1985 04 23 PCAGENDA
PLANNING CCHMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta
City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta,
California
April 23, 1985 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Flag Salute
2. ROLL CALL
3. HEARINGS
A. Tentative Tract Map No. 20717, a proposal to divide 132+ acres into
109 lots with 23 single-family dwellings on individual lots and 488
condaninium units on the remining lots on the south side of Avenue
54, along the proposed alignaent of PGA Boulevard; Sunrise
Canpany, Applicant.
1. Report fran Staff.
2. Motion for Adoption.
ffqn�z4"#(aanis:7
A. Minutes of the regular meeting of March 26, 1985.
B. Minutes of the regular meeting of April 9, 1985.
5. BUSINESS
6. ADJOURNMENT
99
ITEM NO.
DATE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
RE:
JED MOTION BY: GOETCHEUS WALT,ING KLIMKIEWICZ MORAN THORNBURGH
P+1 SECOND BY: GOETCHEUS ING KLIMKIEWICZ MORAN THORNBURGH
)p
DISCUSSION:
ROLL CALL
CO*!MISSIONERS:
GOETCHEUS
nIDffCII7,17ICZ
MORAN
WALLING
THORNBURGH
UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED
AYE NO ABSTAIN ABSENT PRESENT
c/
YES NO
ITEM NO.
DATE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A
MOTION BY: GOETCHEUS ING KLIMKIEWICZ MORAN THORNBURGH
SECOND BY: GOETCHE%US WALLING KLIMKIEWICZ_ p NAIRAN THORNBURGH
P
DISCUSSION: / 5 , &j
ROLL CALL VOTE:
CO^2ISSIONERS:
GOETCHEUS
KLIMKMlICZ
MORAN
WALLING
THORNBURGH
AYE NO ABSTAIN ABSENT PRESENT
UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED: YES NO
0
MEMORANDUM
CITY OF LA QUINTA
To: The Honorable Chairnan and Mamioers of the Planning Cormission
From: Carm mity Development Department
Date: April 23, 1985
Subject: TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 20717
Location: South Side of Avenue 54, Along the Proposed Alignment of PGA --Nest Boulevard.
Applicant: Sunrise Company
Request: Division of 132+ Acres into 109 Lots with 23 Single -Family Dwellings on
Individual Lots and 488 Condominium Units on the Remaining Lots.
1. General Plan
a. Site: Specific Plan No. 83-002 (PGA West), designated for. residential and
golf course/recreational/open space uses.
b. Surrounding Area: "PGA West" surrounds the project to the west, east and
south designated for golf course and residential uses. To the north central
portion of the site, within Specific Plan 83-002, is a 20-acre parcel
designated for carmercial uses. To the north of the project site, across
Avenue 54, designated for agriculture uses in the Riverside County Open Space
and Conservation Element.
2. Zoning
a. Site: R-2 (General Residential).
b. Surrounding Area: within Specific Plan 83-002, R-2 (General Residential) to
the east, west and south and C-P-S (Scenic Highway Cammeroial) on the 20 acres
to the north central portion of the site. To the north of the site, across
Avenue 54, A-1-10 and A-1-2 (Agriculture).
3. Existing Conditions: The site is a portion of the PGA West Specific Plan project.
The site was previously used for various agricultural production and is currently
being graded and improved for the PGA West stadium golf course. Main access to
the tract is to be from PGA West Boulevard at the termination of Jefferson Street
south of Avenue 54.
Public improvements and services are being established and extended to the site
in concurrence with the applicable specific plan and parcel map. Madison Street
and Avenues 54 and 58 are improved and have now been accepted by the City, as a
part of the conditions of approval to vacate Jefferson Street within the PGA West
boundaries.
0
STAFF REPORT - PIANNING CCMISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 2.
4. Envirarmental Considerations: An Environmental Impact Report (SCH #83062922)
was prepared on the overall specific plan and was certified by the City Council
on May 15, 1984. All environmental impacts associated with Tentative Tract No.
20717 have been addressed in the subject EIR available for review at the Community
Development Department. Given the concerns stated in the EIR, several mitigation
measures were incorporated into the conditions of approval attached to Specific
Plan No. 83-002. The proposed project will also incorporate environmental miti-
gation measures applicable to Specific Plan 83-002. City Council Resolution No.
84-28, approving a Statement of Overriding Findings, indicates that although
there urLll be a significant adverse effect on the environment with regard to
converting prime agricultural land to urban uses, the project will provide specific
overriding social, economic and other community benefits.
5. Previous Approvals:
a. Specific Plan No. 83-002, "PGA West", approval of a 1665-acre project oriented
around four (4), 18-hole golf courses, with 5,000 residential units, 20 acres
of retail/office eemiercial, and a 65-acre resort village with a 400-roan hotel
and 250 apartment/condaminium/hotel units. Approved May 15, 1984.
b. Parcel Map No. 20426, division of a 452-acre portion of PGA West into eight (8)
lots, each exceeding 20 acres in size, and one access lot. This map implements
Specific Plan 83-002 by dividing the property into different land uses with
Lots 1 and 4 for residential uses, lots 5, 6, and 7 for golf courses, Lot 8
for a oanmernial center, and Lots 2 and 3 for the resort village area.
Approved February 26, 1985.
c. Change of Zone Case No. 84-007, zoning 1,580 acres R-2, 65 acres R-3 for the
resort village, and 20 acres C-P-S for the commercial center. Approved on
May 15, 1984.
d. Street Vacation No. 84-004, vacating Jefferson Street between Avenues 54 and
58, and vacating Airport Boulevard between Madison and Jefferson Streets.
Approved September 18, 1984.
e. Street Vacation No. 84-006, vacating Airport Boulevard between Jefferson
Street and the All -American Canal, and vacating all of Hatajo Drive.
Approved February 5, 1985.
f. Other minor related plans such as PGA West entry gates, phasing plan, street
name plan, and Specific Plan street signage plans are currently being reviewed.
6. Project: Description:
The proposed project consists of the subdivision of a portion of PGA West into a
conbination of attached condominium units and single-family lots. The tract is
to be developed on 132.2 acres (net acres excluding golf courses) surrounded by
the PGA West stadium golf course and a second golf course to the west. A total
of 488 condominium units and 23 single-family lots are included in this development
request. 91is request for approval not only includes the subdivision of land, but
also includes design review approval of all proposed condominium units. The
following is a breakdown of land uses within Tentative Tract Map No. 20717 (Refer
to Exhibit A - Tract Map):
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING COM"IISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 3.
LOT NOS.
SPECIFIC BUILDING UNITS
NO. OF UNITS
1 - 15
57 Fourplex West Type A
228
16 - 20
Model Units - Fourplex & Duplex Units
36
22 - 30
27 Fourplex East Type B
108
31 - 53
Single -Family Lots for Custcan Home Development
23
21, 54 - 75,
77 - 83,
58 Duplex Units
116
84 - 96 and
98 - 109
CUMULATIVE UNIT TOTAL =
511
MISCELLANEOUS LOTS
76, 84, 97
CCnITMity Pools
0
110 - 116
Lakes within Duplex Unit Location
0
117 - 141
Landscape Ccmnon Area
0
The project site is currently being graded to accommodate the PGA West stadium
golf course.
Consistent with the PGA West Specific Plan and the recently approved related
Parcel Map 20426, the circulation system provides for main entrances off PGA West
Boulevard (the main arterial through PGA West) with gated east and west entrances
into the tract. Frontage roads along PGA West Boulevard provide for building
setbacks from the main arterial of at least 50 feet. Street configuration to the
east portion of the tract indicates that street alignments extend north and south
from the entrance with cul-de-sacs at the ends of alignment stretches fronting
PGA West Boulevard. The farthest alignment, to the west of the entrance, extends
north to abruptly end into what will eventually be expanded into a large loop when
additional tract portions of the Specific Plan are developed. The west portion of
the tract also contains a south and north tentacle-like street alignment which
fronts onto PGA West Boulevard with the northeasterly stretch ending into what also
is expected to expand into a large loop with future development. An island street
configuration travels to the east of the easterly tract entrance providing a con-
tiguous loop for free flowing circulation.
The tract is proposed to have two distinctively different design thanes. To the
east of PGA West Boulevard, there is to be a mix of duplex, fourplex and single-
family home sites. The multiple -family structures are to be large (between 2,300-
square-foot to over 4, 10 0-square-foot floor areas).
The single-family lots, all located in this portion of the tract, are to contain
custom, single-family homes. These lots average 19,025 square feet in size, varying
fran 17,980 to 23,800 square feet in size.
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING OO M9ISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 4.
To the west of PGA West Boulevard, all buildings are proposed to be fourplex,
with the exception of the model units. All of the "Fourplex West" units range
in floorarea from 1,300 to 2,000 square feet.
Prices for the units vary according to square footage and location, with the
larger, higher priced units located to the east of PGA West Boulevard. The
following is a breakdown of projected unit prices. Please note that these are
estimated costs and may vary at time of actual sales.
DESCRIPTION
PRICE RANG
I
Fourplex West Dwelling Units -
Varying in size from 1,300 Sq.Ft. to
$120,000 to $230,000
2,000 Sq.Ft.
II
Fourplex East Dwelling Units -
Varying in size from 2,300 Sq.Ft. to
$230,000 to $400,000
31100 Sq.Ft.
III
Duplex East Dwelling Units -
Varying in size from 3,400 Sq.Ft. to
$400,000 to $650,000
4,200 Sq.Ft.
IV
Single -Family Lots for Custom Hermes -
Prices Unknown at
Ranging in size from 18,000 Sq.Ft. to
This Time
to 24,000 Sq.Ft.
Duplex East Buildings
Applicable Exhibits: Exhibit A - Tract Map - Lots 31 through 36, Lots 54 through
109; Exhibits B-9 through B-16 (Building Site and Unit Floor Plans), and Exhibits
C-5 through C-8 (Elevation Plans).
The duplex buildings are the deluxe, multiple -residential units of "PGA West" and
are generally to be located on an island surrounded by golf course and open space.
All duplex buildings have a consistent architectural thane with the typical "Desert"
style design, having a "Contemporary" architectural character. The buildings dis-
play a triangular symmetry with flat tile, sloping pyramidal roofs over rectangular
front exteriors, heavily emphasizing large roof overhangs supported in height from
9.5' to 22' providing an elite style of architecture.
Each duplex building is centered on a single lot averaging 150' in depth and varying
lot widths depending on building size. For example, the Building 100 Plan has a lot
width of 128 feet. The Building 400 Plan has a 148-foot lot width. Each building
contains two units of the sane design with reversed floor plans. The Plan 100 con-
tains 3,482-square-feet of usable floor area per unit, the Plan 200 contains 3,786-
square-feet of usable floor area per unit, the Plan 300 contains 3,975-square-feet
of usable floor area per unit, and the Plan 400 contains 4,178-square-feet of usable
floor area.
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING COMMISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 5.
The building setbacks are as follows:
° Front Yard Setback fran Garage - 25 Feet
Rear Yard Setbacks:
Plan
100
- 19.75
Feet
Plan
200 -
14.50
Feet
Plan
300
- 14.00
Feet
Plan
400
- 17.00
Feet
° Sideyard Setbacks - 8 Feet (16 Feet between buildings)
All buildings contain a typical front driveway and approach except for the Plan
400, which is to include a loop driveway for guest entry and parking in the front.
Building materials are to include varying pastel pink plaster exteriors, with
white to beige stained wood exterior trim. Roofing materials will consist of
flat, clay tile of various colors from Spanish red to light gray incorporated
together, which from a distance will project a uniform color look.
The floor plans of all duplex units are similar with Unit Plans 200, 300 and 400
being expanded versions of Plan 100. All units are to contain two bedrooms, one
den, three -and -a -half bathrooms, a dining, living and family roan, and a garage
with golf cart storage area. The pools located in the rear yards, as indicated on
the plans, are optional to be installed by the homeowner. A pedestrian door is
provided directly from the garage to the main house.
Fourplex East Buildings
Applicable Exhibits: Exhibit A - Tract Map - Lots 22 through 30; Exhibits B-1
through B-8 (Building Site and Unit Floor Plans); and Exhibits C-1 through C-4
(Elevation Plans).
The fourplex buildings on the east side of PGA West Boulevard are carposed of
Models 3010, 3020, 4010 and 4020. Each model is to contain a specific unit mix
with unit floor area given as follows:
° Model 3010: Two Unit Plans 10 and Two Unit Plans 30
° Model 3020: Two Unit Plans 20 and Two Unit Plans 30
° Model 4010: Two Unit Plans 10 and Two Unit Plans 40
° Model 4020: Two Unit Plans 20 and Two Unit Plans 40
Unit Plan Unit Floor Plan Square Footage
10 2,312 Sq.Ft.
20 2,602 Sq.Ft.
30 2,840 Sq.Ft.
40 3,051 Sq.Ft.
The architectural design of these buildings is similar and compatible with the
Duplex Models embodying a "Desert" type architecture having a contemgcrary flavor.
A sloping mansard style, flat tile roof reaches a maximum building height of 20
feet. The building setbacks are as follows:
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CCMMISSIQd
April 23, 1985
Page 6.
° Front Yard Setbacks: Unit Plans 10, 20 and 30 - 25 Feet
Unit Plan 40 - 15 Feet
° Sideyard Setbacks: All Models - 10 feet (20 feet between buildings)
° Rear Yard Setbacks: Models 3010 and 3020 - 13.75 Feet
Model 3030 - 20 Feet
Model 3040 - 17.5 Feet
All these buildings incorporate large pillars which visually support large exterior
overhangs. The varying roof lines present a visually pleasant setting.
Building materials include a light peach to pastel rose exterior plaster with
varying beige exterior wood trim. Two roof colors are proposed, one containing
varied light brown to gray flat tile and the other with varied dark red to brown
flat tile.
With regard to the floor plans, each unit contains two bedrooms, one den, and three -
and -a -half bathrooms, a two -car garage with golf cart storage is also provided.
Fourplex West Buildings
Applicable Exhibits: Exhibit A - Tract Map - Lots 1 through 17, Lot 20 and a
portion of Lot 10; Exhibits B-17-1 through B-20-1 (Building Site and Floor Plans);
and Exhibits C-17-1 through C-20-1 (Elevation Plans).
The fourplex buildings on the west side of PGA West Boulevard are composed of
Models 4224, 4334, 5225 and 5335. Each model is to contain a specific unit mix
with unit floor area given as follows:
° Model 4224:
Two Unit
Plans
502
and Two Unit Plans
504
° Model 4334:
TWo Unit
Plans
503
and Two Unit Plans
504
° Model 5225:
Wu Unit
Plans
502
and Two Unit Plans
505
• Model 5335:
Two Unit
Plans
503
and TWo Unit Plans
505
Unit Plan Unit Floor Plan Square Footage
502 1,330 Sq.Ft.
503 1,548 Sq.Ft.
504 1,627 Sq.Ft.
505 11918 Sq.Ft.
The architectural design of these buildings is ultra contemporary, however,
remaining in thane with the rest of the project containing desert compatible
colors and materials. The maxin mi building height of these units is 23 feet.
The building setbacks are as follows:
Front Yard Setbacks: All units have a minimum of 20 feet.
° Side Yard Setbacks: All nodels have a minimum of 7.5 feet -
(15 feet between buildings)
° Rear Yard Setbacks: Unit Plan
502
- 15
feet minimum
Unit Plan
503
- 15
feet minim=
Unit Plan
504
- 15
feet or 5 feet from roof overhang
Unit Plan
505
- 15
feet or 5 feet from roof overhang
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING COMMISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 7.
All buildings are to contain large roof overhangs with a rectangular symmetry
and triangular hip roofs.
Building materials include four, colored variety exterior plaster from a light
beige to peach and pink tones. Matching exterior detailing is provided with
varying colors depending on color scheme, including green, rose, brawn and gray.
Roofing includes flat tile varying in color from light gray and brawn to deep
Spanish red.
The unit floor plans all contain two bedrooms and a detached two -car garage.
Units 502, 503 and 504 have two full bathrooms. The larger units, 504 and 505,
contain a separate den with the 505 Model having two -and -a -half bathrooms.
Recreational amenities for the project residents include 22 community pools
located within, at most, 500 feet from any unit in the tract. The project will
be surrounded by the 142-acre PGA West stadium golf course which will provide
residents with dramatic visual open space amenities and the opportunity to golf.
Th the south of the tract will be the PGA West village core which will include
a tennis club and golf club, and several other recreational amenities.
7. Comments From Affected Agencies.
a. City Engineer:
(1) Streets - All streets to be constructed to City standards.
(2) Sewer and Water - Construct sewer and water systems per CVWD standards
and obtain Fire Marshal approval.
(3) Grading and Drainage - Submit grading plan for review and approval by
City Engineer. Submit hydrology and hydrolic
calculations for City Engineer approval. All
pads to be protected from 100-year storm.
(4) Final Map - Submit final map for review and approval by City Engineer.
(5) Traffic Signals - Install traffic signals at intersection of PGA West
Boulevard and Avenue 54.
b. Building Inspector:
(1) Street Numbering - It looks like there is going to be a problem with
addressing due to the nature of the looped streets
within the project.
c. School Districts:
(1) Desert Sands Unified School District - Please require mitigation of
school impacts by requiring developer to enter into agreement with
DSUSD to pay fee of $628 per unit at time of building permit.
(2) Coachella Valley Unified School District - The Applicant needs to sign
an agreement for developer fees. The reason why this response is late
is because a transfer of property between Desert Sands Unified School
District and the Coachella Valley School District is in process.
® 0
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING COMMISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 8.
(Staff Comment: The existing school district boundary line is the original
Jefferson Street aligiment which gives Desert Sands Unified School District
jurisdiction to the west and Coachella Valley Unified School District juris-
diction to the east of Jefferson Street. This boundary line travels through
Lots 8, 9, 10 and 13 and through the middle of several dwelling units. Based
on City of La Quinta Ordinance No. 71, no lot shall be divided by a taxing
district boundary line unless otherwise approved by the CcuuLmity Development
Director. Staff has conferred with both school districts expressing concern
that the boundaries rust be revised in a logical manner with no boundary line
which creates a division between buildings. A meeting between the school
districts is expected in May of 1985; however, it is very difficult to predict
when a mutually agreed boundary change will be approved. The Applicant has
expressed a desire to expedite tract map processing as he expects to start
construction of the model unit phase of the project by June, 1985.)
d. Gemaral Telephone:
GTE will provide service to this development from Jefferson Street and
Avenue 54.
e. Southern California Gas Coapany:
Gas available. No other camients.
f. Coachella Valley Water District:
This area is subject to stonmrater flows from the La Quinta Cove area. We
have been working with the Ia Quinta Redevelopment Agency on a plan to provide
stornwater protection to this area. However, funding for the construction of
these facilities has not been obtained.
This area is designated Zone C on Federal Flood Insurance rate maps which are
in effect at this time.
The District will furnish domestic water and sanitation service to this area
in accordance with the current regulations of this District. These regulations
provide for the payment of certain fees and charges by the subdivider and said
fees and charges are subject to change.
There nay be conflicts with existing District facilities. vie request the
appropriate public agency to withhold the issuance of a building permit until
arrangements have been made with the District for the relocation of these
facilities.
g. Riverside County Sheriff's Department:
There should be an expected increase in calls for service because of the
population increase associated with the addition of 109 residential lots.
Security during construction could be a problem because of the location of
the project which is away fmn existing residential and convercial developments.
It :is recartrended that adequate warning be given to vehicular traffic traveling
southbound on Jefferson that Jefferson ends at Avenue 54. Devices could consist
of:
(1) Warning Signs, "Road Ends in 500 Feet, Decrease Speed,
No Thru Traffic".
(2) Raised Pavement Marker - Dots in the Roadway.
® 9
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING COMISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 9.
h. Riverside County Fire Department:
(1) The water mains shall be capable of providing a potential fire flow
of 2500 GPM and the actual fire flow of 1500 GPM from any one hydrant
connected to any given water main for a two-hour duration at a 20 psi
residual operating pressure.
(2) Super fire hydrants (6" x 4" x 2'" x 2�") shall be located at each
street intersection, if possible, but in no event shall there be an
interval of more than 330' between hydrants.
(3) Emergency access gates meeting La Quinta standards should be provided
to allow access from Avenue 54 to the private roads at areas D-1 and
G-9 of Exhibit A.
(4) A cul-de-sac of at least 90' diameter should be provided at the end of
Section A-1 of Exhibit A.
(5) Due to the size of the proposed buildings, fourplex units will need to
be area separated with two-hour walls into two equal compartments.
i. Camients were requested, however, not received from the following agencies:
(1) Imperial Irrigation District
(2) Riverside County Planning Department
(3) Chamber of Commerce (La Quinta)
STAFF CObP MS AND ANALYSIS
Tentative Tract Map No. 20717 will implement the concept envisioned by PGA West
Specific Plan with regard to residential density and unit mix, architectural design,
circulation and open space/recreational facilities. Sunrise Ccnpany, the Applicant,
has indicated that they will be the primary developer of housing in the 5,000 unit
approved Specific Plan area. The proposed tract map will be the first phases of
residential development of the PGA West Specific Plan.
Activating the proposed tract map will have an effect on other related cases relative
to camtitments made by other developers. For example, conditions of approval in
Parcel Map 'No. 20426 (Tandfinark) require dedication of a fire station site. In
addition, specific Plan No. 83-002 is conditioned to require the Applicant to equip
the fire station with a 1,250-gallon-per-minute engine and a squad or paramedic unit
in accordance with Riverside County Fire Department's specifications. Tb ensure that
these conditions are met, in connection with other related cases, appropriate conditions
should be applied to this project's approval.
Staff is currently monitoring Specific Plan area development. This will assure close
coordination between Landmark and Sunrise to facilitate development, and meet all
co mitments and conditions of all related plans to Specific Plan No. 83-002.
Circulation Considerations
Main access to the tract is to be from PGA West Boulevard south from the termination
of Jefferson Street at Avenue 54. PGA West Boulevard is the circulatory backbone
of the entire Specific Plan area. Two major collectors take access off PGA west
® 0
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING CCYMIISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 10.
Boulevard, one easterly and the other westerly, to the two different portions of the
tract. The major collectors logically provide access to the several minor residential
collectors. Since the tract is only a small portion of the entire Specific Plan, the
circulation system, as proposed, is incomplete with several deadends, creating some
concerns. The circulation plan assumes that other portions, contiguous to this tract
map, will be developed. To the east, the residential collector serving Lots 23 through
30 deadends at 6,000 feet from the main entrance at PGA West Boulevard, although the
Faster Plan would eventually extend this into the loop system. To the west, the resi-
dential collector serving Lots 11 through 16 deadends at 3,000 feet from the main
entrance. This would be a permanent cul-de-sac according to the Master Plan. Based
on comments from the Fire Marshal, emergency access gates or other appropriate measures
should be provided at these locations.
Staff recommends that the minor residential street serving Lots 22 through 30 be
continued and improved to an all-weather street to connect into the duplex and single-
family lot island of the project (Lets 31 through 110 per Exhibit A). This map adjust-
ment will allow emergency vehicles to access and exit Lots 31 through 110 with a minimum
of conflicts. The residential collector serving Lots 1 through 10, Exhibit A, deadends
at 2,500 feet from point of entrance. Although this street alignment is expected to
eventually connect to a master circulation loop in the future, free flow circulation
and emergency vehicle turn -around would be blocked in the short term. Based on comments
from the Fire Marshal, a cul-de-sac or other mitigative measure should be provided at
the end of the street along Lots 1 through 10.
The duplex and single-family lot portion of the tract, Lots 31 through 115, utilize a
loop circulation system which will provide for smooth entrancing and exiting with no
deadends. Emergency vehicles will adequately access these units from PGA West
Boulevard and easily exit from this portion of the project.
With regard to adequate street design for the number of dwelling units served the
major collectors are well integrated into the minor 32'-wide collectors which abut
all residential units. This street width will permit two-way circulation with on -street
guest parking on one side of the street. Therefore, the Applicant should be required
to limit parking to one side of the street by any of the following means:
° Red curbing with designated no parking on one side of the street.
° Redesign of street to provide on -street parking pockets and no other
on -.street parking permitted designated.
° Redesign of street to a minimum width of 40 feet to permit parking
on ]both sides of the street.
The Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall indicate enforcement of
parking requirements reflecting one or a canbination of the above conditions. In
any case, a minimum of 24' street clearance must be provided for emergency and service
vehicle access to all residential units at all times.
All street widths and driveway locations are adequate for proper vehicular circulation.
However, no pedestrian paths or sidewalks have been provided. Of concern is pedestrian
orientation and the minimization of conflicts between vehicular and pedestrian travel.
STAFF REPORT" - PLANNING 00MMSSICN
April 23, 1985
Page 11.
The Applicant should make sam provision for pedestrian access between buildings
and from units to the axm=ity pools.
Due to the nature of the development, catering to seasonal population and primarily
moderate and upper income groups, sidewalks may not be necessary to link the residential
areas to PGA West Boulevard. It is expected that the automobile will be the primary
mode of transportation between other areas of the project and outside the project.
With regard to off -site circulation, it is anticipated that the project will signifi-
cantly impact current traffic circulation on Jefferson Street and Avenue 54. Based
on caments from the City Engineer, a traffic signal shall be installed at the
intersection of Jefferson Street, PGA West Boulevard and Avenue 54. Major traffic
impacts are not expected until cmplete occupancy of Phase 6 of the tract in which
230 units, not including model units, are to be completed. The Applicant should have
the opportunity to bond for the signal, rather than immediately install the signal,
prior to finaling any portion of the tract map. Time of installation of the traffic
signal shall be determined by the Ccff=ity Development Director.
Phasing Considerations
The Applicant has submitted for review a phasing plan for the ultimate buildout of
the tract. Construction of the model units will obviously be the first phase of
development. The Applicant has stated that subsequent construction of the other
development phases will be dependent on the marketability of the different unit types.
For example, the very large duplex units, anticipated to sell for between $400,000
and $650,000 may not sell as well as the unit -mix dictates in the tract map. Given
this situation, the Applicant may desire to adjust the tract map to indicate the
replacement of same duplex units with fourplex units. Therefore, the Applicant should
be required to submit, for review and approval by the C uuunity Development Director,
any minor changes in the tentative tract map, including but not limited to, unit -mix
changes, exterior color changes, changes in lot lines, lot shape modifications, changes
in lot dimensions and street alignment alterations.
Density Considerations
The project proposes an overall unit density of 3.86 units per acre. This figure is
based on the net acreage of 132.2 acres which does not include the surrounding golf
course and open space areas. Minor changes upwards or downwards are expected in the
unit density due to unit -mix modifications as indicated in the Phasing Considerations
portion of this report. Tract area density varies according to location. The western
portion of the tract, which includes a mix of all fourplex units, has a unit density
of 7.2 units to the acre. The fourplex portions of the eastern part of the tract
ccotains a density of 4.4 units per acre. The duplex portions of the eastern portion
of the tract have a unit density of 3.0 units per acre. And finally, the single-
family lot development portion of the project has a density of only 2.0 units per
acre. However, the 3.86 overall per acre unit density figure is well within the
limitatians placed on the Specific Plan and General Plan. As additional tracts are
proposed for the PGA West Specific Plan area, density review will be cumulatively
tied to Tentative Tract 20717, to ensure that complete Specific Plan project area
buildout complies with all applicable density requirements.
STAFF REPDXP - PINING COMMISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 12.
Energy Considerations
The proposed project, as designed, minimizes building sun exposure to a great extent
with 328 of the total 488 condominium units oriented generally east -west (68% of all
buildings). It is difficult to determine how hares will be oriented on the proposed
23 single-family lots, due to the large lot sizes; however, Staff will review building
siting and orientation with regard to solar efficiency when houses are proposed for
these lots. The overall subdivision will be reviewed and approved to ensure tract
compliance with all State laws relative to solar accessibility conformance. The
Applicant shall comply with all energy related requirements at the time of building
permit issuance.
Building Design Considerations
The architectural design of the buildings in the project is well conceived embodying
a variety of architectural flavors. The design is consistent with the architectural
themes dismissed in Specific Plan No. 83-002. Building materials, colors, roof design,
building height, and architectural details all meet the standards of the approved
Specific Plan and are appropriate for the proposed development type.
Tentative Tract No. 20717 will be setting a precedent for architectural design of the
Specific Plain area as well as the surrounding, primarily vacant areas. It is therefore
difficult to make any determinations with regard to compatibility with surrounding
developments. However, the different varieties of units within the project embody
a similar design and architectural theme. All building proposed within the project
have compatible building materials, colors, roof design, building height and architectural
details.
There are three different unit designs with duplex and fourplex plans located to the
east of PGA West Boulevard. The model unit areas, which will consist of all three
plans, are logically located at the west entrance of the tract at PGA West Boulevard.
The model complex will include five fourplex, two duplex buildings, and a sales office
with a parking area. The sales office and parking area, Lot 143 of Exhibit A, will
require a separate plot plan application subject to review and approval by the
Cc munity Development Department. The following is a discussion of the three proposed
development types.
- Duplex Buildings: Given that all duplex units have the same front yard setback,
the units will give an appearance of a "cookie cutter" effect. In other words,
the units may display uniformity contributing to a visually trite streetscape.
Building Plans 100 and 200, having a building height of 19 feet, could have a
front yard setback of 20 to 23 feet. Building Plans 300 and 400, having a building
height of 21 feet, could remain with a minimum 25-foot front yard setback. In no
case, shall these units have a front yard setback of less than 20 feet. The side -
yard areas between each building are to include a separating wall midway regardless
of building type. In several cases, the buildings are not oriented in the typical
design as indicated in the floor plan due to lot configuration. These odd -shaped
lots should at least meet a minimmun sideyard setback of five feet (10 feet between
buildings). The rear yard setbacks are adequate in all cases.
STAFF REPORT' - PLANNING CCNPIISSION
April 23, 1 85
Page 13.
- Fourplex East Buildings: All buildings have a typical driveway approach with
adequate vehicle stacking provided. The garage does not have a direct entry
into the unit except for unit Plan 40. The resident will have to access the
unit through the side garage door and then to the main side entry door. It has
been a matter of City policy to require a separate pedestrian door into the garage.
The intent of this requirement is to provide residents with the convenience of
having the ability to directly access the house fran the garage, avoiding travel
outside, which in the summer can create a difficult temperature transition. The
access is through a private enclosed courtyard which is not covered. Considera-
tion needs to be given to whether or not this access should be modified. It
should be noted that this would necessitate very substantial revision to the
floor plans since the only co mn wall with the garage is a bedroom. A setback
deficiency is identified in unit Plan 40 having a 15-foot front setback for the
golf cart parking area. This does provide some variety for the streetscape while
not reducing the depth needed for automobile parking.
As indicated in the Density Considerations portion of this report, unit mix may
be modified according to market forces. In this case, fourplex east units may
be integrated into duplex portions of the project. Since the architectural
design and colors proposed for both duplex and fourplex units are compatible,
this is not expected to be a problem.
- Fourplex West Buildings: A concern is that the garage is located 10' to 12' from
the main house and over 60 feet from the pedestrian garage door to the house's
main entrance in Units 504 and 505. As indicated previously, City policy requires
that a pedestrian door be connected from the main unit to the garage for convenience.
However, this requirement applied to the Fourplex West Units, will destroy an
important: design element. Due to the smaller size of the units, the location of the
garage will strategically give an open space feel to the unit. In addition, this
design allows more light into the units therefore eliminating the need for an atrium.
Therefore, the garage location is a trade-off of function and convenience for
aesthetics and amenities. Staff therefore recommends that the garage location, as
proposed, be permitted.
1. The proposed overall density, without the inclusion of golf course open space
amenities, of 3.86 units per acre is consistent with the General Plan, zoning,
and the Specific Plan.
2. Approximately 75% of the net developable area will be developed with open space
and recreational uses, which exceeds the City's planned residential standards.
3. The envirorinental impacts associated with the proposed project have been
adequately addressed in the Environmental Impact Report. A Statement of Overriding
Findings has been approved by the La Quinta City Council addressing the conversion
of prime agricultural land to urban uses. other environmental impacts of the
project, such as effects on flora, fauna, archaeological resources, City streets
and circulation, public schools and public services will be adequately mitigated
through conditions of approval.
STAFF REPORT' - PLANNING COMMISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 14.
4. Although the project will generate substantial traffic impacts, improvements
already made, such as improvements to Avenue 54 and Madison Street, as well as
improvements to be made such as traffic signalization at the intersection of
Jefferson Street and Avenue 54, will be appropriate to handle the increased
traffic generated.
5. The proposed circulation system as modified in accordance with the conditions
of approval, will provide for the safe and efficient movement of vehicles within
the project.
6. The unit. designs, as modified by the conditions of approval, will be in compliance
with the City standards and requirements.
7. The proposed recreational amenities in the project will adequately serve the needs
of the residents.
FINDINGS
1. That the proposed Tentative Tract Map No. 20717 is consistent with the goals,
policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan.
2. That the design and improvement of Tentative Tract No. 20717 is consistent with
the goals, policies and intent of the La Quinta General Plan.
3. The site is physically suitable for the proposed project at an overall density
of 3.86 units per acre.
4. That the design and improvements applicable to Tentative Tract Map No. 20717 are
not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or injury of fish or wildlife
or their habitat.
5. That the design of the subdivision, as conditionally approved, is not likely to
cause serious public health problems.
6. That the design of Tentative Tract Map No. 20717 will not conflict with easements,
acquired by the public at large, for access through the project since alternate
easements for access and for use have been provided that are substantially equiva-
lent to those previously acquired by the public.
7. The project is consistent with the standards of the Municipal Zoning and Land
Division Ordinance.
8. The env.ircm ental impacts associated with the proposed project have been adequately
addressed in the certified Environmental Impact Report prepared for the entire PGA
West Specific Plan. The significant impacts presented by this project will be
appropriately mitigated through conditions of approval for the project to the
extent feasible.
0 0
STAFF REPORT - PLANNING COMMISSION
April 23, 1985
Page 15.
9. The project incorporates an energy efficient design which includes maximizing
lot size and configuration and building orientation in an east -west alignment
to minimize sun exposure and therefore Conserve energy to the greatest extent
feasible.
10. The Applicant has sukmitted a c-cnplete application with all required information
to appropriately review and make a determination of approval or denial of
Tentative Tract Map No. 20717.
11. The Cityof La Quinta has adopted Specific Plan No. 83-002 in which this approved
project is a part of, and that Tentative Tract Map No. 20717, as conditionally
approved is consistent in design and improvement with said Specific Plan.
12. The discharge of waste from the proposed subdivision will not result in violation
of existing requirements prescribed by the Coachella Valley Water District and the
Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Based on the above findings, the Community Development Department recommends approval
of Tentative Tract Map No. 20717, subject to the attached conditions.
1y0��.:��
Gary W. Price
Associate Planner
Atchs: 1. Conditions of Approval
APP BY:
C��Ilk'
Lawrence L. Stevens, AICP
Commmity Development Director
0
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP NO. 20717 - APRIL 23, 1985
General
1. Tentative Tract Map No. 20717, shall comply with the requirements and standards of
the State Subdivision Map Act and the City of La Quinta land Division Ordinance,
unless otherwise modified by the following conditions.
2. This tentative tract map approval shall expire two years after the original date
of approval by the La Quinta City Council unless approved for extension pursuant
to the City of La Quinta Land Division Ordinance.
3. Tract phasing plans, including phasing of public improvements, shall be suhmitted
for review and approval by the City Engineer and the Community Development
Department.
4. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for construction of any building or
use contemplated by this approval, the Applicant shall obtain permits and/or
clearances fran the following public agencies:
° City Fire Marshal
° City Engineer
° Camwnity Development Department, Planning Division
° Coachella Valley Water District
° Riverside County Environmental Health Department
° Desert Sands Unified School District or Coachella Valley
unified School District (as appropriate)
Evidence of said permits or clearances fran 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. The final map, or any portion thereof, shall not be recorded until and unless
Parcel Map No. 20426 has been recorded.
Soils and Geo oc
6. Prior to approval of any portion of the final map, a detailed geotechnical study
shall be conducted to establish site specific geotechnical parameters for engineering
design of the planned structure locations.
7. Prior to issuance of any building permit, the Applicant shall sulmit a grading
plan for review and approval by the City Engineer.
Hydrology/Water Conservation
8. Prior to approval of any portion of the final tract map, the Applicant shall prepare
a hydrological analysis for approval by the City Engineer which will indicate method
and design to protect the development from the 100-year flood and any flooding caused
fran a breach of embankment of Lake Cahuilla or the Coachella Canal. This plan shall
be consistent with the purposes of any similar plans of the Redevelopment Agency
and/or the Coachella Valley Water District.
CONDITIONS OF' APPROVAL - TM 20717 - 4/23/85
Page 2.
9. Prior to approval of building permits, the Applicant shall prepare a water
conservation plan which will adequately indicate the following:
a. Methods to minimize the consumption of water usage including, but not
limited to , water saving fixtures, drought -tolerant and native landscaping,
and programs to minimize landscape irrigation.
b. Methods for minimizing the effects of increased on -site surface water runoff
and increased groundwater recharge.
.0. That surface runoff water frcn landscape irrigation systems shall be minimized with
the installation of drip, bubbler systems and other water conservation measures.
Also, that a system of catch basins shall be incorporated into the landscaped
cannon areas of the project in order to contain on -site surface water runoff.
_1. The Applicant shall utilize dust control measures in accordance with the Municipal
Code and the Uniform Building Code and subject to the approval of the City Engineer
xaffic and Circulation
.2. The Applicant shall develop all roads applicable to Tentative Tract No. 20717 in
conformance with City standards and with the design standards specified in Specific
Plan No. 83-002 (PGA West Specific Plan) as conditionally approved.
L3. All roadways within Tentative Tract No. 20717 shall ruin private and shall be
maintained as such.
L4. A traffic signal shall be installed at the intersection of Jefferson Street, PGA
West Boulevard and Avenue 54. The traffic signal shall be installed at a time
deemed appropriate by the Cccm mity Development Director, but no later than the
issuance of a building permit for the 250th unit authorized by this approval.
Said traffic signal design and method of installation shall be approved by the
City Engineer.
L5. The following modification shall be made in the local street circulation plan:
a. A 90-foot cul-de-sac shall be provided at the end of Shoal Creek at Lots 5
and 16 of We it A. The cul-de-sac shall provide an adequate turning radius
for emergency service vehicles and shall be subject to review and approval by
the City Fire Marshal and City Engineer.
b. That the minor residential collector street serving Lots 22 through 30 be
continued and improved to an all-weather street to connect into the duplex
and single-family lot portions of the project (Lots 31 through 110) prior to
building permit issuance on Lots 22 through 30.
c. Emergency access gates shall be provided from Avenue 54 at Lots 11 and 30.
The design and installation of these gates are subject to review and approval
of the City Fire Marshal and the Community Development Department.
CNDIPIONS OF APPROVAL - TIM 20717 - 4/23/85
age 3.
.6. A plan indicating proposed parking along the private road system shall be submitted
for review and approval by the Corunity Development Department. The plan shall
designate any "no parking" areas and show the method of identifying than.
7. The Applicant shall carply with the following requirements regarding private street
improvements:
a. The Applicant shall submit detailed plans of the gatehouses and umnanned
access gates to the Ccmanity Development Department for review and approval.
b. The width of all interior drives, where residential units are to be located
alone, shall be a minimum of 32 feet.
c. The Applicant shall submit to the Conmanity Development Department for review
and approval a plan indicating proposed traffic cbannelization (street striping
and means for traffic control within the project) .
.8. A plan showing non -automotive means of transportation within the project, including
bicycle and pedestrian paths, shall be suhnitted for review and approval by the
Community Development Department prior to any recordation.
lublic Services and Utilities
.9. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Fire Marshal. Prior
to issuance of any building permit, the following conditions shall be met/certified
to:
a. Fire Hydrants - Install Super fire hydrants (with one 4" outlet and two 2'Y"
outlets) located no less than 25 feet nor greater than 165 feet from any
portion of exterior walls of proposed building(s), spaced no more than 365
feet apart, as measured along approved vehicular travelways. Installation
shall be on a water system capable of delivering 2500 GPM fire flow for a
2-hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure in accordance with
Ordinance No. 7, Section 10.301c. The Fire Marshal may approve alternate
fire protection requirements.
b. Any street 150' or longer shall be provided with a cul-de-sac or hammerhead
for Fire Department turnaround.
c. Cul-de-sacs shall be no longer than 550' long, unless provided with an
approved urgency alternate access or other appropriate fire protection
as approved by the City Fire Marshal.
d. Developer shall furnish two copies of water system plans to the Fire
Department for review and approval. Plans shall conform to fire hydrant
types, location and spacing; the water system shall meet fire flow require-
ments. Plans shall be signed by a Registered Civil Engineer and approved
by the water cacpany.
e. Prior to arrival of canbustible materials on the construction site, the
above a. and b. fire protection must be operating.
20. The Applicant shall canply with the requirements of Coachella Valley Water District.
a. The water and sewage disposal systens shall be installed in accordance with the
requirements of the City and the Coachella Valley Water District.
:CNDrrICNS OF APPROVAL - TIM 20717 - 4/23/85
'age 4.
b. [Mien there are identified conflicts with existing CVWD facilities, the City
will withhold the issuance of any building perniit until arrangements have
been made with the District for the relocation of these facilities.
?1. The Applicant shall comply with the requirements of DTperial Irrigation District
prior to issuance of building permits. Applicant shall provide written clearance
to the City Community Development Department that Imperial Irrigation District
can provide service to this development.
?2. All utility improvements to the project shall be installed underground. All
existing overhead utility lines located along the perimeter of the tract, with
the exception of high voltage power lines of 66KV and above, shall be installed
underground.
Schools/Fire Station
?3. In order to mitigate impacts on public schools, Applicant shall comply with the
following:
a. Prior to recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall enter into an
agreement to pay School Mitigation Developer Fees with the Coachella Valley
Unified School District (CVUSD) and the Desert Sands Unified School District
(DSUSD).
b. Prior to the issuance of any building permits, the Applicant shall provide
the Director of Camwnity Development with written clearance from the
applicable school district(s) (DSUSD or CVUSD) stating that the per unit
impact fees have been paid.
c. Prior to issuance of a building permit for construction of any building
bisected by the existing school district boundary line, a mutual agreement
between Coachella Valley Unified School District and the Desert Sands Unified
School District resolving school district boundaries, so that no units are
bisected by those boundaries within the tract, shall be reached and submitted
to the Community Development Director. For any units bisected by the boundary
line, the Commuiity Development Director may collect and hold the school impact
mitigation fee pending resolution of the issue. Phases not affected by the
bisection may proceed without regard for this condition.
N . The PGA West fire station at Madison Street and Avenue 54 shall be operational
prior to beginning combustible construction or adequate temporary facilities
shall be provided. Temporary facilities shall only be allowed if it is demonstrated
that satisfactory progress is being made for the permanent facility.
Kanagement
25. Prior to the recordation of the final map, the Applicant shall submit to the
Community Development Director 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:
MITIONS OF APPROVAL - TIM 20717 - 4/23/85
Page 5.
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 lard 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 continu-
ously 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 be
subordinant 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.
Building and Site Design
26. The development of the site and buildings shall comply with Exhibits A, B and C
pursuant to Conminity Developmnt Department Tentative Tract Map No. 20717 file
as conditionally approved. The following building and site design conditions shall
take precedence in the event of any conflicts with the provisions of the tentative
tract map.
27. This approval authorizes the construction of a sales office, entry gates and
community pool facilities at the general locations shown on Exhibit "A", as
amended :by these conditions. The buildings' and/or structures' (parking area,
community pools) specific location, design, size and height shall be subject to
separate plot plan approval by the Com nuty Development Department.
28. All roof -mounted mechanical equipment shall be screened from view at all sides by
the roof design. Any ground-mmmunted mechanical equipment shall be screened from
view by methods approved by the Comnlnity Development Departmmnent.
29. The following setback criteria shall be applied to site design:
a. Varying setbacks between 20 and 25 feet shall be designed into the
duplex units.
b. A minimum front setback of 20 feet shall be required on all residential
dwelling units in the project, except for the Fourplex East unit (Plan 40)
which may have a 15-foot setback.
c. Mininnnn sideyard setbacks shall be five feet (10 feet between all residential
building complexes in the project).
30. Prior to building permit issuance, building setbacks, engineering design, orienta-
tion of buildings, acoustical insulation, noise barriers, and other measures shall
be taken. to reduce noise inpacts on residential dwelling units within the project
from nearby existing and future roadways to within State standards. Special
consideration shall be given to the dwelling units adjacent to Avenue 54 and PGA
West Boulevard. An acoustical study shall be prepared for all units on Lots 11
through 30, per Exhibit "A", to determine existing noise levels and future anti-
cipated noise levels at time of ultimate PGA West Specific Plan area buildout.
-ONDTTICNS OF APPROVAL - TTM 20717 - 4/23/85
'age 6.
The study shall recommend specific noise mitigation measures for each dwelling
unit to reduce future anticipated noise to reasonable State standard levels.
The study shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development
Department. Reasonable noise mitigation measures, as recommended, shall be
incorporated into the project and building design.
31. Any minor changes in the tentative tract map including, but not limited to, unit
mix changes, exterior building color changes, changes in lot lines, lot shape
modifications, changes in lot dimensions and street alignment alterations shall
be subject to the approval of the Community Development Director.
a. Lot sizes, building locations and street locations shall be adjusted
as necessary to provide for setbacks specified in the approval of
the perimeter wall along Avenue 54. (NOTE: This wall plan has not
been given final approval.)
32. All buildings, other than the residential structures indicated on the tract map
for approval shall require a separate submittal of plot plan applications and/or
other development request applications as deemed necessary by the Community
Development Department.
4iscellaneous
33. The Applicant shall submit a plan for perimeter fencing for review and approval
by the Connunity Development Department prior to final map recordation.
34. No occupancy permit will be issued for any dwelling unit until the surrounding
golf course and common landscaped areas have been planted and matured to mitigate
localized blowing dust.
35. If buried remains are encountered during development, a qualified archaeologist
shall be contacted immediately and appropriate mitigation measures can be taken.
36. The Applicant shall submit a tentative time schedule of tract map development
phasing as it relates to the phased implementation of Specific Plan No. 83-002.
This achodule shall be subject to review and approval by the Canmumity Development
Department.
37. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Applicant shall submit a landscape
plan to the Ca[munity Development Department for review and approval. Desert
or native plant species and drought -resistant plant materials shall be incor-
porated into landscaping plans for the project.
38. Applicant shall submit plans for lighting along roads for review and approval
by the Cmuunity Development Department.
39. The location of and access to all construction facilities shall be subject to
review and approval by the Community Developient Department.
40. The Applicant shall comply with the provisions and requirements of the City's
adopted Infrastructure Fee Program in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
ITEM NO.
DATE
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
RE:
OTION BY: GOETCHEUS WALLING KLIMKIEWICZ MORAN
SECOND BY: GOETCHEU WALLING: KLIMKIEWICZ MORAN
DISCUSSION: (/l e (� •
ROLL CALL VOTE:
CO*MISSIONERS:
GOETCHEUS
hZDIKIEWICZ
MORAN
WALLING
THORNBURGH
THORNBURGH
THORNBURGH
AYE NO ABSTAIN ABSENT PRESENT
UNANIMOUSLY ADOPTED: YES NO
M I N U T E S
PLANNING cowaSSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A Regular Meeting Held at the La Quinta
City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta,
California
March 26, 1985 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Chairman Thornburgh called the Planning Commission meeting to order at
7:00 p.m. He then called upon Sandra Bonner, Principal Planner, to lead
the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
A. Chairman Thornburgh requested the roll call. The Secretary called the roll:
Present: Ccrmdssioners Goetcheus, Klimkiewicz, Moran, Walling and Chairman
Thornburgh
Absent: None
Also present were Community Developmnt Director Lawrence L. Stevens, Principal
Planner Sandra L. Bonner, Assistant Planner Tamara J. Campbell and Secretary
Dom3k M. Velotta.
Chairman Thornburgh announced that, after discussing the matter with the City Attorney
and Planning Staff, it was decided that he should turn the meeting over to the Vice
Chairman due to the fact that he owned property adjacent to the property under discussion
at this meeting. Therefore, there may be a conflict of interest.
3. HEARINGS
Vice Chairman John Walling introduced the three hearings, to be heard concurrently,
as follows:
A. Specific Plans Nos. 85-005A and 85-005B, proposals to amend an existing Specific
Plan of alignment for Avenue 52 between Jefferson Street and Desert Club Drive;
William G. Young and landmark Land Company, Applicants.
B. Change of Zane Case No. 85-015, a proposal to change the zoning from R-1*,
R*++-1-10,000, R*-2-20,000, and N-A*, to R*++-1-10,000, R*-2-20,000 and N-A*,
on a 746-acre site easterly of Avenida Bermudas and southerly of Avenida
Nuestra; Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant.
C. Tentative Tract Map No. 20328, Revised No. 1, a proposal to approve a planned
residential development with 843 candcminium units, 47 single-family lots, a
tennis and country club and an 18-hole golf course on a 417-acre portion of a
731-acre site easterly of Avenida Bermudas and southerly of Avenida Nuestra;
Saul Pebble Country Club, Applicant.
Vice Chairman Walling called for the Staff Reports on these matters.
1. Cmnmuiity Development Director Lawrence L. Stevens advised that in addition
to the three hearings regarding the Sand Pebble Country Club before the
Omission at this meeting, there are also several related issues which
will care before them on the April 9th meeting. These related issues are
road vacations and the need to make modifica*ions to the Duna La Quinta
-___ ..,.,.......>c v.L Lhe realignment uL r vc iuc .�c.
Director Stevens advised that the Specific Plans being presented at this
meeting are two applications, one from Bill Young and one from landmark.
Their request is to amend a previously approved alignment plan for Avenue
52. He noted that in the early 1970's, the County of Riverside approved
a Specific Plan to allow for the future aligruent of Avenue 52, but the
plan has never been implemented.
The proposed project will result in the ccrplete vacation of Avenue 52
and create an entirely new alignment. The revised alignment will run
adjacent to Avenida Nuestra, extending easterly to Jefferson Street and
westerly, curving slightly southward, running into Calle Amigo. The new
MINUTES - PLANNING CCMISSION
March 26, 1985
Page 2.
road will have two travel lanes in each direction, a center median, curb
and gutters from Desert Club Drive to a point 660-feet east of Adams Street.
From that point, an interim, two-lane highway is proposed through to
Jefferson Street. No curb or gutter improvements are proposed from Adams
Street to Jefferson Street.
Sand Pebble Country Club is requesting this realignment in conjunction with
the development of Sand Pebble Country Club. Since the boundary of Sand
Pebble Country Club is 660-feet west of Adams Street easement and to allow
for adequate circulation, Landmark Land Company has agreed to continue the
realignment through to Jefferson Street. The Applicant is requesting the
realignment to allow additional space for development of flood control
improvements.
Major impacts and appropriate mitigation measures are noted in the Staff
Report. Director Stevens stated that the City has hired a consultant to
provide an acoustical study with regard to the increased noise levels which
could significantly impact the residents of Avenida Nuestra. We have also
contracted with a traffic engineer to evaluate if Avenida Nuestra should be
connected to the potential realignment of Avenue 52 to assure that it is
done in a safe traffic manner, as well as to look at the design radii of
the curves being created. These reports are expected by Thursday or Friday
of this week. Director Stevens noted that, lacking these reports at this
meeting, we will not be able to came to a conclusion at this time. However,
Staff believed it appropriate because of the numerous complex applications
of the project, to solicit public and Planning Commission comments so that
in working with the Applicant, Staff could resolve as many of the issues as
possible before the next hearing.
Director Stevens stated that the realignment, based on present information,
appears to be warranted. The principal reasons that Staff believes this is
we will be able to realign the street with safe radii on the curves, we can
bring that alignment to the future extension of Avenue 52 into Eisenhower
Drive, where rightrof-way has already been purchased, and we recognize the
Applicant's need to expand the project to include this parcel into the
development part of the project, which was not included previously because
of needs associated with flood control.
Director Stevens stated that this concluded the Staff Report on the Specific
Plans and turned the meeting over to Principal Planner Sandra Bonner for the
report on the Change of Zone case.
Principal Planner Bonner began her report with a short description of the
project for those who were not familiar with the project. She then went on
to state that the requested change in zoning is intended to facilitate the
proposed revisions to Tentative Tract Map No. 20328. With the proposed
realignment of Avenue 52 northwards, the project site will be increased by
57 acres. The Applicant is requesting that the zoning on this additional
acreage north of existing Avenue 52 be changed from R-l* to R-2*-20,000.
This is consistent with the zoning on the remainder of the condominium
portions of the project. The R-2 type zoning will permit a maximum of eight
units per building, which should be compatible with surrounding development
provided that design standards are imposed on the tentative tract map approval.
A total of 395 acres is proposed for R-2*-20,000 zoning, which would allow a
maximum of 860 condominiums, 17 more units than are proposed by the Applicant.
'Ifie Acml i ran+- ; q a l -,o requesting a slightto accommodate four new custan home lots located to the northeast of the main
cluster of single-family lots. A total of 22 acres of R-1++*-10,000 zoning
is proposed for 46 residential lots and one common recreational lot.
Minor adjustments are proposed to the zoning boundaries between the R-1++*-
10,000, R-2*-20,000 and N-A* areas. These changes are due to the fact that
the Applicant has obtained more detailed topographic information on the site
since the previous change of zone was approved. In general, the N-A* zoning
on the mountainous portion of the site has been increased slightly.
MIN[TI7;S - PLANNING COMMISSION
March 26, 1985
Page 3.
in general, the density allowed under the proposed zoning is substantially
less than that designated by the current General Plan land use designations.
In addition, the proposed 2.2 density allowed by the R-2*-20,000 zoning is
substantially less than the R-1 zoning adjacent to the west and north. The
17-foot height limit will prevent two-story units on the single-family lots.
Although the proposed R-2*-20,000 zoning will allow structures up to 35 feet
in height, compatibility with adjacent developuent will be ensured through
design review of the tentative tract map.
Moving on to the Tentative Tract Map No. 20328, Revised No. 1, Principal
Planner Bonner explained that this request for a revision to the previously
approved tentative map was suhnitted concurrently with the request to realign
Avenue 52 on the north side of the project. As described in the Staff Report
on Specific Plans Nos. 85-005A and 85-005B, the Applicant is requesting that
Avenue 52 be shifted approximately 500 feet northward adjacent to Avenida
Nuestra for the roadway section between Desert Club Drive and Jefferson
Street. The reasons for the Applicant's request for the revisions to the
tract map and Avenue 52 plan include the following:
° The shifting of the road northward adds 57 acres to the Sand Pebble
Country Club site, thereby partially compensating the Applicant for
the laid within the project being committed to construction of the
La Quinta Stonmwater Channel and retention basins.
° Due directly to the Applicant's agreement to accept drainage from
Cove area to the west, the required holding capacity of the
cn-site retention areas was substantially increased over that
designed for on the original development plan.
° in order to obtain the additional required capacities for the
retention areas, the Applicant proposes larger, shallower basins
rather than smaller, deeper basins, such as Oleander Basin with
its high berm sides. Therefore, additional land is used for flood
central improvements in the revised map than was proposed in the
original tract.
The following are the major design differences between the previously
approved tract map and this proposed revision:
• Developable area increased by 57 acres by realigning Avenue 52
approximately 500 feet northward.
° Addition of 166 condominium units, almost all of which are two-
story units.
• Deletion of five single-family house lots and a change in this
area's configuration.
° Placement of two-story units along the Avenida Bermudas and
Avenue 52 boundaries.
° Relocation of flood control retention basins and driving range
away from Avenue 52, resulting in units being adjacent to the
public roadway rather than open space.
Principal Planner Bonner went on to describe some major design issues that
were of concern to Staff, which included two-story condominiums, the tennis
clubhouse, views into the project and tree retention. She also discussed
items such as the single-family, custom hoe lots, the perimeter walls,
the new location for the fire station and the vacant parcel on the northwest
Commissioner Klimkiewicz asked if he was correct in remenbering the setbacks
on Avenida Bermudas to be a voluntary 50' to 100' from the original approval
of this request.
Ms. Bonner stated that she believed it was a voluntary 50' to 70' for the
Avenida Bermudas setbacks.
Commissioner Moran wondered if there would be sidewalks along Avenida
Bernudas and Avenue 52.
0
MINU FS - PLANNING COMMISSION
March 26, 1985
Page 4.
Ms. Bonner replied that the original conditions required sidewalks along
the east side of Benmmmdas and a 41, meandering sidewalk on the south side
of Avenue 52. This was before the realignment of Avenue 52. The conditions
also requested a 5' bike path on the north side of Avenue 52. The new condi-
tions of approval will also require this.
Vice Chairman Walling asked if the RV storage area on the northwest corner
of the site was going to be recessed and has close it is actually to the
street.
Ms. Bonner replied that it is set back 10' to 20' fran the wall. Under the
original conditions of approval, we required that it be recessed so that a
14'-high vehicle could not be seen from the other side of the street.
Director Stevens continued to report that as he had stated earlier, Staff
and the Applicant are still working out some details on this project and it
is the Staff's recommendation that each of the three itans under considera-
tion at this hearing be continued for additional public hearing at the next
regular Planning Conudssion meeting of April 9, 1985. We do, however,
recommend that you conduct tonight's hearing because we are interested in
finding out if there are any issues associated with the project which we
have not identified from either the Commission's or the public's perspective,
so that we can endeavor to resolve any of these concerns during the inter-
vening two weeks. He stated that as indicated at the study session the day
prior, we do have an agreement with the Applicant relative to the dedication,
at no cost to the City, of flood control easement. Part of our understanding
with the Applicant to secure those easements was that we would facilitate
scheduling of these revisions to the extent that we could. Therefore, we
have tried to achieve that and are hoping that the two -week continuance will
allow us to solve most of the concerns and allow us to go to City Council at
their second meeting in April. Our recommendation is for continuance, but
we are strongly interested in any comments from the Commission and the public.
Director Stevens also informed the Commission that Staff has received two
letters, both objecting to the proposal for realignment of Avenue 52. One
letter is from Mr. & Mrs. Jim Williams and the second letter is fran Dr.
Charles Sodikoff. The letters were passed on to the Commission for viewing.
This concluded Staff's presentation.
Vice Cha=rn Walling opened the public hearing at 7:41 p.m.
Bill Young, President of Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant, spoke in favor
of the project and explained the reasons for the revisions to the original
plan, which are primarily for flood control improvements for the City of La
Quinta.
Forrest Haag, Landmark land Company, Applicant, spoke in favor of the project
and the realignment of Avenue 52.
Kevin Manning, Landmark Land Company, Applicant, spoke in favor of the project
and the realignment of Avenue 52.
Paul Fisher, 51-475 Calle Rondo, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to the
realignment stating that with the realignment of Avenue 52, he would have
three roads abutting the southern boundary of his property, along with a
block wall and could see his property value plummeting.
Bob Baier, 51-485 Calle Guatamala, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to the
reaLigmmment of Avenue 52, stating that he has lived in his present location
for 21 years. He felt that with the realignment of Avenue 52 there would
be a major road at his back door which would increase the noise impact on
his property as well as block his view of the mountain if a wall were
erected. He stated if this happened, he felt it would be necessary to hire
an attorney and sue for damages.
MIN[TPES - PUNNING CCMMISSICN
March 26, 19135
Page 5.
Audrey Ostrowsky, P. 0. Box 351, La Quinta, recited a letter she had
prepared in opposition to the realignment of Avenue 52, which also cited
several other items of concern she had with the City of La Quintals present
status. She also made a statement of the possible benefits this all would
have for Tom Thornburgh, owner of the Desert Club.
TtBn Thornburgh, P. O. Box 925, La Quinta, owner of the Desert Club, spoke
in rebuttal to Mrs. Ostrowsky's statements.
Dr. Charles Sodikoff, Rt. 1, Box 134, Del Mar, CA, and property owner at
51-400 Calle Palcmma, La Quinta, spoke in behalf of several property owners
in the area, who are as follows:
Mike Parker, 51-322 Calle Paloma, La Quinta.
Francisco Moreno, 78-560 Avenida Nuestra, La Quinta
Virginia Higgs, 51-444 Calle Paloma, La Quinta
He spoke for all in opposition to the Avenue 52 realignment, stating the
reasons as noise impacts, unsightliness, etc.
Diana Searcy, 52-279 Avenida Navarro, La Quinta, spoke opposing the realign-
ment as well as the project itself due to the fact that the Applicant would
be removing the Eucalyptus trees and Pyracantha bushes along Avenue 52.
Carmen McDowell, 81-292 Green Avenue, Indio, CA, spoke as representative of
the Riverside County Trail and Parks Subcommittee. Also with her were Dr. Ted
Morris and Mr. Burkett also of Indio. She stated that as a member of the
Equestrian Subcommittee of the Riverside County Parks Department and therefore
a representative of hundreds of hikers and horsemen in the Coachella Valley
and Riverside County, she called upon the City of La Quinta to include in the
conditions of approval for the revised Tentative Tract Map No. 20328, the
requirement that Sand Pebble Country Club deed a 12' easement for riding and
hiking purposes to the County of Riverside Parks Department. This 12' ease-
ment should be adjacent to or included within the right-of-way of Avenida
Bermudas and Avenue 52 and the trail should be incorporated in the design of
the street improvements and landscape plans provided for the Sand Pebble
Country Club tract. Provision should also be made for connecting the trail
along Avenida Bermudas with that along Avenue 52, preferably by additional
easement along north and west tract boundaries where public streets do not
occur. Sufficient land is available for such easement along the north
boundary of the project. Ms. McDowell stated she will be submitting a
letter and a Parks Department plan for this proposed trail to the Commission.
Joe Thrento, 78-195 Cadiz, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to the realignment.
He stated that he had not been notified of this meeting and he has lived here
for 21 years. He noted that he found out about it by accident. He also
stated that his mother received a notice and she has been deceased for 10
years and his father also received a notice and he has been deceased for A
years. He felt that all residents should be notified of these hearings.
Director Stevens responded to Mr. Torento's statement by advising that the
City notified property owners within a 500' radius, either side of the Avenue
52 realignment area and around the project, we notified property owners with-
in a 400' radius. By law, we are only required to notify property owners
within a 300' area. The notices are prepared based on the current assessment
rolls and spot checked against the Applicant's submittal to see that it is
hacinal I,, mY nv F ni nr Stevens staged he
did not receive a notice, but we would check our records and will add him
manually to the list to assure that he gets any further notices.
Karen Sodikoff, Rt. 1, Box 134, Del Mar, CA, and property owner at 51-400
Calle Paloma, La Quinta, spoke in opposition to the realignment, stating
reasons of the noise impacts on residents in the area.
Cecil Hartman, 53-345 Avenida Vallejo, La Quinta, spoke against the realign-
ment, stating his main concern was the noise impaction on residents.
Richard Beeman, 51-401 Guatamala, Ia Quinta, spoke in opposition to any type
of progress in La Quinta, stating he moved here for the peace and solitude
and now feels threatened that he must move, being pushed out by progress.
® 0
MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION
March 26, 1985
Page 6.
Boner Davis, 52-211 Avenida Bermudas, La Quinta, stated his only concerns
were with the wall on the east side of Avenida Bermudas and the height of
the condominiums along the perimeter of that wall.
Director Stevens replied to Mr. Davis' concerns by inviting him to come
into the Camunity Development Department office to look at the plans so
he could have a better understanding of the final proposal.
J. Burton Gold, Vice President of Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant,
explained again the reasons for the realignment of Avenue 52 was primarily
due to flood control improvements. He stated that they had no alternative.
Either the road be moved or the land would be taken and used for the flood
control anyway.
Virginia Higgs, La Quinta resident, opposed the realignment of Avenue 52.
Bill Young, President of Sand Pebble Country Club, spoke again in favor
of the project and the realignment of Avenue 52 for the flood control
improvements. However, he stated that after listening to the public's
comments at this hearing, he wanted to be on record that if the City does
not need his support with regard to the flood control improvements that he
would withdraw the realignment request and return to the original plans.
Vice Chairman Walling closed the public hearing at 8:35 p.m.
Vice Chairman Walling advised the Commission that he had prepared a list
of items for discussion regarding these three items before them and would
go through then one at a time, asking each Commissioner for their comments.
The first iten for discussion was the two-story condominiums.
Commissioner Moran stated that she would like to see the one-story and
two-story buildings be mixed. She was also concerned after hearing the
comments from the residents in the area of the realignment and felt she
could not make a finding on that item until the acoustical study has been
received and there is a plan to see the setbacks in that area. She stated
she feels the rest of the project is beautifully laid out.
Commissioner Goetcheus has no quarrel with the two-story buildings, only
a quarrel with the aesthetics of how they look. He feels Staff has ideas
on this that will make it aesthetically all right so that the development
will be suitable to everyone.
Ocnvd ssioner Klimkiewicz feels that the two-story buildings should not be
on the perimeter of the project.
C.onnissicner Walling feels that two-story buildings should be used on the
interior and not along the perimeter of the project.
Vice Chairman Walling requested the Commission's views on the retention of
trees for the project.
Commissioner Klimkiewicz stated that this was not of great concern to him
as the trees were on the interior of the project.
Conmissioner Goetcheus wanted to see a landscape plan before making a
Vice Chairman Walling agreed with the developer regarding breaking windrows
and clumping the trees in most areas. He feels the windrow on Avenue 52
could be used in a manner that would allow more of them to be saved.
Vice Chairman Walling requested the Commission's views regarding the
exterior views from the site along Avenue 52.
Commissioner Moran would like to see more open space where the putting clock
II is located.
MINUTES - PLANNING CONMISSICN
March 26, 1985
Page 7.
Commissioner Goetcheus feels that the houses behind the wall will be very
acceptable. He noted that in looking at other projects in La Quinta, we
were all worried about the sight of the houses above the walls and now that
they are all in place, everything is fine.
Commissioner Klimkiewicz feels the perimeter of the project should be low
profile and that the two-story buildings should be moved more to the interior.
Vice Chairman walling does not have a problem with the units being close
to the street if they are not too high and not too dense. He stated he
does like to see the units broken up somewhat so you can see into the
project.
Vice Chairman Walling requested the Commission's views regarding the
realignment of Avenue 52.
Commissioner Klimkiewicz felt he would like to wait before commenting to
see the acoustical and traffic studies that are to be received shortly.
All were in agreement with ConTnissioner Klimnkiewicz.
Loa missioner Goetcheus stated, however, he feels we need to develop this
east -west corridor from Eisenhower Drive to Jefferson Street.
Vice Chairman Walling requested eo Tents regarding the walls and setbacks
on Avenida Bermudas.
Commissioner Klimkiewicz stated he would like to see the setbacks on Avenida
Bermudas be put back into the plan.
Vice Chairman Walling requested comments on the golf course maintenance
building.
(YamLissioner Moran stated she does not like golf course maintenance buildings
to be located on public rights -of -way because of the noise, traffic, smells,
etc. She feels that they should be located within the club. However, in
this particular case, she cannot see any other place where a road could go
into the project. She requested, however, that the Applicant try to locate
it where it cannot be seen. She feels they are very unsightly.
Commissioner Goetcheus and Commissioner Klirrkiewicz agreed with this
statement.
Vice Chairman Walling felt the golf course maintenance building impacted
the residents in the interior of the project as well as the Desert Club
at its present location.
Vice Chairman Walling stated that it has been recommended that these three
hearings be continued to the meeting of April 9, 1985. Therefore, he
called for a motion.
Commissioner Klimkiewicz made a motion to continue the hearings regarding
Specific Plans Nos. 85-OO5A and 85-005B, Change of Zone Case No. 85-015
and Tentative Tract Map No. 20328, Revised No. 1, to the next regular
meeting of the Planning Commission on April 9, 1985. Commissioner Moran
with one abstention,
flgmM;w N
Commissioner Moran wished the minutes to reflect her statement, for the record,
that she would like the placement of golf course maintenance facilities for any
future developments be located in the interior of the projects.
A. Moved by Commissioner Walling, seconded by Chairman Thornburgh to approve the
minutes of the regular meeting of March 12, 1985, as amended.
1. The minutes of the regular meeting of March 12, 1985, were approved as
amended. Unanimously Adopted.
MINUTES - PLANNING CC MISSICN
March 26, 1985
Page 8.
5. BUSINESS
None
There being no further item of agenda to care before the Ca:mission, Chairman
Thornburgh called for a motion to adjourn.
Chairman Thornburgh made a motion to adjourn to the next regular meeting of
April 9, 1985, at 7:00 p.m., in La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, la Quinta,
California. Canaissioner Goetcheus seconded the motion. Unanimously Adopted.
The regular meeting of the Planning Ca[mission of the City of La Quinta, California,
was adjourned at 9:35 p.m., March 26, 1985, in the La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle
Estado, La Quinta, California.
,III
M I N U T E S
PLANNING COMMISSION - CITY OF LA QUINTA
A Regular Meeting Held at the Ia Quinta
City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta,
California
April 9, 1985 7:00 p.m.
1. CALL TO ORDER
A. Chairman Thornburgh called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 7:00
p.m. He called upon Co[missioner Klimkiewicz to lead the flag salute.
2. ROLL CALL
A. Chairman Thornburgh requested the roll call. The Secretary called the roll:
Present: Commissioners Goetcheus, Klimkiewicz, Moran, Walling and Chairman
Thornburgh
Absent: None
Also present were Community Develop ent Director Lawrence L. Stevens, Principal
Planner Sandra L. Bonner, Assistant Planner Tamara J. Campbell, City Manager
Frank M. Usher and Secretary Donna M. Velotta.
Chairman Thornburgh announced that he would turn the meeting over to Vice Chairman
John Walling due to the fact that he owns property adjacent to the projects under
3iscussion at this meeting. He stated that after discussion with the City Attorney,
it was felt there may be a conflict of interest in this matter.
Vice Chairman Walling explained to all those present the procedures followed during a
public hearing.
He continued by stating that there were four public hearings before the Ccumission at
this meeting that are directly related. He noted that the Ccnvdssion would hear the
first two items separately and the third and fourth items concurrently. He also
announced that the Sand Pebble Country Club project is now known as Crystal Canyon of
La Quinta.
3. HEARINGS
A. Vice Chairman Walling introduced the first item to be heard as Specific Plan
No. 83-001, Amendment No. 1, a proposal to amend the previously approved
Specific Plan for Duna La Quinta reducing the acreage from 246 to 179 acres,
and reducing the approved number of units from 1,277 to 979 for the area
generally bounded by Avenue 50 on the north, Calle Tampico and Avenue 52 on
the south, Avenida Bermudas alignment on the west and Adams Street alignment
on the south; Landmark Land Company, Applicant. He called for the Staff Report.
1. Sandra Bonner, Principal Planner, advised that this Specific Plan had been
previously approved on May 15, 1984 by City Council Resolution No. 84-34.
The project area is bounded on the north by 50th Avenue, Washington Street
goes through the center, Avenida Tampico and Avenue 52 currently go through
the top of Phase 9 of the project. The Applicant's original request was to
delete Phase 9 and 10 acres of Phase 8. This would reduce the total acreage
from 246 to 179 acres, and the total number of approved units from 1,277 to
979. Principal Planner Bonner stated, however, that on April 8, 1985, Staff
received a request from the Applicant to change the proposed amendment from
deleting any property to just showing the proposed, realianed Avenue 52
property. She notkRY uuc uy"uns to me urmnrssion for
acting on this request:
• To act on the Applicant's original request just addressed. If this is
done, then the property would revert to the underlying General Plan
designation which is Very Lv., Density Residential and limits it to
three units per acre.
• To act on the Applicant's new request addressed above. This would leave
the land use designations on this Specific Plan as they are at 4.4 units
per acre on Phase 9 and 4.6 units per acre on Phase 8. Also, to just
show the Avenue 52 realignment running through Phase 9.
• To modify the request by modifying the densities or whatever else the
Conmission feels appropriate.
MINMS - PLANNING CCMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 2.
Principal Planner Bonner turned the remainder of the Staff Report over
to Community Development Director Lawrence L. Stevens.
Director Stevens explained that with the revised request received on
April 8, 1985, it is the Applicant's intention to maintain, in effect,
the extra units by simply accepting the fact that there will be a major
highway bisecting portions of Phase 9. He believes that the Applicant
is doing this in recognition of the fact that there will shortly be before
the Commission a revised Specific Plan which will ultimately change the
densities in those areas, and in effect, delete the Phase 9 area from the
Duna La Quinta Plan and add it to the Oak Tree West Plan. The Applicant
as Director Stevens understands it, has some concern that if some problem
erupts during this interim period, that they have essentially lost units.
That is the reason for the Applicant's revised request.
Director Stevens advised the Carcnission that the way the conditions are
written on the Duna La Quinta Specific Plan leaves room for very little
modification of the conditions except for perhaps a couple of procedural
items. He noted that Staff does not object to approving the Applicant's
revised request. Staff would, however, suggest that the portion of Phase
9, which would end up being south of the realigned Avenue 52, density be
established at the zoning density rather than the Specific Plan density,
which would be three units per acre rather than 4.4. Director Stevens
noted that concluded the Staff Report.
Vice Chairman Walling asked for any questions from the Crnmissioners.
Commissioner issioner Klimkiewicz asked Staff why they would suggest the density
in this manner.
Director Stevens replied that it was simply because you cannot put public
roads through these types of projects with the Specific Plan density noted.
The zoning density would physically divorce this portion from how the
Applicant proposed to develop the remaining project and as a result, the
density transfer that you get from being part of a Specific Plan really
should not apply to that area. He noted that because there will be a major
highway going through it (Avenue 52), it really changes its relationship to
the Specific Plan. You may note that Washington Street goes through the
Duna La Quinta project, but that project is being developed in phases which
are not as small as this 18-acre section we are referring to here. Therefore,
Staff feels it is more typical of the surrounding residential rather than
the density allowed in the Specific Plan. Director Stevens advised the
Commission that if they were not comfortable with that condition, they have
the option of letting the Applicant retain the Specific Plan density in that
area.
Vice Chairman Walling asked Staff if the Commission did take the third
option and modify the densities, would not there be a need for an actual
plan from the Applicant.
Director Stevens replied that Staff could condition it and follow the
Commission's direction in modifying the exhibits appropriately.
'Vice Chairman Walling asked about the future extension of Calle Tampico.
Dirartr)r Stm7pns replied that Staff - .--.-
to Calle Tampico at the present time on all three of the options before the
Commission.
Vice Chairman Walling opened the public hearing at 7:41 p.m.
Kaye Chandler, representative for the Applicant, Landmark Land Company,
apologized for the last minute submission of the revised request, but noted
after reviewing Staff's cements and the conditions of approval, the
Applicant felt the application as originally submitted was premature. He
stated that they felt this application's set of conditions were more appro-
priate to the Oak Tree West Specific Plan which has now been submitted to
0
MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 3.
the City. He stated that Landmark was submitting their request with
regard to the realignment of Avenue 52 at this time instead of with the
Oak Tree West Specific Plan simply to accommodate the Crystal Canyon
project and the City. He noted they would not have submitted the original
request in the first place if they would have realized it meant down zoning
the property. He stated that the Applicant would like the Commission to
act strictly on the realignment of Avenue 52 and delete any reference to
reducing the densities in the portion of Duna La Quinta Specific Plan
referred to at this meeting.
As no one else wished to be heard, Vice Chairman Walling closed the public
hearing at 7:25 p.m.
After a short discussion period, Vice Chairman Walling called for a motion.
2. Commissioner Goetcheus made a motion based on the findings in the Staff
Report to adopt Planning Commission Resolution No. P.C. 85-006, with
attached conditions, as amended. Camhissioner Klimkiewicz seconded the
notion. Unanimously Adopted with one abstention.
B. Vice Chairman Walling introduced the second item of hearing to be Specific
Plans Nos. 85-OO5A and 85-005B, proposals to amend an existing specific plan
of alignment for Avenue 52 between Jefferson Street and Desert Club Drive;
William Young and Landmark Land Company, Applicants. He called for the Staff
Report.
1. Assistant Planner Tamara J. Campbell advised that additional information
has been received since this hearing was last presented at the March 26,
1985, Planning Commission neeting. This information is regarding noise
impacts and traffic concerns. The acoustical study received concluded
that increased noise would impact residents north of the proposed alignment.
The inmmediate impact would be approximately three tines greater than existing
noise levels. Over the years, noise levels would gradually increase in that
the final noise levels may be approximately seven tines the current noise
level. She advised that it should be noted that the area world experience
increased traffic noise over the caning years regardless of whether Avenue
52 is realigned or not. The acoustical study provided several scenarios
for several methods of mitigation. The most effective of these nethods
would be to construct a 12' wall between Avenida Nuestra and the proposed
Avenue 52, and also to replace the previously proposed perimeter wall of
Crystal Canyon with a berm so that noise would not bounce back to residents
on Avenida Nuestra. With these two barriers, the acoustical engineer deter-
mined that the existing noise levels would be replicated. Assistant Planner
Caupbell stated that the 12' wall presented some aesthetic problems, there-
fore, Staff consulted with the acoustical engineer regarding a combination
6' berm and a 6' wall, which would have the same effective acoustical
qualities as the 12' wall, but provides a more pleasant appearance. The
Applicant has agreed to this combination on a 35' parkway between the two
streets. She identified this 35' parkway on a rendering displayed for the
Commission. Assistant Planner Campbell went on to state that there is a
10' setback along Avenida Nuestra so the nearest resident would probably
be 77' from the curb of the proposed Avenue 52 and approximately 47' from
the wall.
Moving on to the traffic concerns, Assistant Planner Campbell advised that
the nn-rn- r real;armient of Avenue 52 —',' --------
Avenida Nuestra at Washington Street to restrict access, as recommended by
a report received from Berrymman & Stephenson. in addition, 12' will be
added to the Avenida Nuestra right-of-way to provide for two travel lanes,
with parking. The Berryman & Stephenson report also commented on the need
for a bicycle/pedestrian path on Avenida Nuestra to minimize conflicts
between autos, bicycles and pedestrians. Staff recommends that the Applicant
be required to provide both bicycle and pedestrian paths to mitigate these
safety hazards. What the Applicant has proposed is a 6' meandering bike
trail. Currently, we have 8' minimum standards for a combination bike/
pedestrian path. Staff is recommending that an additional 5' path be
provided on the south side of proposed Avenue 52. In contact with the
MINUTES - PLANNING OOMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 4.
City Engineer, he recaarends that the radius of the easterly curve of
proposed Avenue 52 be increased to 2000', based on the California Highway
Design Manual Standards for anticipated speed limit of 55 mph. Due to
the anticipated lower speed limit for the westerly portion of proposed
Avenue 52, the proposed 1200' curve radius is adequate. Staff is recommending
that the proposed realignment be revised according to the City Engineer's
recommendation.
Assistant Planner Campbell stated there were concerns raised by local
residents, the Planning Ccmdssion and Staff regarding the aesthetic
impacts. These concerns included the height of the wall, the design and
materials of the wall and the proposed landscaping along the south side of
Avenida Nuestra. Essentially, there is a trade-off between constructing
a barrier to mitigate noise while still maintaining a low profile, all to
retain the view of the mountains to the south. Even though the combination
berm and wall will be a total of 12' high (it is set back 47' from the
nearest property line), this should allow for a view of the mountains to
even those closest to the barrier. The impact on the southerly view
decreases as the distance of the barrier increases.
As explained earlier, Assistant Planner Campbell stated the Applicant is
proposing a 25' wide, 6' high berm, with a 6' high block wall on tap.
There will be a 12' wide, landscaped berm with parkway between Avenida
Nuestra and the wall. This will be fully landscaped. In addition to the
trees planted along Avenida Nuestra, the trees planted along Avenue 52
parkways and center median will also be visible from the subdivision. The
use of both the berm and extensive landscaping will serve to minimize the
height and soften the appearance of this noise barrier. All landscaping
and wall plans shall be approved by the City prior to installation.
With regard to light and glare, Assistant Planner Campbell stated that the
proposed noise barrier should screen direct light and glare. Along the
south side of Avenue 52, the Applicant proposes to install wrought iron
fencing with extensive landscaping in order to minimize light and glare
affecting the Crystal Canyon project.
She went on to note other points which should be noted such as the fact
that Avenida Nuestra will only be improved from Calle Rondo to Washington
Street. Also, the intent of the proposal is to compensate for changes in
comunity flood control. Assistant Planner Campbell turned the Staff
]Report over to Director Stevens for the flood control report.
Director Stevens stated that at the Study Session on April 8, the Co[mission
had indicated a desire to see if a representative of the Coachella Valley
Water District could be requested to attend the meeting this date (4/9/85)
to discuss some of the rationale that went into the flood control design
that necessitated these changes. Unfortunately, no one from CVWD could
attend at such short notice due to other cocmitments. Director Stevens
stated he spoke with a couple of CVWD representatives, however, and would
try to relate what they told him. He stated, however, that the important
think to point out is that Staff perceives, in our support for the Applicant's
request, that the flood control is really this cammmity's highest priority
concern and actions which will facilitate the implementation of that flood
control program in the most cost effective fashion are reasonable and
appropriate.
Director Stevens went on to explain that the prinicpal reasons that the
project had to be redesigned and, ultimately, Avenue 52 realigned to
accomndate flood control are these. Staff imposed a condition on the
previous tentative tract relative to requiring the developer to accept
drainage from the Cove area. In designing the flood control system, it
was determined that this, in fact, meant the entire Cove - because the
design of the Bear Creek system on the west side of the Cove could not
acccnmiodate any additional flows from local street drainage from the Cove
area. This, in essence, meant that ultimately a storm drain system is
going to have to bring that drainage to the east to this project, and we
MINUTES - PIANNING COMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 5.
needed to ensure that the design of this project could accommodate those
flows. So, the engineers worked out an analysis of the 100-year flood,
which would impact those streets and determined how much capacity they
needed for retention to make the hydrolics of the system work. You must
remember that, ultimately, there is a connection between the Bear Creek
system and the east Cove drainage system at the evacuation channel, so
you are really talking about basins that have storage and then control the
time of flow to ultimately trove all the water out. Therefore, large areas
are needed for storage. That necessitated more than the 39 acres we saw
in the tentative tract, and when we finally ended up working out the details,
we needed 82 acres of land area to store, and yet still allow some reasonable
use of that land area as part of the golf course development, which has been
a ccu on design approval in the valley. Therefore, we had to increase the
area substantially to allow canpliance with the Cove drainage system we
ultimately expect to be installed there, and we needed the land area now.
The second major reason that the flood control necessitated changes related
to differences in elevation between the area ultimately receiving the water,
which is the La Quinta Stonmater Evacuation Channel, and the site itself.
You must be equal to or higher than the elevation where you are emitting
the water to the evacuation channel and, when you look at the volume that
required storage and the depths you would be required to have to store that
water, you are getting to the point where the bottan of the storage areas
would be lower than the evacuation channel. As a result, you have to make
sure you have an appropriate relationship between those elevations and that
is what resulted, essentially, in this design.
Director Stevens noted that at the Study Session, there was discussion of
the passibility of leaving the project as previously approved and using
that portion of the boanerang parcel (where the current bend is) for a
storage basin. This alternative created two major problems. The first
being the requirement of a large dike (similar to that at Eisenhower and
Tampico) all along that portion of Avenue 52 and in order to obtain the
necessary elevation difference between that area and the evacuation channel,
that storage basin would have been sane 12 to 14' deep and contain sufficient
amount of acre-feet of water to subject the project to the requirements of
the California Bureau of Dam Safety. The California Bureau of Den Safety
requirements would have added approximately one million dollars, or there-
abouts, in cost to the flood control project and would have likely delayed
that project as much as a year while the design was going through their
approval process. Therefore, we tried to find a design which would allow
the avoidance of time delays in going through the Bureau of Dam Safety.
This led to the early rejection of a large basin on the north side of the
former alignment of Avenue 52.
Director Stevens stated that we are now able, with this design, to handle
all local street drainage with the Cove up to either Durango or Sinaloa.
All of that area would be able to use this east Cove drainage system. We
still need to find a solution for the area north of that, which is presently
in the works. one of our additional goals and also trying to work within
the project was that the cost of the flood control project was significantly
cheaper if the City did not have to pay for the land that we were doing the
storage on or if the City did not have to at least acquire some type of an
easement right, if not outright fee purchase of the land. Trying to work
all of this into the framework of a development plan, the City saved a
_,_ey to the ultimate __
by securing, at no cost to the City or Redevelopment Agency, the necessary
easements upon which this retention will occur. In return, the City allows
multiple use with the golf course, but that has been co mon practice with
the District as a flood control agency and Staff thinks it is an appropriate
multiple use in light of the nature of the storms we usually get. Therefore,
Staff sees significant benefits to the City, principally to its flood control
project, by the realignment of Avenue 52. Director Stevens stated that this
concluded the Staff Report regarding flood control and asked the Commission
for any questions.
MINUTES - PLANNING COMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 6.
Commissioner Nbran commented that in looking at the plans, she only saw
a 36-inch drainage pipe going to the evacuation channel and wondered if
that was correct.
Director Stevens advised that it is not correct. It will be a 60-inch,
underground culvert that would go essentially along the alignment of
Desert Club Drive from the project to the evacuation channel.
Commissioner Goetcheus asked how many feet high the dike is at the north-
west corner of Avenida Tampico and Eisenhower Drive.
Director Stevens stated that Lloyd Watson (who was present at the meeting)
of Landmark Land Company advised that the dike was 15' or more above the
street.
Commissioner Goetcheus went on to comment that looking at the corner of
Avenue 50 and Eisenhower Drive, we have a beautiful view of Landmark
property. He noted that he has always been after as good a view from the
Cove side as there is from the other side. He stated he has always wanted
sidewalks, landscaping, etc., and the developer had good plans three or four
years ago, but it has not been improved to date. Commissioner Goetcheus
stated he feels this is an example of where we have not insisted that the
plans be what people in the Cove would like. He noted that it bothered him
that we might start over on scmmething else here that will be as bad as what
we have done already. He advised that he was referring to the two sides of
Avenida Benmidas where there will be berms and walls because of flood control,
which, try as he will, he does not understand.
Assistant Planner Campbell continued her Staff Report by noting some changes
in the written report. on Page 9, under Findings, Item 4 should read:
"4. The project will not have a significant impact on the
environment if adequate mitigation measures are required
as conditions of approval."
on the first page of the Conditions of Approval, under Noise, Item 14 should
read:
"14. The Applicant shall provide a 35-foot-wide, 6' to 8'
high bean on the south side of Avenue 52 to mitigate
noise impaction. Any wall on the south side of Avenue
52 shall be subject to City approval."
On Page 2 of the Conditions of Approval, under Miscellaneous, Item 16 should
read:
"16. The Applicant shall provide a meandering, 6-foot-wide,
bicycle path on the north side of Avenue 52, and a
5-foot-wide, meandering pedestrian path on the south
side of Avenue 52."
Director Stevens followed by stating that Staff's reconmendation to the
Comnission is adoption of the Resolution with the modifications to the
conditions.
('rnm;cc;nnar xmimkiaw_irz asked for a review --,_
Avenue 52. _
Assistant Planner Campbell did so by using the displayed rendering of that
area.
Vice Chariman Walling opened the hearing at 8:00 p.m.
J. B. Cold, Vice President of the Crystal Canyon project, Applicant, spoke
in reference to the flood control concerns which Commissioner Goetcheus
related earlier. He spoke also on the acoustical report received which
gave then a difficult task trying to develop noise mitigation for the
residents on Avenida Nuestra. He went on to explain the project to the
Commission.
MINUTES - PLAMING CCIVMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 7.
Kevin Manning, Planner for Landmark Land company, Applicant, advised
the Omm fission that the Applicant had no problems with the Conditions
of Approval in the request for the realignment that pertained to than.
Specifically, Conditions Nos. 1, 2, 31 4 and 12. However, they do have
a problem with Condition No. 10. They had proposed a 1000' radius.
Landmark feels that the 2000' radius is a safety hazard and wish to
ccinprm ise by proposing a 1200' radius at the curve. He stated that
the Berryman & Stephenson report proposed a 900' radius, which was
ignored by Staff. The City Engineer proposed the 2000' radius which
was promoted by Staff.
Director Stevens replied to Mr. Manning's report that Berryman &
Stephenson did indeed show that a 900' radius would be adequate. But
because that was in conflict with the recommendation we received from
the City Engineer, who recommended the 2000' radius, Staff talked to both
parties. The City Enginee indicated he was trying to avoid a super
elevated road, which means a banking situation in order to maintain the
type of speed that will occur on Avenue 52 (55 mph). In discussing this
point with Berryman & Stephenson, they stated they did not take into
consideration the impact of having to super elevate. Therefore, Staff
recommended the 2000' radius because it basically avoids the need to do
the super elevation. He noted that the super elevation or banking procedure
is more of a highway design and we do not presently have any roads with
this type of design.
Dr. Sodikoff, Rt. 1, Box 134, Del Mar, California, an Avenida Nuestra
property owner, spoke against the realignment.
Karen Sodikoff, Rt. 1, Box 134, Del Mar, California, an Avenida Nuestra
property owner, spoke against the realignment.
Audrey Ostrowsky, La Quinta, California, a La Quinta ply owner,
spoke against the realignment and Staff.
Bill Young, President of Crystal Canyon, Applicant, responded to the
concerns of area residents who had just spoken.
Vice Chairman Walling closed the public hearing at 8:30 p.m.
Comnnissioner Moran stated that she feels the residents of Avenida Nuestra
are benefiting by the proposed plans for their street with regard to all
the landscaping and the fact that it will be closed from Washington Street
traffic, etc. She feels that the Applicant has also done a very good job
with regard to the noise mitigation measures they have proposed for Avenue
52.
Commissioner Goetcheus stated he feels the Applicant has a very good project
and that everything on the inside of it is fine. He stated he does not like
the Avenue 52 realignment and felt the project was fine as developed
previously. He stated he does not like the Avenida Bermudas development
with regard to the wall and berm. He further stated that if he voted yes
on this project that he hoped the City Council, in their wisdom, would say
that this project is worth it to the City by changing the water affairs to
gain a project. He noted he is not satisfied that the water has to be
handled in the way it has been given to the Commission and even though
the plans, he wis' �c'-
had been present to answer any questions.
Commissioner Klimkiewicz stated that if this was just a request of an
Applicant, he would say no to the request. But, since it is a way to
solve some of our flood control concerns, and having reviewed our alterna-
tives as far as the impaction on the houses in the area, it seems like the
best solution we have cane up with. La Quinta is not going to remain as
it has been for the past 30 years.
MINUTES - PLANNrC COMMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 8.
Vice Chairman Walling stated he tends to agree with ccumissioner
Klimkiewicz. He noted that some people may not realize it, but if
Avenue 52 is not moved and there was a project to the south of Calle
Nuestra, the people there would probably still be subjected to a large
wall system, and perhaps not with such a thorough landscaping design as
this. This also provides for ample open space between Avenida Nuestra
and any buildings. This seems to be the most equitable means of obtaining
flood control for the City.
Vice Chairman Walling called for a motion.
2. ComTLssianer Klimkiewicz made a motion to adopt Planning Crnmission
Resolution No. 85-005 with modifications to the Conditions of Approval
as recaarended by Staff. Camtissioner Moran seconded the motion.
Unanimously Adopted with one objection (with friendliness) and one
abstention.
Director Stevens made a comment for the record. Staff disputes Mrs. Ostrowsky's
recollecton of the facts regarding the availability of information. He noted that you
cannot read a person's mind when they cane in asking for the Staff Report and try and
understand that to mean the acoustical study. He noted that several of the residents
who spoke at the last meeting and who are here tonight had copies of the acoustical
study as soon as it was available to the public, which was eight days ago. Dr. Sodikoff
made arrangements to receive a copy and paid for it and Mrs. Higgs made arrangements to
receive a copy. We cannot read peoples' minds in teens of the information they want
and we do the best we can. He stated again for the record that the acoustical study was
available to anyone who wished to receive a copy.
Vice Chairman. Walling advised that the next two item of hearing would be heard
concurrently.
C. Change of Zone Case No. 85-015, a proposal to change the zoning from R-1*,
R*++-1-10,000, R*-2-20,000, and N-A* to R*++-1-10,000, R*-2-20,000, and N-A*
on a 746-acre site easterly of Avenida Bermudas and southerly of Avenida
Nuestra; Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant.
D. Tentative Tract Map No. 20328, Revised No. 1, a proposal to approve a planned
residential development with 843 condominium units, 47 single-family lots, a
tennis and country club and an 18-hole golf course on a 417-acre portion of
a 731-acre site easterly of Avenida Bermudas and southerly of Avenida Nuestra;
Sand Pebble Country Club, Applicant.
Vice Chairman Walling requested the Staff Report.
1. Principal Planner Bonner stated that this is the same Change of Zone Case
as presented at the previous Planning Commission mission meeting. Due to the
addition of 57 acres, the Applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from
R-1* to R-2*20,000. That is the same zoning as placed on the remainder
of the project. The Applicant has made minor modifications to the single-
family lot area and, therefore, has adjusted that boundary for the R-l*
zoning. The southeast corner of the project has a 17' height limit, a
minimum 1200-square-foot dwelling size and minimum 10,000-square-foot lot
size. The next change is due to more engineering information the Applicant
has received. He has made minor modifications on the boundary between the
mountains and the units and has actually lost a minor amount of land to
keep away from the toes of the slopes. Staff is racammendina_gDproval.of_
arse vi here uasea on findings that the proposed zoning is consistent
with the general plan, that the proposed zoning would reduce the densities
allowable under the existing zoning, that it is compatible with the
surrounding area and, in fact, has a density approximately 3 to 4 units
per acre less than the surrounding area and that the approval of the request
will not result in a significant adverse impact on the environment.
Moving on to the Tentative Tract, Principal Planner Bonner stated she
would just review additional information and changes Staff has received
Since the last hearing on this case. She noted concerns brought up at
the previous hearing regarding the single-family units. Specifically,
the twD-story units around the perimeter of the project. The concerns
MINU'PFS - PLPMING COMMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 9.
were in regard to the height of the units, the fact that they were clustered
along the perimeter, the majority of the units were in larger buildings
having four units and, therefore, they had substantial bulk. Also, the fact
of the close spacing and clustering of units seamed to increase the mass of
than. At the last hearing, Planning Commission comments and comments from
the audience requested that the Applicant redesign or modify his plans to
modify these concerns. Therefore, last Friday, the Applicant submitted a
revised plan showing different treatment for the perimeter units. He has
eliminated some of the units on Avenida Bermudas, he has mixed units between
one and two-story units, he has decreased the building size by going from
fourplexes to duplexes, he has removed sore units from the northwest corner
to allow a window into the project. Principal Planner Bonner pointed out
the areas where changes have occurred by use of colored renderings submitted
by the Applicant. Staff still has concerns with some of the two-story
buildings along Avenida Bermudas and Avenue 52. On Avenida Bermudas, the
view from the single-family dwellings on the west side would allow the entire
second floor to be visible on the east side. Staff feels that the height
limit being 17 feet on the west side, that the two-story structures on the
east side should be kept away from this area, particularly in the interest of
compatibility and not blocking the view fron adjacent residents. Therefore,
Staff is reccnrending that the units be dropped back approximately 100' from
the right-of-way line. The units involved would just be reduced to one story.
The Applicant has agreed to three things in regard to the tennis clubhouse.
First, he has agreed to set back the building an additional 20 feet; second,
he will modify the wall design and third, the overall height of the building
will be limited to 20 feet.
Regarding Avenue 52, Principal Planner Bonner stated it is a different
situation than on Avenida Rarnudas. Right now, the distance from the property
lines on the west side of Avenida Bermudas to the wall on the east side as
proposed by the Applicant is about 100 feet. On Avenue 52, when you take
into consideration Avenida Nuestra, the extra setback for landscaping, etc.,
you are looking at approximately 200 feet to the wall (this is from property
line of Avenida Nuestra to perimeter wall of the project). Because they are
not adjacent to any other single-family units that are one-story and will
not be imposing on anyone's privacy or viewscape, Staff feels that the units
on Avenue 52 would have the opportunity to mix one and two-story units more
than proposed by the Applicant. Staff feels they can work with the Applicant
as far as revising the plan with this point in mind.
Principal Planner Bonner stated that eonments node at the previous meeting
tended toward the fact that we wanted more views into the project and this has
been a standard the City has tried to encourage in developments so that we
do not have a solid gall. As Assistant Planner Camnpbell mentioned earlier,
any requests for solid walls are all going to be conditioned upon. The
acoustical engineer will look at any of these plans to determine any
"bouncing" back of noise. Principal Planner Bonner noted that Staff has
not shown these plans to the acoustical engineer at this point.
Regarding the maintenance building, the Applicant has set back the building
frcm the Desert Club and the adjacent street. He has broken up the roof
lines to be ccnpatible with surrounding area and plans to recess the parking
area also.
With regard to concerns raised on the impact of the project to the wildlife
; c n,+- vq 4-taf 114 acres of the mour:t�-4-77--
will remain in natural open space. The Conditions of Approval prohibit the
installation of fencing which will restrict wildlife access from this area
into the project. In addition, the sandy wash habitat area in the southeast
area will be incorporated into the design. The biologist who prepared the
section within the La Quinta Flood Control Redevelopment Project Environmental
Impact Report on flora and fauna reviewed the project with respect to the
mitigation measures adopted as a part of the flood control project. He
stated that although any project affects existing habitat and foraging areas,
the design of this project and Conditions of Approval would reduce these
impacts significantly. Staff will also take extreme care in reviewing the
landscape and tree retention plans to ensure that impacts on wildlife will
be minimized to the extent feasible.
AOL
0
MRums - PLANNING CCnCSSION
April 9, 1985
Page 10.
Principal Planner Bonner went over the Conditions of Approval that
were being added to or changed.
Add to Condition No. 9:
"9.(d) All two-story units will be set back a minimum of 100 feet
from the right-of-way line."
Add additional condition under "Building and Site Design":
"Staff recommends that the maximum number of allowable units,
including single-family and condominiums, be reduced from
889 to 850."
Principal Planner Bonner noted that this concluded her Staff Report to
the Commission on the two items being heard concurrently.
Director Stevens noted that Staff is recommending approval of Tentative
Tract Map No. 20328, Revised No. 1, subject to the Conditions of Approval,
as amended, and based on the findings in the Staff Report.
Vice Chairman Walling opened the public hearing at 9:13 p.m.
Bill Young, President of the Crystal Canyon project (formerly known as
Sand Pebble Country Club), Applicant, reviewed the project as a whole,
speaking in favor of same.
J. B. Gold, Vice President of Crystal Canyon, representative of the
Applicant, replied to sane of the concerns addressed along Avenida
Bermudas. He also spoke in favor of the project.
Honer Davis, 52-211 Avenida Bermudas, La Quinta, questioned whether there
would be a bike lane, a gutter and a sidewalk on the west side of Avenida
Bermudas.
Director Stevens replied to this by noting that these type of improvements
would be done by the Applicant on the east side of Avenida Bermudas only.
Robert Craven, 53-125 Avenida Bermudas, La Quinta, questioned the height
of the two-story units on Avenida Bermudas, as to how much would be seen
by the homeowners on the west side.
Principal Planner Bonner explained to Mr. Craven that with the additional
setback being requested, only the roof of the closest building should be
seen by those residents on the west side of Avenida Bermudas.
Vice Chairman Walling closed the public hearing at 9:25 p.m.
Commissioner Klimkiewicz stated that most of his concerns have been
satisfied, with the exception of the northeast corner density of units.
Director Stevens advised that Staff could add a condition that particularly
indicates the northeast corner be evaluated to m;nim;ze the appearance of
bulk to the exterior of the project. If Staff cannot work out the details
of this with the Applicant, they will bring it back to the Commission.
Commissioner Goetcheus again stated that he has no objections to anything
inside the walls.
Commissioner Moran stated she would like to see 100' to 150' setbacks from
the wall for the two-story units on Avenida Bermudas. In the putting clock
II area, she stated she would like to see the units that are right on Avenue
52 either pulled back or have then not all two-story as shown. She agreed
with Ccnrdssioner Klimkiewicz that the density of the northeast corner
should be changed. She also had concerns with the location of the golf
course maintenance building with regard to noise, smell, etc., to the nearby
residents and made several suggestions for relocation. Commissioner Moran
asked the Applicant who they would have to maintain the golf course in the
event of flooding.
MINUTES - PLANNING COMMISSION
April 9, 1985
Page 11.
Bill Young replied that there will be an easement where the water will cane
through and CVWD will take care of any bad damage in the easement area and
the developer will maintain the golf course.
Vice Chairman Walling felt that the two-story units on the northwest corner
and the northeast corner are too dense. He feels a 100' setback on the
east should be provided. His major concern is the two-story units on the
highway. He also felt that anything on the golf course maintenance building
and the two-story units should come back to the Planning Commission for
review.
After a short discussion, it was decided to change Condition 9.(d) which
has been added previously in the meeting, as follows:
"9.(d) All two --story units shall be set back 100' from perimeter
roads as well as the common property line along Desert
Club area."
The Ocnmission would like to review final plans regarding the above.
With regard to the location of the golf course maintenance building,
Director Stevens stated he would attempt to discuss other options with
the Applicant when he gets to the point of final design.
After a brief discussion, Vice Chairman Walling called for a motion.
2. Commissioner Goetcheus made a motion based on findings in the Staff Report,
to approve Change of Zone Case No. 85-015, and Tentative Tract Map No. 20328,
Revised No. 1, subject to Conditions of Approval, as amended. Commissioner
Klinkiewicz seconded the motion. Unanimously Adopted with one abstention.
At this point, Director Stevens advised those present that the City Council hearings
on these items is scheduled for next Tuesday, April 16, 1985, at 7:30 p.m., in these
chambers.
5. BUSINESS
A. Vice Chairman Walling introduced the first item of buisness as Street Vacations
Nos. 85-007A and 85-007B, a request to determine General Plan consistency of a
proposed vacation of Avenue 52, generally between Jefferson Street and Desert
Club Drive; William Young and Landmark Land Company, Applicants. He called for
the Staff Report.
1. Director Stevens advised that on road vacations, the Planning CmTnyssion's
responsibility is to determine whether or not they are consistent with the
General Plan and make a report to the City Council as to that consistency.
Regarding these requests, we essentially envision that the vacations will
occur, if they are approved, upon the completion of the improvements on the
realigned right -of -Fray. You can expect, across the frontage of the project,
that it will be a full -width right-of-way and those areas through the Landmark
Land Company portion of the property, which would be to the east of this
rim-i . f- - u, ,i d mb .. ,i ;.,; 4-i.al.ly that sectior_ - - -° ,
section. It would be a two-lane, paved road to Jefferson and as Landmark
developed the adjacent property, then it would became a full width, four -
lane road. It is Staff's recommendation that the Commission adopt Planning
Commission Resolution No. P.C. 85-004 which determines that the vacations
are consistent with the La Quinta General Plan essentially since it is the
realignment of a road through an area. With regard to the conditions
attached:
Add Condition 1.(a) as follows:
"(a) If satisfactory arrangements for a private street access cannot
be worked out, provisions shall be made for a public street
access along the easterly side of the Desert Club."
MINUTES - PLAMING CCMMISSICN
April 9, 1985
Page 12.
Change 3.(6) adding Avenida Nuestra after Avenue 52.
Vice Chairman Walling called for a motion.
2. Commissioner Klimkiewicz made a motion to adopt Planning Commission
Resolution No. P.C. 85-004 and reccmTended support of the attached
conditions. Commissioner Moran seconded the motion. Unanimously
Adopted with one abstention.
Vice Chairman Walling called upon Staff to report on the five lot plan r
construction before the Planning Comiission, p p requests for
Director Stevens stated that as these requests had been reviewed at the study session
the day prior, he would identify each request and the Planning Crnmission could rule
on them as a whole. He stated that Staff is recommending approval of each of the
requests. Director Stevens identified each of the five requests as follows:
6.
B. Plot Plan No. 85-137, a request to construct a single-family dwelling on the
west side of Avenida Beanudas, 300' north of Calle Nogales; Desert Design
Development, Applicant.
C. Plot Plan No. 85-139, a request for approval of two classroom buildings in
conjunction with Public Use Permit No. 84-001 at the northwest corner of
Miles Avenue and Adams Street alignment; Family Heritage Church of the Valley,
Applicant.
D. Plot Plan No. 85-140, a request to construct a single-family dwelling on the
west side of Avenida Diaz, 180' south of Calle Potrero; Rick Johnson
Construction, Applicant.
E. Plot Plan No. 85-141, a request to construct a single-family dwelling on the
east side of Avenida Cbregon, 200' south of Calle Chihuahua; Rick Johnson
Construction, Applicant.
F. Plot Plan No. 85-142, a request to construct a single-family dwelling on the
west side of Avenida Martinez, 150' south of Calle Madrid; Rick Johnson
Construction, Applicant.
Vice Chaiz an Walling called for a motion.
Commi.ssiarner Goetcheus made a motion based on the findings in the Staff Reports
to approve Plot Plan No. 85-137 and Plot Plans 85-139 through 85-142, subject
to the Conditions of Approval. CmTissioner Klimkiewicz seconded the motion.
Unanimously Adopted.
There being no further items of agenda to came before the Commission, Vice Chairman
Walling called for a motion to adjourn.
Chairman 7hornbungh made a motion to adjourn to the next regular meeting of
April 23, 1985, at 7:00 p.m., in La Quinta City Hall, 78-105 Calle Estado, La Quinta,
California. Vice Chairman Walling seconded the motion. Unanimously Adopted.
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California,
was adjourned at 10:15 n_m__ Anri1 q. 1985, in the La Quinta r
zscaao, la Vainta, Caiitorn9a.