportunities for
pedestrian orientation.
d. Project: consistency with the General Plan and the Village at
La Quinta Design Concept is feasible with project redesign.
3. Continue until completion and adoption of the Village at La
Quinta Specific Plan with the following findings:
a. The proposed remodel is not consistent with the goals and
policies of the La Quinta General Plan.
b. The proposal does not facilitate the objectives of the
Village; at La Quinta Design Concept.
C. The proposal does not provide sufficient opportunities for
pedestrian orientation.
d. Project consistency with the General Plan and the Village at
La Quinta Design Concept is feasible upon project redesign
with incorporation of design guidelines of the Village at La
® Quinta Specific Plan.
4. Approve Plot Plan No. 87-383, findings, and conditions as listed
in Attachment No. 2.
MR/STAFFRPT.012 3
11
RECOMMENDATION:
The Planning and, Development Department recommends that the Planning
Commission continue Plot Plan No. 87-383 for redesign consistent with
the design objectives of the Village at La Quinta Design Concept.
MR/STAFFRPT.012 4
55'-o"
!I�
AE<111N
9 CONC E P T S,. GRO UP.
,
sirE
rAMPIC
,r N ,e •• ,. I e• n .r
• + AVCNIDA -� c o 0 0 0
j MONTEZUMA
j- CALLI TA 611
P �•
•.�'ONTEZU0 .. •' ..i,
_ o NI ALG C
Z CA
m
j. +. 3I
7r �� .'� •re ,1, iALLE
AAllf
ATTACHMENT "
47-8346 AVENIDA MONrEZUMA
N
ATTACHMENT NO. 2
AUGUST 25, 1987
APPROVAL OPTION
FINDINGS
1. The request is consistent with the C-P-S Zone.
2. The project, as conditioned, is consistent with the La Quinta
General Plan.
3. The project, as conditioned, will adequately address the
pedestrian orientation requirements of the Village at La Quinta.
4. The project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act.
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Remodel of exterior portions of the Miele Building shall conform
substantially with Exhibit A contained in the file for Plot Plan
No. 87-383, as amended by the following conditions.
2. The approved plot plan shall be used within two (2) years of the
approval date, otherwise it shall become null and void and of no
effect whatsoever.
Parking and Refuse Enclosure
3. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the project, the
Applicant shall submit for review and approval by the City
Engineer/Public Works Director and the Planning and Development
Department the following improvement plans:
a. Slurry seal over all paved areas of the site.
b. Striping plan for a minimum of 13 off-street parking spaces,
including handicapped parking spaces.
C. Trash enclosure plan - compliance with the City's Refuse
Enclosure Design Guidelines.
Structural Desic;n
4. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a revised enclosure
improvement plan shall be submitted for review and approval by
the Planning Commission. The revised plan shall modify design
and building materials as follows:
MR/CONAPRVL.010 1
11
a. All siding materials shall be constructed with open wrought
iron or other open viewing materials.
b. Wrought iron or other open viewing material gates for
pedestrian access shall be provided at the main and side
entrances to the corridor breezeway.
C. Wrought iron or other open viewing material's design and
color shall incorporate a character which will blend well
with the building architecture.
5. Prior to issuance of a building permit, the Applicant shall
submit for review and approval by the Planning Commission an
overall sign, program to include all main Plaza and tenant
identification attached and detached signage, including a color
scheme for Parkside Plaza.
MR/CONAPRVL.010 2
11
11
El
View of Public Corridor Breeze
way. Note:Enclosure Proposed
Front View of Miele Buildinrt
Across from Avenida PRontezuma
ATTACHMENT NO. 3
EXISTING MIELE BUILDING
— near View of Miele Buildina PLOT PLAN NO. 87-383