The URL can be used to link to this page

2008 12 09 PCCity of La Quinta Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-guinta.org 4i5 C�dl0F14�9 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California DECEMBER 9, 2008 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2008-033 Beginning Minute Motion 2008-021 CALL TO ORDER A. Pledge of Allegiance B. Roll Call II. PUBLIC COMMENT This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your comments to three minutes. III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA IV. CONSENT CALENDAR Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 12, 2008 and November 25, 2008. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time. Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s) in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the public hearing. A. Item .................. CONTINUED - ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2008- 602 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2008-112 Applicant........... City of La Quinta Location............ City-wide Request ............. Consideration of an Amendment of the La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element, Amending Exhibit 3.3 Street Cross Sections - City Streets, Exhibit 3.5 City Roadway Classifications, and Exhibit 3.10 the Multi -Purpose Trails Map. Action ............... Resolution 2008-, and Resolution 2008-. VI. BUSINESS ITEM: A. Item .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2006-866, TIME EXTENSION NO. 1 Applicant........... Trans West Housing, Inc. Location............ East Side of Monroe Street, '/4 Mile South of Avenue 54 Request ............. Clarification of Condition No. 85 Regarding Interim Landscaping. Action ............... Minute Motion 2008- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Report on City Council Meeting of December 2, 2008, from Commissioner Quill. B. December 16, 2008, Council Meeting Attendee scheduled to be Commissioner Weber. IX. DIRECTOR ITEMS: A. Discussion of a Joint Meeting with the Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee. X. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on January 13, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. DECLARATION OF POSTING I, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary of the City of La Quinta, do hereby declare that the foregoing Agenda for the La Quinta Planning Commission meeting of Tuesday, December 9, 2008 was posted on the outside entry to the Council Chamber, 78-495 Calle Tampico and the bulletin board at the La Quinta Cove Post Office, on Friday, December 5, 2008. DATED: December 5, 2008 wW CAROLY� N�/LKER, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California Public Notices The La Quinta City Council Chamber is handicapped accessible. If special equipment is needed for the hearing impaired, please call the City Clerk's office at 777-7123, twenty- four (24) hours in advance of the meeting and accommodations will be made. If special electronic equipment is needed to make presentations to the Planning Commission, arrangements should be made in advance by contacting the City Clerk's office at 777-7123. A one (1) week notice is required. If background material is to be presented to the Planning Commission during a Planning Commission meeting, please be advised that eight (8) copies of all documents, exhibits, etc., must be supplied to the Executive Secretary for distribution. It is requested that this take place prior to the beginning of the 7:00 p.m. meeting. MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA November 12, 2008 7:04 P.M. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by Chairman Ed Alderson who asked Commissioner Weber to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Katie Barrows, Paul Quill, Mark Weber, Robert Wilkinson, and Chairman Ed Alderson. C. Staff present: Planning Director Les Johnson, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Planning Manager David Sawyer, City Attorney Kathy Jenson , Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen, Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. II. PUBLIC COMMENT: Gayle Cady, 82-831 Avenue 54, Vista Santa Rosa, CA, complimented the City on the City's equestrian signs and brought some sample signs for the Commissioners to view. She suggested the City considering including directional signs for Lake Cahuilla as well as some equestrian crossing signs at various intersections. III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chairman Alderson asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of October 28, 2008. There being no changes, or corrections, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Wilkinson to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Reversion to Acreage 2008-005; a request of Stantec Consulting for Stamko Development Co. for consideration of Reversion to Acreage RA 2008-005 (36058-R), located east of Adams Street, south of Auto Centre Drive, west of La Quinta Drive. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Chairman Alderson recused himself from this item and turned the meeting over to Vice Chairperson Katie Barrows who opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Commissioner Quill commented on the maintenance conditions and the fact they would be cleaned up. Staff pointed out the condition which referenced the maintenance of screening and landscaping and the public right -of way. Staff added there was a mass grading plan permit in Public Works which has not been approved yet. When the City Council approves this application the grading permit can then be approved. Commissioner Quill asked a question about follow-through on the mass grading permit. Staff explained the procedures to be followed. Commissioner Quill asked if any problems on the site could be addressed by Code Enforcement. City Attorney Jenson said the Municipal Code has a whole provision on grading permits (issued for the site) and if the City Engineer finds any condition he considers unsafe he can require that it be removed. Commissioner Quill asked about the date of the mass grading permit. Planning Director Johnson explained the status of the current grading permit and the procedures to be followed for the approval of that permit. He also discussed the need for the applicant to maintain the stockpiling of material that is on the northern portion of the site. It was a 3:1 slope stockpile that was part of the activity for the JC Penney site. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about the history of the site including any complaints or previous code enforcement issues. Planning Director Johnson said he did not believe there had been any Code Enforcement issues. There being no further questions of staff, Vice Chairperson Barrows asked if there were any applicant representatives or comments. The applicant, Chris Clarke 2205 North Poinsettia, Manhattan Beach CA 90266, commented on the economic conditions around the world, and specifically, this community. She pointed out that JC Penney had pulled out of this site and she has had to revert the acreage. She gave some PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 background on the property and the grading permit history. She outlined what her plans were for the future of this site. She said she will comply with the mass grading permit on file with Public Works. She said they have had no complaints in the past eight or nine years. She commented on Condition No. 23, which states: "The applicant shall furnish security, in a form acceptable to the City, and in an amount sufficient to guarantee compliance with the approved Fugitive Dust Control Plan provisions as submitted with its application for a grading permit." She said the City has had a $40,000 (cash) deposit, for a number of years and she did not understand what the condition meant in reference to a "sufficient deposit". She said the City had held the money for eight years and asked what was the "security" they were referring to. City Attorney Jenson said it was her understanding there were stockpiles and some other things that could potentially need to be addressed. She spoke to the City Engineer regarding the purpose of that bond and it was to restore, or revert, the site back. Ms. Clarke said she was a little confused as to what the site was to be restored to. City Attorney Jenson replied it would have to be reverted back to a site without stockpiles. Ms. Clarke said the stockpiles currently met the City's codes. Ms. Clarke also said the City has had an open-ended condition for the $40,000 bond, and the site has already been graded. She asked what was the City asking her to restore the site to. City Attorney Jenson said there were also PM-10 issues and the site was not finished. It was still in a rough graded condition and would continue to need PM-10 control. Ms. Clarke said she understood that and was not asking for the $40,000 back. She was asking about the amount of security and said if the $40,000 wasn't enough she should be informed as to exactly what additional amount would be needed. City Attorney Jenson asked if she was referring to additional security. Ms. Clarke said she was unclear on the matter. The City Attorney suggested Public Works staff respond. Principal Engineer Wimmer said the amount of security would only be that which would be appropriate to the reversion of the acreage. If the amount (when it is calculated) was less than $40,000 the difference would be refunded. If it was more, the applicant would be asked for P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 3 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 additional funds. At this time they did not have the calculations completed to specifically answer the question. Ms. Clarks said she was still confused as to what was requested on the reversion of acreage and the previous request for bonding. Principal Engineer Wimmer said the amount of money needed to secure PM-10 coverage had not yet been calculated and repeated his explanation of the amount as noted above. Ms. Clarke pointed out she had given the Planning Commission Secretary a copy of additional resolution corrections (copies of which were given to the Commissioners). She added she was still confused and she said, after six maps, the deposit amount should have been calculated and specifically stated. Vice Chairperson Barrows asked about the resolution corrections and Ms. Clarke said they were very minor in nature. Commissioner Quill asked if Ms. Clarke was only concerned about the one condition, mentioning the security deposit, but she was all right with everything else. Ms. Clarke responded she was. There being no further applicant comments Vice Chairperson Barrows asked if there was any public comment. Suzanne Albert, 47510 Villa Florence, La Quinta, said her property backs up to the Adams property. She said she had been there for five years, through all the changes. She had one concern which was to plant trees, as promised by each developer, instead of having the unattractive green fence. She commented on the amount of dust in her home and requested trees be planted on Adams Street. Judy Harrison 47145 Via Orvieto, La Quinta, was confused as to what was meant by reversion of acreage. She asked what the applicant was trying to do. She commented on the JC Penney site being approved and the major construction and traffic on Adams Street. She stated she admired the fact the applicant did provide the polymer spray to keep down the dust, but she has been to City hall many times about the dust problem for the properties behind Lowes, Target, as well as those south of St. Francis Church. She commended Stamko again for the polymer but asked what it means to revert acreage. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Principal Planner Mogensen explained the background of the site and the fact the applicant was trying to revert this to a single parcel, instead of multiple parcels since that is what it was originally. Mrs. Harrison asked what that meant, did that make it commercial or multi -family. Staff gave her an explanation of what the reversion would entail and the number of parcels. Mrs. Harrison commented on a recent occurrence involving a severe dust storm and how it affected her and her neighbors. She explained the steps she took to attempt to correct the problem and emphasized the City need to pay closer attention to PM-10 control. She commended Stamko again for their use of the polymer spray to hold down the dust. There being no further questions, or public comment, Vice Chairperson Barrows closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Weber gave a synopsis of what the $40,000 held by the City was actually for. He said it is there to make sure the City can take care of any remediation issues, and in essence it was a bond. He said that was standard procedure, until the property was put into its final state. The City holds this bond, in trust, to be sure there are no financial repercussions which could fall back onto the City of La Quinta. City Attorney Jenson said that was correct. Commissioner Weber added that the $40,000 amount was established years ago with the City's best calculation of the potential liability if the applicant did not perform as requested. Commission Weber asked if when this property is regraded, will an action take place to make sure it is kept in compliance with PM-10 regulations. City Attorney Jenson responded to his question and explained what was necessary to release the bond. Commissioner Weber commented the concern to the citizens and the City was with PM-10 issues on this site and others. He asked if Public Works would be responsible for the inspections. Staff replied it would. Commissioner Weber asked about the trees Mrs. Harrison was referencing. He was under the assumption she was referring to the trees on the Adams Street frontage. He said there was currently a lot of landscaping already in place and asked if there were any trees that had PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 5 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 been promised and not planted as yet. Planning Director Johnson said with the entitlement for the JC Penney project there was a landscape plan that included trees. He added if that project went forward the trees would be included in that entitlement. However, he said there was a perimeter landscaping established and full street improvements included on Adams Street. That is not typically the case. He explained why the balance of the improvements were not in and what was needed. Commissioner Weber asked if there was anything deficient. Planning Director Johnson said there was nothing deficient at this point. City Attorney Jenson advised the Commission about the extension of a site development permit and that would be the appropriate time to condition whether or not something further should be done. Commissioner Weber said he understood the dust concern, but wasn't sure if they were actually coming from this site. He said he was pleased that it has been landscaped as it is not a normal practice. He commended the applicant, the owner, and the City for planning ahead so the citizens could enjoy at least a partially improved streetscape. There being no further questions, or public comment, Vice Chairperson Barrows closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Weber to approve Resolution 2008-032 for Reversion to Acreage 2008-005 as submitted. AYES: Commissioners Quill, Weber, Wilkinson, and Vice Chairperson Barrows. NOES: None. ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: Chairman Alderson B. Site Development Permit 2006-866, Time Extension No. 1; a request of Trans West Housing, Inc. for consideration of a one-year time extension for Site Development Permit 2008-866, for the construction of an equestrian facility, located on the east side of Monroe Street, '/4 mile south of Avenue 54. Chairman Alderson re -joined the meeting and opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 6 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Chairman Alderson asked about the second gate access and back road and asked if that was an addition. Staff said it had not been added and had been there all along. Chairman Alderson asked about the conditions in italics. He asked if they were the same as the previously approved conditions or had they been added and were they germaine to the issue. Staff said they had been added and were germaine to the issue. Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant had seen them and was in agreement with them. Staff said they had and they were. He added the specific condition regarding bonding was recommended by the applicant. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if there were any applicant representatives or comments. Applicant's representative, Ms. Marty Butler, introduced herself and stated she would like to wait to hear what concerns nearby neighbors had. She said Trans West was very enthusiastic in going forward and have been working closely with the Public Works Department. They do have funds set aside and are not asking for an extension without anticipating that they would go forward. She stated this was an integral part of the Griffin Ranch and a very key and important part of the project as well as an asset to the City of La Quinta. There being no further applicant comments Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. Gayle Cady, 82831 Avenue 54, Vista Santa Rosa, said she was here to support the project. She said the City had a wonderful opportunity to help Griffin Ranch and encouraged everyone to support this project as the equestrian community had been looking forward to this for so long. She urged the Commissioners to approve the extension. Betty M Smith, P 0 Box 732, 82470 Avenue 54, La Quinta CA, spoke on behalf of the project and spoke highly of some of the parties involved. She said the group planned very well for its neighbors and praised the planning and management of the Griffin Ranch. She noted the equestrian nature of the area and that she is in support of the project and urged the Commissioners to vote in favor of the extension. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 7 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Linda von Hurst, 81810 Mountain View Estates, La Quinta CA 92253, pointed out where her home was located (on the aerial) facing the 200 residential acres which has been under construction for the past two years. She stated they have had nothing but problems from the project, including PM-10 issues and described what has been going on. She said Mery Griffin explained there would not be any problems at the beginning of the project. She told about the grading of the acreage and the lack of water trucks used. She was concerned about the fact that no one is willing to help her. She did not want to see those problems happen to her neighbors. She said the 2006 EIR needed to be re -visited and PM-10 is hazardous to everyone's health. The amount of dust has caused her health problems, and ruined her family's health. Rich Levine, 81-990 Mountain View Lane, La Quinta, CA 92253 said she wished to give his time to James Rosenbaum. James Rosenbaum, 81-965 Mountain View Lane, La Quinta CA said he has tried to speak to Trans West and found them wholly insensitive to the neighbors' needs. They have done nothing about the problems they have created. He has had experience with horses and is aware there are odors, noises, flies, etc., but this is right on the border of his property. He said what has happened has not been good for our neighborhood. He is opposed to the project and he is on the Board of Trustees of the Estates of La Quinta and they are 100% opposed to this project. He felt promises would not be kept and suggested the Commissioners visit the von Hurst house. He said this situation will only reoccur to other properties and cause devaluation of their houses. Chairman Alderson asked if he represented the Estate of La Quinta when this project was originally approved. Mr. Rosenbaum replied he did not. Chairman Alderson said when the project was originally presented it was approved by that Homeowners' Association. Mr. Rosenbaum said the approval was rather biased and people moved out and moved away. This is something current. It is not the issue as to previous approval. Dr. Frank Hernandez, 81-875 Mountain View Lane, La Quinta CA, said he spends $285 a month to have his septic tank drained. He said the neighbors were promised sewer lines which have not been put in and he is concerned about the issue of the damage and dust to his pool and P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-OS.doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 backyard. He said Trans West has paid neighbors around him, but not him. He is a little confused as to how Trans West is dealing with the neighbors. He added that regardless of the economic situation, Trans West has made promises and have gotten a lot of latitude and generosity from the City. He is opposed to the project as it has negatively impacted their neighborhood. Bahram Niknam, 81-840 Mountain View Lane, La Quinta CA 92253, is directly south of the facility. He purchased his home in April and if he had been aware of the situation they would have kept looking. They have no trust the developer will keep their promises and he does not want to be in a position where they have to constantly call the City to have the developer comply. He commented that they are constantly cleaning their pool and power washing the deck. It was his understanding the applicant is supposed to comply with PM-10 regulations and requested the permit be denied. Mr. Trixifina, 81-870 Mountain View Lane, La Quinta CA 92253, said he would like to express the concerns of the previous speakers. He said the agreement they received in September 2006 is almost the same as the one they received in November. He said he couad not consider this a contract as there was no completion date of the contract. He commented on the bond being requested. He sympathized with the von Hursts and others. He said they have had to clean their residence on a daily basis. It is not a good way to live and they are slaves to their property. Tom Brohard, 81-905 Mountain View Lane, La Quinta CA, said he was speaking as the President of the Board of Directors of the Homeowners' Association. He had appeared before the Commission in support of the project in 2006. They had extensive discussions, and negotiations with Trans West and they did move some areas of the project in response to the Board's suggestions. When they put the plan to a straw vote, only one neighbor dissented. He added, to sweeten the pot, Trans West offered to connect their neighborhood to the sewer system. In addition, he hadn't really experienced the dust from the grading. He said the von Hurst's situation boiled down to a matter of trust. They have called the City and AQMD but there is a significant amount of damage that has been caused due to the dust. They received a revised agreement from Trans West yesterday, but the neighbors have a great deal of distrust and are opposed to this project. The grading will be immediately adjacent to seven properties, on the northern boundaries, P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 9 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 and it will be chaotic to those residences. He asked that the Commission consider this extension very carefully as their Homeowners' Association does not support it. Commissioner Quill said if the Commission did not grant an extension what would be the homeowners' expectation. Mr. Brohard said they are concerned about the grading and the PM-10 issues. They were made promises on the rest of the project, but it wasn't happening. Commissioner Quill said he understood , but asked why killing the project would assist him. Mr. Brohard said they would like more time to talk to Trans West. Chairman Alderson asked how many homes were in this Association. Mr. Brohard replied 14 lots and 13 homes. Joanne Boegner, 81-080 Golf View Drive, La Quinta CA, chose to give her time to Betty Smith. Thomas Colvin, 82470 Avenue 54, Thermal CA, chose to give his time to Betty Smith. Betty M. Smith, P O Box 732, Indio CA, said as far as flies and odors are concerned, she cleans up manure every morning. She said she didn't understand why people moved to the desert and then complain about the dust. Wherever you move in this Valley you are going to have dust. It is dusty and it is something we have to deal with. Richard Levine, 81-990 Mountain View Lane, La Quinta CA, said he tried to contain the dust problem, but it manages to infest every area of his home. He has spent $10,000 to seal up his house. He depends on air conditioning. He just finds that if you look at the map the new range would be 40 feet from his house. The pictures are beautiful, but it is currently a dust bowl. He thinks this is an appalling situation. You can find other horse ranches with other neighbors that are not on top of you. He said he loved horses, but there are people who just wanted to be left in peace in solitude. Norman Cady, 82-831 Avenue 54, Vista Santa Rosa CA, chose to give his time to Gayle Cady. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doe 10 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Gayle Cady, 82-831 Avenue 54, Vista Santa Rosa, CA, commented on people who move to the desert and complain about the heat and sand. She was not condoning PM-10 conditions, but when the wind is blowing at 40 miles an hour you are going to have dust, not just from the Griffin Ranch, but also from projects such as Silverrock, The Hideaway, and Madison Club. She commented on the fact that until the projects are completed, in the area, the nearby residents will have dust. She commented on the septic tank problem, and gave an example of the frequency of having the septic tank pumped out. She added that the current stables were already there before the La Quinta Estates. The Griffin Ranch people do have a first class operation. Linda von Hurst said we are all entitled to breathe healthy air. It is negligence on the part of the construction workers and it is Griffin Ranch's responsibility to make sure they do their job. She offered to send a federal report to the Commissioners and added they should have the freedom to enjoy their home in a healthy manner. She also stated all land is owned by someone and they need to keep care of their property. Chairman Alderson asked Public Works staff about the dust control complaints and the responses. Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer said he was not familiar with the case. Chairman Alderson said he had some concerns on the financial securities. City Attorney Jenson said the applicant has submitted documentation and the security is actually a cash deposit instead of a bond. Ms. Marty Butler, Trans West said, in response to the dust issues, they have a full PM-10 Plan in place and implemented. They have sufficient trucks and have glued down the soil. They fully follow the PM-10 Plan and have had no citations from the City of La Quinta. Wind also comes from other properties and she acknowledged that the neighbors do have dust, however, they religiously follow their PM-10 Plans because if they do not they will be fined by the AQMD. When the wind blows, the Van Hursts call AQMD and they do come on the site and see that we are following the PM-10 Plan. She added, she was sorry if someone has dust, but they were following the PM-10 Plan. Chairman Alderson asked if the PM-10 control was primarily water or soil control. Ms. Butler said both and their water bill was extremely high. They have to keep up with the control or they will have AQMD and the City of La Quinta citing them. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 11 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Commissioner Quill asked if AQMD was called and they made visits, did the applicant have any pending litigation, fines, or citations with AQMD. Ms. Butler said, in the last three years, they have had only one citation and it did not have to do with grading. Chairman Alderson said these people are talking about dust control measures and they are getting an inordinate amount of sand. Ms. Butler said the wind does blow and they are doing everything that is asked of us and going the extra mile to control the dust. Chairman Alderson said once construction starts there will be problems. He asked if the applicant will be pulling a grading permit soon and will go forward with the project. Ms. Butler said yes. Chairman Alderson said if they proceed with construction, shortly, this should put to rest some of these problems. Commissioner Weber said if the landscaping was done on site then the underground utilities would take place and would that address the sewer system issue. Ms. Butler said no. They contacted the neighbors and they were interested in connecting to a sewer system. Trans West offered a memorandum of understanding, without a time frame, to complete this. She said they submitted an agreement that as soon as they worked on the Monroe Street improvements they would work on the sewer system. They did give them a rough timing, but in today's economy they cannot give them a more definite time frame. Commissioner Barrows said the application mentioned six to eight months. She asked when the construction would occur. Ms. Butler said they would begin right away. They have set aside funds for this improvement. Commissioner Barrows asked if this could happen within a matter of months. Ms. Butler said yes. Commissioner Barrows said she was not familiar with the use of landscaping and soil stabilizer, but asked about a ground cover being more effective. Ms. Butler said the site is very tight. The pastures will remain the same. The two houses will remain. The front area will be grassed. They will be doing some surface grading and planting around the arenas. They will immediately begin building these buildings. Commissioner Quill said it appears that the issue is not so much the Saddle Club as the project to the west and asked if that had been graded. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 12 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Ms. Butler said yes. The due west site is approximately 2/3 graded and the northeast section has been rough graded and soil stabilized. Commissioner Quill referenced Commissioner Barrow's point about planting ground cover such as winter barley done as a buffer which can be very effective in knocking down the dust from the areas on the other side. Ms. Butler said they are not opposed to that. Commissioner Quill said once that's established you can turn the water off and then they would not have to worry about the soil crust being disturbed. Commissioner Quill asked about the current sales and Ms. Butler said they had one a week ago and one a month ago. They have been averaging about one per month. They usually have more success during the season because they are very high end and especially wanted to capture the horse people during the season. Commissioner Quill asked if the comments from the sales department have been they need to finish the amenities. Ms. Butler said yes. Commissioner Wilkinson said there were funds for grading, but were there funds for construction. Ms. Butler said not construction, but for the sewer construction. She explained when the project would be done. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if the funds were in place to do this part. Ms. Butler said they were for the Saddle Club. Commissioner Wilkinson said Ms. Butler mentioned they were using soil cement and water trucks. Ms. Butler said they were using both on all of the site. They were using two to four water trucks. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if it had been two years since it was soil stabilized. Ms. Butler said no, it had been done recently. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if there was any type of bond that was established for the Griffin Ranch residential area to handle this type of situation. Principal Engineer Wimmer said condition no. 22, page 15, of the staff report covers that very issue and then read it. He added, with every project there are fugitive dust control measures and that condition had been included in the packet. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 13 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Commissioner Wilkinson asked if staff was familiar with any complaints from that area. Principal Engineer Wimmer said that is a different section of the Public Works Department but he would be happy to look into it. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if Ms. Butler had met with the homeowners. She replied she had met with them previously, but not recently. She met with them as a group. She said Trans West projects are well received and they believe in customer service. Commissioner Wilkinson said there is something seriously wrong when you have complaints like this. He is conflicted. He likes the project. but there needs to be some type of vehicle available to satisfy some of these situations. He knows about PM-10 because he is certified. You can't control dust from project to project, but once it's on your project it's yours. You have to find a solution. Ms. Butler said they are concerned about PM-10 and have worked with the Public Works Department. They are willing to work on additional PM- 10 issues. Commissioner Wilkinson said he sees and problem and would like to see how it can be solved. Commissioner Barrows said she wanted to follow up on the comment on the monitoring of the project. Ms. Butler said they do the whole regimen. Planning Director Johnson said there is, with regard to the residential component, an active grading plan with security in place to address that. There is also a subdivision improvement agreement and he wanted to clarify that. Commissioner Barrows said she assumed the conditions of this project are also imposed on the residential project. Staff responded those conditions are similar to the established subdivision. Commissioner Weber wanted to address two things: 1) he wanted to asked if the status was as a result of the Art in Public Places Program. Ms. Butler said yes. That is something the developers contribute to, not the City. 2) Regarding the EPA activities, he asked if she could give then a brief synopsis. Ms. Butler explain the situation of what was happening in 2001 /2002 and the consequences. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 14 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Commissioner Barrows explained the situation with the Valley being out of compliance with EPA standards. Commissioner Weber said the issue we are addressing, while these are real concerns, the Saddle Club is a distinct project with PM-10 ranch dust issues, but we need to move forward. Chairman Alderson asked Ms. Butler if she were amenable to revisiting her PM-10 Plan. Ms. Butler said she was and she would take any additional recommendations that the Public Works department had. She acknowledged that it was a possibility their plan was outdated. Chairman Alderson said that was an excellent suggestion. He added seeding that site would address a lot of their concerns. Immediate construction on that site is going to be a problem no matter when you build it. The neighbors have concerns and these recommendations could be helpful. Chairman Alderson suggested staff schedule an updated PM-10 Plan meeting and added it would be helpful to have water trucks twice a day, during a wind storm. Chairman Alderson said there would be a new review meeting and those items could be reviewed. Ms. Von hurst said her family has been neglected for two years. There have been over 100 complaints. People who have previously made complaints have moved out. When she requested retrieval of the complaints, from June Greek, they were unavailable. Raoul Martinez came to their home and promised to have something done. They had records and now they are gone. This is not a good reflection on the City of La Quinta. This is why they had to sue. In regards to the AQMD, Katherine Woodward said it takes two hours to come from Riverside to their home and they have to see the situation with their own eyes. She disagreed with Ms. Butler on the number of reports and the fact they were not cited. If they had been cited the Von hursts would still be enjoying their home today. There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 15 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Commissioner Weber reiterated the issue deals with the Saddle Club site. He would like to see the developer and staff work to resolve these issues. Commissioner Barrows questioned staff on how the issues were being covered on this property versus the residential property. City Attorney Jenson said the applicant agreed the Commission could impose a condition on the site. The Commission had the authority to do that. Commissioner Barrows said she liked the suggestion of the cover planting. Commissioner Quill commented that the public complaints had to do with issues with the developer and not the Saddle Club. He referenced the developer's comments on the sale of one house per month and the amount of time it will take before the sewers are actually put in. That project will not be possible at this time. He said it was commendable they were willing to do it in the first place. He added somebody has dropped the ball; whether it is AQMD, the City, or the developer, because the people present were obviously being inundated by sand. Dust is a fact of life out here, and it's not just because of the developers. There needs to be some control of the dust to the west of this project. He suggested seeding and planting of dust control buffers and thought that would be a proper solution. It would also assist in water conservation efforts. Commissioner Wilkinson commented the conditions referred to two different projects, but the same owner, and was concerned about compliance. He wanted to make sure there was some type of requirement for Trans West to come back and verify that something was getting done on the soil sealing and PM-10 issues. Planning Director Johnson reiterated what the City Attorney mentioned earlier regarding addressing this with a time extension, by adding a condition requiring review of their PM-10 Plans. City Attorney Jenson said if the Commission wanted more "teeth" in the condition, they could say the developer had to be in complete review and compliance before they can pull any building permits. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if this was a one year time extension. Planning Director Johnson said it had been identified as a year, but could be modified. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 16 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Commissioner Quill asked if that was one year to start. Staff replied it was actually about ten months, based on the original application's expiration date. Commissioner Quill asked if the project would take one year to start; not complete. Staff said yes. Commissioner Wilkinson said he wanted to make sure there was a plan of action in place. His concern was if the economy continued to go awry the City would be in the same spot without one. City Attorney Jenson said what staff suggested was the developer would have to pull permits so the Commission would be in control of the amount of time of the extension. Commissioner Wilkinson asked if there was a way to extend this so it was not related to pulling permits. City Attorney Jenson explained the options and difficulties with setting a time frame rather than relating the extension to pulling permits. Chairman Alderson said another option would be when they pull a grading permit. City Attorney Jenson said you could then add a condition which states they cannot pull the grading permit until they have gotten the review on the residential site and were in compliance with the additional requirements. Commissioner Wilkinson asked how that would be achieved. Staff replied by holding the bond. Chairman Alderson suggested grading be held up until a new PM-10 Plan is in place Commissioner Barrows made a motion requesting the applicant be required to have a review of the Griffin Ranch residential area PM-10 Plan, which would include representatives from AQMD, the City, and a representative of the Estates at La Quinta Homeowners' Association. She added interim landscaping should be considered as an option and said the PM-10 plan should be completed and reviewed prior to the issuance of any grading permits. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 17 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Commissioner Quill suggested staff could check further on the PM-10 Plan and report back at the next meeting. Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant had heard and agreed to the conditions. Ms. Butler said yes. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Weber to approve Minute Motion 2008-017 for Site Development Permit 2006-866, Time Extension No. 1 with the addition of the following condition: 85. Staff shall conduct a review of the applicant's PM-10 dust control plans for Griffin Ranch involving the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Public Works, and a representative of the La Quinta Estates Homeowners' Association. Dust control measures shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to the issuance of grading permit for the Saddle Club. Unanimously approved. Chairman Alderson requested a break, in the meeting, at 9:20 and the Commission reconvened at 9:29 P.M. C. Sign Application 2008-1309; a request of 51025 Mendoza, LLC. for consideration of a proposed sign program for a two-story 4,036 square foot building, located on the southwest corner of Calle Tampico and Avenida Mendoza. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked about the ten day time frame for removal and repair of signs. Staff replied it was up to the landlord. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if there were any applicant representatives or comments. There being no applicant comments Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doe 18 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 There being no public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Barrows to approve Minute Motion 2008-018 for Sign Application 2008-1309 as submitted. Unanimously approved. D. Environmental Assessment 2008-602 and General Plan Amendment 2008-112; a request of the City of La Quinta for consideration of an Amendment of the La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element, amending Exhibit 3.3 Street Cross Sections — City Streets, Exhibit 3.5 City Roadway Classifications, and Exhibit 3.10 the Multi -Purpose Trails Map, located City-wide. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department with the addition of two letters submitted prior to the meeting which are on file in the Planning Department. Commissioner Quill asked if the City has looked at these plans, regarding conformance, with CVAG's intention for trails in the non -motorized plan section, of their transportation plan for the Valley. Planning Director Johnson said CVAG is currently in the process of updating the plan and have not been consulted as yet. He said this is not viewed as being a non-conformance item and it is actually introducing more multi -purpose trails. It is only proposing the elimination of two segments of trails which were problematic. This will actually provide greater and better access and circulation. Commissioner Quill asked about the addition of trails and an explanation of those trails. Staff explained the history of multi -purpose trails and the reason for the changes. Commissioner Wilkinson asked which one of these widths would be more like Madison. Planning Director Johnson said the modified secondary arterial B, with the exception of four lanes, would be comparable to PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 19 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Madison Street, north of Avenue 60. None of these exactly fit and that was why they were noted as modified. Staff then gave a more detailed explanation of the widths. Commissioner Quill asked about the bike and pedestrian lanes. Staff explained what was being changed, as well as what was currently there. Commissioner Weber expressed his concern about receiving letters on the day of the meeting and asked if that could be prevented in the future. City Attorney Jenson said the public can submit letters right up to the convening of the meeting. Planning Director Johnson explained how the meeting had been publicized and notices had been directed to folks who would be affected. Commissioner Quill had a question regarding a letter referencing the widening of Avenue 62. Staff explained what was being referred to and what was actually proposed. City Attorney Jenson added clarification on the staff's explanation regarding the road over the dike. Commissioner Quill asked about the adjacent property to the south of the existing right-of-way and any burden on the owner of that property to develop it. Staff said that was actually in the County's jurisdiction. The General Plan of the County calls out for a condition similar to what the City has currently identified in the General Plan. Commissioner Quill asked if there had been any communication with the County regarding reducing the street width of the proposed Avenue 62. Staff said they have been in contact with the County regarding their intentions. Commissioner Barrows said it was kind of challenging to come to a decision after receiving letters which were submitted so late. Chairman Alderson and Commissioner Quill both asked for clarification on the four modified street sections from the General Plan for specific streets. Staff explained the sections in question. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 20 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Chairman Alderson said there is no action in the immediate future, just when they are done. Staff replied that is correct and added there is one project that was approved two -and -a -half years ago (Coral Mountain) which has a two phase build out. He then explained the impact of this change on the project. Chairman Alderson asked if it was landlocked until the extension of Madison Street. Staff said there was not a street established, but it is reachable. It is not an established street at this time. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if there were any applicant representatives or comments. There being no further applicant comments Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. Margo Thibeault, MSA Consulting, Inc., 34200 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho Mirage, CA, spoke on behalf of Mr. Howard Keck who owns 235 acres of land on the south side of Avenue 62. She apologized for the lateness of the letter she submitted to the Commission and explained the circumstances. She said they felt the widening of the dike was unnecessary to accommodate the traffic in the area. Currently the right- of- way was divided between the north and south sides of Avenue 62 and explained their position of negative effects on Mr. Keck's property as stated in the letter dated November 12, 2008 and submitted to the Planning Commission prior to the meeting. Commissioner Quill said Avenue 62 on the General Plan was already going over the levee, so there would be a connection to Jefferson and Madison Streets as well as Avenue 62 and provide three points of ingress and egress. Staff said that was correct. Commissioner Quill asked what the staff's traffic analysis said. Staff explained what was found in the traffic study, based on Avenue 62, trip amounts were less than were warranted for a four lane road. He also explained the reason for the need for the General Plan changes, as requested, and the benefits of those changes. Commissioner Quill said the Travertine project has been on the books since the late 1980's. The present state of the economy will preclude it from developing for the next several years. He explained the effects of the alluvial fan area and said this is also one of the recharge areas for the Coachella Valley Water Basin. He questioned whether development will P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 21 Planning Commission Minutes November 12. 2008 ever be allowed to occur on the uphill side of the levee and said it was a stretch to plan for something to be developed in an area that may not be developable due to the flood and habitat issues. He asked why this was so important in the General Plan. City Attorney Jenson said part of this was due to the Coral Mountain project going forward, and with reimbursement and other complications they were having to build the street out to the greater width and explained the importance at this time. Staff added that another part of it comes from the interaction with the property owner of the Travertine area. Staff is looking at the Specific Plan Amendment Review. Staff's interest here is in looking at the long term objective. We don't know what and when something will develop out there, but based on one entitlement in the area, we have looked at the 2002 General Plan. Commissioner Wilkinson asked Ms. Thibeault her recollection of a previous discussion about expanding Avenue 62 to more lanes. She replied that was the South Valley Parkway in the County which he was referring to. Ms. Thibeault added she did not know if Mr. Keck's property was going to be included in that plan. She said Trilogy, Hoffman, and Mr. Keck will be bearing the burden of this improvement. City Attorney Jenson pointed out that Mr. Keck had not been required to pay any of that and explained the particulars of his participation on the roadway improvement. Commissioner Quill commented it was in the County not the City. City Attorney Jenson there is some power to do eminent domain outside of your jurisdiction. Commissioner Wilkinson asked since this is in the County's Redevelopment Area, couldn't they use their funds. Staff said they could. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 22 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Chairman Alderson asked if Mr. Keck's main concern is land loss. Ms. Thibeault said it was and reiterated her concerns about the elevated road. Chairman Alderson noted Commissioner Quill's comments about the use of the land over the dike and said Jefferson Street needs to be there to facilitate that; ultimately it's got to happen. Commissioner Quill asked about the process of the Travertine Specific Plan and how the possibility they could wind up with a significantly reduced number of properties, and that resulted in a significantly reduced number of trips, could the City then reduce and get rid of one of the three legs. He gave the example of less traffic. City Attorney Jenson commented on the issues of concern, such as 1) from the standpoint of demand, 2) emergency services access, and 3) the Fire Department's concern about response time in that area. The City is proposing a fire station in that area and the access provided by Avenue 62 Is a key element. She continued, there are property owners other than those in front of you, and Section 5 is divided in a strange way. Avenue 62 is the roadway that actually goes to them and she was concerned that we would take an affirmative action to eliminate the road. Commissioner Quill had concerns about developing in a flood area since you would not be able to evacuate people during a flood. The burden of those services should be placed on the person who chooses to develop in that type of area. He explained what could happen during a flooding scenario and said it was not safe to be up there. Chairman Alderson said the Commission's job was to approve these road sections. Mr. Jim Hildenbrand ,77-852 Wildcat Drive, Palm Desert CA introduced himself and said he previously addressed Council and explained that they are going forward. He added that the original project was a very intense project and the new one is much less intense. He then explained his concerns as noted in the letter submitted to the Planning Commission on November 12, 2008, and on file in the Planning Department. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 23 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Commissioner Quill asked if Mr. Hildenbrand's letter was discussing an alternative to putting in the trails. Mr. Hildenbrand said he was concerned about the road sections and shifting them to the east. Chairman Alderson asked if he meant the extension of Madison Street. Mr. Hildrenbrand said yes and also mentioned the addressing of Avenue 62 as noted in their letter. He then addressed the concerns of the Fire Department and the options available to them. He added he was in support of the General Plan changes with the exception of extending Avenue 62 over the dike. Commissioner Wilkinson asked staff if this offset complied with City Standards. Planning Director Johnson said it is his understanding that Mr. Hildenbrand is proposing taking modified secondary arterial A and shifting it to provide a larger shoulder. He said staff could address this with the applicant at the appropriate time and explained how and what would be addressed. He was concerned about the potential problems an offset would cause and gave some examples. Commissioner Quill suggested a compromise would be to take the right- of-way but allow the slope to be in it. Staff said they have been considering the idea, internally, with regards to Madison, south of Avenue 60 where it goes up and over the dike into the recharge ponds and eventually into the Travertine project that maybe we have a situation where there is an all-weather multi -purpose trail on one side. Chairman Alderson said the bottom line was staff could work with the developer. Commissioner Barrows asked Mr. Hildenbrand a question about the extension of Avenue 62 over the dike and public safety. Mr. Hildenbrand said as part of Travertine we'll have Madison and Jefferson Streets in place. There is an existing roadway today. There are enhancements to that on an emergency basis only. He explained the other options available for the public safety issues. Commissioner Barrows asked the current width of that existing roadway. Mr. Hildenbrand said he guessed it was 30 feet or so. Commissioner Barrows asked if it was two lane. Mr. Hildenbrand said it was a gravel road. Commissioner Barrows pointed out to staff that concurred with Mr. Keck's letter regarding keeping the street width at 30 feet. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 24 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Planning Director Johnson said it was important to point out, on the modified collector street, there is an asterisk and below showing there could be modification to the width in that design when circumstances warranted it. One of those circumstances could be the crossing over of the dike. We are not anticipating a street cross section up and over the dike that would exactly match what is shown tonight. We would have to make sure it would adequately accommodate a two lane road. Mr. Hildenbrand responded to Commissioner Quill's comments relating to obtaining the correct right-of-ways. Ms. Gayle Cady, 82-831 Avenue 54, Vista Santa Rosa CA, as an individual and a 41" District Representative for Roy Wilson Trails Committee said with regards to Travertine, the dike, and the Martinez Rock Land Slide there are three faults dead center and a flood zone in the center of Travertine. She wanted to comment on the changes proposed by the City of La Quinta. She explained about the trails in La Quinta. It would be a shame and a travesty to be erased off the map. And she had a proposal to enhance the trails. She handed the copy to Chairman Alderson. She then gave some background on the Travertine project and some history on the Martinez Rock Slide avalanche. One of her proposals was to extend a non -motorized, all purpose trail around the mountain. She gave background on a new trail. The reason she was showing this was to illustrate greater trail access. She explained why these were important and what she was proposing. She said she needed to get together with staff. to go over what was being proposed. Chairman Alderson asked if staff could go over this with Ms. Cady. Planning Director Johnson said the Boo Hoff Trail was still included. The new plan eliminated routing over Section 5 properties, which were privately held, and it would be difficult to obtain those properties as conservation easements. Ms. Cady said the National Monument line goes right through there. She explained where the trails were shown on her map. Staff said they would discuss the map and trails with Ms. Cady. Ms. Cady brought the map up to the dais for the Commissioners to look at and staff said they would be happy to work with her on this. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doe 25 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Ms. Betty M. Smith, 82-470 Avenue 54, Vista Santa Rosa, CA, commented Ms. Cady and Commissioner Quill were right about the trails. She was happy to hear the Boo Hoff Trail would be left open. She said they would be able to ride from here to Palm Springs on those trails. There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Quill said a lot of these maps show the CVRPD proposed trails along the levee. The Bureau of Reclamation generally supports trails on their properties. He asked if there was any logic or reason why the City would want to show a path along the top of the levee. Staff explained about the upcoming major update to the City's General Plan Commissioner Barrows concurred with Commissioner Quill's comments on the alluvial fan. She knows the trails and was totally confused by the map on the screen. She asked for some clarification and staff gave her an explanation of the areas outlined on the map. There was discussion that a short continuance might be justified. Commissioner Barrows said she would feel more comfortable with that and asked if that created any problems for staff. Staff replied no. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any time constraints. Staff said it would be no problem if it would help the Commissioners. There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Barrows to continue discussion of Environmental Assessment 2008-602 and General Plan Amendment 2008-112 to the Planning Commission meeting of November 25, 2008. Unanimously approved. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: A. Site Development Permit 2008-902; a request of Madison Square; Sobel Development for consideration of perimeter landscaping (sidewalks) located at the northeast corner of Highway 1 1 1 and Dune Palms Road. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 26 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager David Sawyer presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant had made all the changes as previously requested. Staff commented on the berming being left out at this time because of the level of the parking lot, the height of Dune Palms Road and screening at the fast food restaurant and said staff was satisfied those items were met. Commissioner Barrows asked if it was an eight foot or ten foot sidewalk. Staff explained about the eight versus ten foot sidewalk. The applicant proposed as an eight foot sidewalk which is the City Standard and matches the one across Dune Palms. Chairman Alderson asked if it matched the sidewalks nearby. Staff replied yes. Chairman Alderson said on Dune Palms Road, in the northern -most portion of the project, on the north side of Building One, there is a planter but no sidewalk. He asked how pedestrians were supposed to get around to Building One without walking in the street. Staff said that area is an area that could have a sidewalk placed there, other than what is proposed. Staff then explained the layout. Chairman Alderson said the biggest concern of the Commission was the fact that the High School students would be walking across the flood control channel and now they would be walking in the street. Staff suggested the applicant address the concern and explain their proposal. Commissioner Weber said in the staff report it does talk about the lack of addressing the landscaping and the berm. He was concerned about those issues. Commissioner Weber said Attachment 2 has been revised from what was previously shown on the screen. Staff replied it was landscaped. Commissioner Quill said he just wanted to make sure they include the piece of sidewalk on the north end . PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 27 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if there were any applicant representatives or comments. Mr. Brad Soble, the applicant, said in regard to the northernmost corner, they would put in a sidewalk if the Commission wanted one. He then explained the traffic situation. He said they took two passes at this design, one after the previous Planning Commission meeting and one after the previous City Council meeting with concerns about the sidewalk on Dune Palms and one on Highway1 1 1 . They tried to make everybody happy by berming and showed the last revised conceptual landscaping. That was summarily rejected by the Mayor. They ended up with what was shown today with no berming on Dune Palms and all the berming on Highway 1 11 . He explained the berming layout. Chairman Alderson said near the fast food restaurant there is a three foot stucco screen wall and asked if that was a retaining wall. Mr. Sobel said it was not. Mr. Sobel said based on their initial meeting the Commission requested that they return with the final landscaping plan. Since that time it has become apparent that would hold up their grading plans. He wanted to make sure the intent was to clarify the Commission's questions and they could move on to the Planning Department normal operating procedures. Commissioner Weber had one comment regarding the sidewalk adjoining to the northwest corner, encouraging traffic to go alongside the homes. He was worried that would be a concern until a bridge goes in. He suggested a sign be put in. Commissioner Weber said the way it is landscaped now it would discourage pedestrian traffic to go north. He would encourage that. That it is not a through sidewalk and approved passage for students. Commissioner Barrows asked if he wanted them to travel on the west side of the street. Commissioner Weber said he was just worried about liability, from a risk management standpoint. He didn't want to infer that was an approved passageway. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 28 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Mike Sutton, RBF Consulting, 74-130 Country Club Drive, Palm Desert CA, introduced himself and pointed out the fact there is a sidewalk along the Wash but once you get past the Wash there is no sidewalk. He said there was a trailer park there with no frontage sidewalk. Commissioner Quill asked if the trailer park was a City -owned redevelopment project property. Staff said no. Planning Director Johnson explained the layout of the roadway. He said it may be a risk until the bridge and/or a signal could be included. He discussed the shoulder of the road. He discussed visibility on the north side versus the south side of the Wash. Heavily used. He didn't know if there was a lesser of evils. By allowing the opportunity to make that connection. You are allowing for the potential of greater visibility. North connection provides a better opportunity. Commissioner Weber said practically speaking he agreed, but he was very concerned and still wanted the signage about a legal crossing. And explained how he would want that to happen. Chairman Alderson agreed with Commission Quill's comment that kids are going to cross that one way or another. Commissioner Quill said he believed there would be a solution someday. The mobile home park will not be there forever and there will be a sidewalk there its important that we put it in; if not, then we must take out the sidewalk all the way back to Corporate Center Drive. Commissioner Weber said he wanted the sidewalk in and the warning signage included. He wanted to make sure the Commission did not do something to put the City in an awkward position. Commissioner Wilkinson had several questions about traffic signals at Adams Street and Westward Ho Drive and at Corporate Center. He wondered if the students could be directed if a signal was there. Staff said we would never designate a sidewalk without the signal being there. He explained the visibility in the area and the fact there was no way to put in a secure cross walk in at this time. Chairman Alderson asked what the Mayor's concerns were. Staff explained they related to where the crosswalks were and where people actually cross. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-OB.doc 29 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 Commissioner Wilkinson asked for clarification on walking on the west side of the Wash versus the east side. Staff explained the distance. Chairman Alderson asked where the pedestrians go. Staff explained the connection to enter the sidewalk. Chairman Alderson asked if the Commission had to look at the final landscaping plans. Staff said Condition No. 79 was established on July 22, 2008, that said it would have to be approved by the Planning Commission. Staff read the condition stated at that time and said Mr. Sobel is asking for reconsideration of that condition. Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant indicated they were going ahead with construction. Mr. Sobel said they have restructured and they are 93% leased in Phase One and they just signed a new tenant. Chairman Alderson asked where Phase One was. Mr. Sobel said it included Buildings 3, 6, and 5, and explained the phasing of the project. Mr. Sobel said they are in the process of re -negotiating a construction loan. Everything is very expensive and, with the revamp of what they've done, their landscaping has gone up $65,000 since the last meeting. He was concerned about LA Fitness deciding not to come. Mr. Sobel also discussed the water quality plan and the different ways to make that work. Every dollar is critical and they need to make sure their project stays solvent. There being no further applicant comments Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. There was no further discussion, and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Quill to approve Minute Motion 2008-019 for approval of the perimeter landscaping (sidewalks) for Site Development Permit 2008-902 as submitted with the following additions: a. There be an addition of a sidewalk in the northeast portion of the project. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 30 Planning Commission Minutes November 12, 2008 b. The final landscaping plans be reviewed by the ALRC and do not have to be reconsidered by the Planning Commission as required in Condition No. 79 of Resolution 2008-021 for Site Development Permit 2008-902. Unanimously approved. VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: Chairman Alderson gave a report on the City Council Meeting of November 4, 2008. Commissioner Barrows is scheduled to present the next Council report. Planning Director went over some of the items that would be discussed at the Joint Meeting, November 25, 2008, at 5:00 p.m. in the Study Session room. IX. DIRECTOR ITEMS: None X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners / to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting to be held on November 25, 2008, This regular meeting was adjourned at 1 1:28 p.m. on November 12, 2008. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-12-08.doc 31 MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA November 25, 2008 7:04 P.M. CALL TO ORDER A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:04 p.m. by Chairman Ed Alderson who asked Commissioner Wilkinson to lead the flag salute. B. Present: Commissioners Katie Barrows, Paul Quill, Mark Weber, Robert Wilkinson, and Chairman Ed Alderson. C. Staff present: Planning Director Les Johnson, Planning Manager David Sawyer, City Attorney Kathy Jenson, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. II. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Continued - Conditional Use Permit 2008-114; a request of La Quinta Farmers Market/Bazaar for consideration of an Outdoor Market, located at 77-880 Calle Tampico; Benjamin Franklin Elementary School in the La Quinta Village. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager David Sawyer advised the Commissioners that the applicant had requested a withdrawal of this item. Staff explained the circumstances of the withdrawal. The Commissioners unanimously voted to remove the item from the agenda. P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\Draft Minutes 11-25-08.doc Planning Commission Minutes November 25, 2008 B. Continued — Environmental Assessment 2008-602 and General Plan Amendment 2008-1 12; a request for consideration of an Amendment of the La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element, Amending Exhibit 3.3 Street Cross Sections — City Streets, Exhibit 3.5 City Roadway Classifications, and Exhibit 3.10 the Multi -Purpose Trails Map located City-wide. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager David Sawyer presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. The staff report requested the item be continued to the December 9, 2008, Planning Commission Meeting. There being no further questions of staff, and since the City was the applicant there was no further comment from applicant representatives. Chairman Alderson then asked if there was any public comment. There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Chairman Alderson asked if the continuation allowed staff a sufficient amount of time to prepare and present the item at the next meeting. Planning Director Johnson replied this was a staff item and the amount of time was sufficient. There was no further discussion, and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilkinson/Barrows to approve continuation of this item until the December 9, 2008, meeting. Unanimously approved. C. Final Landscape Plans 2008-042; a request by Malaga Estates for consideration of perimeter wall design located on the southwest corner of Avenue 60 and Madison Street. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Planning Manager David Sawyer presented the information contained in the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. P;!Repnrts - PC'200a 12-09-O Draft Minutes 11-2b-O8xoU 2 Planning Commission Minutes November 25, 2008 Chairman Alderson asked about materials used for the cap. Staff provided the information and added there would also be pilasters. Chairman Alderson asked if Condition Number 30 was in reference to seismic joints. Planning Manager Sawyer replied he did not have the specifics from the Building and Safety Department but thought that was what they were for. Chairman Alderson asked if the exhibits represented what was going to be built. Staff replied the walls would be similar in character but would not have the tile work as shown in the illustration. There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson asked if there were any applicant representatives or comments. There being no applicant comments Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. There being no further questions, or public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Commissioner Weber said he had an opportunity to visit the site, thought the design was really nice, and he would support it. Commissioner Barrows had a question about the water feature and if there was a condition on the extent of the water feature. Planning Director Johnson replied that previously the Commission had requested elimination of the water feature. When the application was presented to Council they overturned the condition and the applicant was allowed to put in the water feature. Commissioner Barrows said she did recall that. Commissioner Quill said it was a very pretty wall and he commented on the consideration of turf and turf at the curb. Commissioner Wilkinson said it was a great looking wall. There was no further discussion, and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Wilkinson to approve Minute Motion 2008-020 accepting the proposed design of the perimeter walls for Final Landscape Plans 2008-042 as submitted. AYES: Commissioners Quill, Weber, Wilkinson, and Chairman Alderson. NOES: Commissioner Barrows ABSTAIN: None. ABSENT: None. P Rapu,ts - PC.?C08'.12-09-MMOit Minutes i 1-2b-03.00C 3 Planning Commission Minutes November 25, 2008 VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Chairman Alderson gave a report on the City Council Meeting of November 18, 2008 and commented on some of the items Council was concerned about; such as, tree sizes (caliper) and pedestrian linkage. Commissioner Barrows asked about the possibility of imposing conditions on projects. Planning Director Johnson replied staff and the Commission need to be more cognizant of pedestrian linkages, including adjacent vacant property. This assists staff in working on pedestrian/vehicular linkages when property is developed. Commissioner Barrows asked if this was something that was incorporated into the City's design guidelines. Staff replied there were only Village and Highway 111 Design Guidelines. It was added this can be addressed through the General Plan and it will be looked at more closely in the future. City Attorney Jenson added this is much better done at the map stage when you are taking care of the property aspects; rather than at the design stage, by requiring a condition of approval, even if there is nothing on the parcel other than to insure we are getting future reciprocal agreements. Chairman Alderson gave some additional examples of things Council was concerned about and added that the Council does look at the Planning Commission rulings. Commissioner Quill commented on the Council concerns about pedestrian access and referenced the recent JC Penney discussion and the Commission's efforts. B. Chairman Alderson noted Commissioner Quill was scheduled to report back on the December 2, 2008, Council meeting. C. The possibility of cancellation of the December 23, 2008, Planning Commission meeting was discussed and unanimously approved. P:�Reports - PCA2008'12-09-08VDraft Minutes 11-2b-08.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes November 25, 2008 D. Commissioner Quill gave a Community Trails Alliance presentation. He thanked the Commission and staff for the opportunity to make his presentation. The Commissioners then had the opportunity to ask him questions. E. Chairman Alderson added an item referencing the Public Works' CIP reports and requested the Commissioners receive the quarterly reports of Residential/Commercial Activities from the Planning Department. Staff responded they would be e-mailed to the Commissioners and any updates will automatically be sent to them. IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: Planning Director Johnson presented information on the resolution of Appeal 2008-002 for Standard Pacific Homes. He stated, upon further discussion with legal counsel on both sides, it was decided there was some allowance for relief on the timing and the applicant would be allowed to continue to finalize their map. He then explained the history and layout of the project. Planning Director Johnson gave an update on the Griffin Ranch PM-10 issue. He referenced the fact that the Commission had concerns about dust issues and stated staff had a meeting with Griffin Ranch personnel and conducted site visits. It was determined that Griffin Ranch was adhering to the PM-10 conditions as stated by the Commission. They have put down a sealer treatment and it has solidified the dirt. Griffin Ranch has even gone to the point of adding windbreaks, in parts of the project, to aid in dust control. Since the meeting, Griffin Ranch personnel had approached two of the adjoining property owners to see if there was a way to alleviate some of the additional dust problems. The Planning Department, as the Public Works, feels Griffin Ranch is definitely adhering to their PM 10 provisions. He encouraged the Commissioners to go out and see the efforts Griffin Ranch had gone through to eliminate dust problems. He did, however, state one of staff's concerns was regarding the condition of additional planting which would require the soil be tilled and it would be 60 to 90 days before the plants mature. This would actually create an additional dust problem. Staff ensured there will be regular inspections and stated they have also contacted AQMD, who has identified they have no citations or issues or violations identified with Griffin Ranch. P;�Heports - PC`200& 12-09-08tDraft Minutes t I-2b-08_dcc 5 Planning Commission Minutes November 25, 2008 Staff said they would like to present consideration of relief of the planting condition, as a Business Item, at the next Commission meeting. Commissioner Wilkinson said he went out and visited the site, and concurred with staff, that the applicant has done everything asked of them and more; including meeting with the homeowners, and President of the Homeowners' Association, who were satisfied with their efforts. Commissioner Quill had not reviewed the site and couldn't comment. Commissioner Weber suggested the Commissioners go out and look at the site. Commissioner Barrows said she appreciated the efforts the applicant had made. Chairman Alderson had a question about where the dust was coming from, if not from Griffin Ranch. Staff provided information on the contributing factors to the dust problem; including the fact there was a race track on the Griffin Estate which was currently being utilized as an alfalfa field. The applicant had asked the Estate Manager to consider some topical treatments to hold down the dust. Planning Director Johnson said he could not speak to the long-standing history of the dust problems, only what was happening today and the fact the applicant was doing the job and doing it well. Chairman Alderson thanked staff for their due diligence. He gave some background on the Site Development Permit application and the condition which was added. He said considering the applicant has proven to staff and the Commission that they have done what was requested of them. This was handled through chemical treatment and there was no need for the seeding, so the Commission would be rescinding that condition of approval. He asked staff if the Commission could take official action tonight. Staff suggested it be brought back, for consideration, as a Business Item. Chairman Alderson said he had pushed hard for the seeding, but after staff's update, he concurred it would be unwise to open up the soil for a 60 or 90 day growth period. The Commissioners concurred with staff's suggestion to bring the item back, for deliberation, at the next meeting. I Reports - PG2008172-09-08\!)raft Minute's "I 1-2b-08 don Planning Commission Minutes November 25, 2008 X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Weber/Wilkinson to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting to be held on December 9, 2008. This regular meeting was adjourned at 8:19 p.m. on November 25, 2008. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary City of La Quinta, California P Hepwts - PC2008,12-09-Q8'.Draft Minutes t 1-2b-0e.aoc 7 PH#A STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: DECEMBER 9, 2008 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2008-602 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2008-112 REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT OF THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT, AMENDING EXHIBIT 3.3 STREET CROSS SECTIONS - CITY STREETS, EXHIBIT 3.5 CITY ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS, AND EXHIBIT 3.10 THE MULTI -PURPOSE TRAILS MAP. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WILL ADD FOUR ADDITIONAL STREET CROSS -SECTIONS, MODIFY FOUR ROADWAY SECTION DESIGNATIONS, AND MODIFY THE LOCATION OF MULTI -PURPOSE TRAILS WITHIN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE CITY. LOCATION: CITY-WIDE APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS PREPARED AN ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH #2000091023 ("EIR") THAT THE CITY CERTIFIED IN 2002. THE CITY FINDS THAT CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDMENT DOES NOT CALL FOR THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT EIR PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15162 OR PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166, IN THAT THE AMENDMENT DOES NOT INVOLVE: 1) SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE ROADWAYS OR MULTI -USE TRAILS ANALYZED IN THE EIR WHICH WOULD INVOLVE NEW SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT OR SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED IMPACTS; 2) SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES WITH RESPECT TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE AMENDMENT IS BEING UNDERTAKEN WHICH WOULD INVOLVE NEW SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOT ANALYZED IN THE EIR, OR SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED IMPACTS; OR 3) NEW INFORMATION OF SUBSTANTIAL IMPORTANCE WHICH WOULD INVOLVE NEW SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOT ANALYZED IN THE EIR WHICH WOULD 1 PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\GPA 08-112\PC RPT GPA 08-112.doc SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED IMPACTS. UPDATE: This request was continued from the November 12`h and 25`h, 2008 Planning Commission hearings so that revised maps could be prepared and staff could have the opportunity to meet with a member of the public with concerns about the proposed Multi -Purpose Trail revisions. Staff has included additional exhibits with this report to better clarify the proposed roadway section and trail modifications. Staff and Commissioner Barrows met with Gayle Cady on November 21, 2008 to discuss the proposed trail modifications and present clarified exhibits identifying the proposed sections for modification. Ms. Cady was concerned with the loss or reduction of Multi -Purpose Trails in the southwestern portion of the City and has advocated greater connectivity and access to public lands. Ms. Cady did not voice any objections to the proposed revisions and said that she would in turn report to others in the equestrian community who were interested in the proposed changes. BACKGROUND: In response to recently approved projects and development proposals in the southeastern portion of the City, staff is proposing to add four new roadway sections and revise the location of multi -purpose trails identified within the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The current General Plan Circulation Element identifies only one roadway design each for a Secondary Arterial and Collector. As the southern portions of the City are anticipated to experience less traffic and have fewer through -trips than as proposed in the 2002 General Plan, the need for reduced roadway designs has been identified. In addition, staff has identified the need to update the location of multi -purpose trails in this area. PROJECT PROPOSAL: This proposal is to amend the General Plan Circulation Element to identify four new roadway sections in Exhibit 3.3 (Attachment 1, Pg.2), to identify the proposed locations for those new roadway sections in Exhibit 3.5 (Attachment 2, Pg.2), and to make revisions to the locations of Multi -Purpose Trails identified in Exhibit 3.10 (Attachment 3, Pgs.2-4) of the General Plan. The staff report from November 12, 2008 has been attached with this report for reference (Attachment 4). ANALYSIS: The proposed street section modifications have been determined necessary to accommodate both approved and proposed future projects such as Travertine, 2 PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08XGPA 08-112\PC RPT GPA 08-112.doc Coral Canyon, and The Enclave. The proposed new roadway segments will provide developers and the City with additional Secondary Arterial and Collector designs and permit projects to incorporate smaller and lesser -traffic roadway designs than what are currently identified in the General Plan. Because the proposed Travertine Specific Plan amendment would reduce the number of residential units by half, and because there are limited future development opportunities in the southwest portions of the City such as within Section 5, projected traffic counts will be less than those identified in the 2002 General Plan. These additional roadway designs will be more conducive to the actual traffic demands expected from the area and will accommodate the projected 2020 traffic volumes identified in the traffic study prepared for the proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment. During the November 12, 2008 Planning Commission hearing, letters were presented to the Planning Commissioners from a representative of the Travertine project and MSA Consulting, representing a private property owner of farm land along the south side of Avenue 62 in the County (Attachment 5). Both of these letters expressed concerns regarding the extension of Avenue 62 over the Bureau of Reclamation dike, requesting the street section be removed in their entirety, rather than reduced to Modified Collector street dimensions. In the analysis of the future traffic demands at build -out in 2020, staff identified that without the use of an Avenue 62 crossing over the dike, the estimated additional traffic volume onto Madison Street would exceed an acceptable level of service, requiring a 4-lane roadway design (Attachments 6). In addition, as no future emergency service facilities are proposed on the western side of the dike, Riverside County Fire has identified the need for emergency access from Avenue 62 between Madison and Monroe Streets. The modifications to the Multi -Purpose Trail system will clean-up an outdated map, eliminate impractical segments, and provide improved overall connectivity to the trail system. The trail revisions are in accord with the Coachella Valley Multi - Species Habitat Conservation Plan and will continue to allow a connection between the southwestern portion of the City to existing trails such as the Boo Hof Trail and the La Quinta Cove to Lake Cahuiiia Trail. None of the proposed revisions will result in an increase in intensity or impact upon what is currently identified in the General Plan. As the planning and design of the southeastern portion of the City progresses, these amendments are necessary to accommodate near -term future growth. All of the roadway and trail exhibits in the Circulation Element will be revisited when the next major General Plan update occurs. 3 PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\GPA 08-112\PC RPT GPA 08-112.doc CEQA: Staff has prepared an Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report which was originally approved and certified in 2002. The EIR Addendum found that the modifications to the street cross sections and roadway classifications all involved a downgrading or reduction to the current General Plan design standards and that the modifications to the Multi -Purpose Trail exhibit would have no more physical impact on the environment than the build out of the General Plan roadways previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The EIR Addendum has been revised since the previous public hearing to reference a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. Because no new or increased impacts were identified, staff has determined that the General Plan Amendment does not call for the preparation of a subsequent EIR. SB 18 TRIBAL CONSULTATION: In accord with the requirements of Senate Bill 18 (2004), staff contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and forwarded a request for consultation with local Tribal Agencies. None of the tribes contacted requested formal consultation, but staff received two written comments from the Morongo Band of Mission Indians and the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians. Those comments involved a standard request for archaeological and Native American monitoring during grading activities, both of which are already accommodated under City policy. FINDINGS: The findings to support Environmental Assessment 2008-602 and General Plan Amendment 08-112 are contained in the attached Planning Commission Resolutions. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolutions recommending to the City Council approval of Environmental Assessment 2008-602 and General Plan Amendment 08-112, as recommended. Prepared by: An ew J. Mogensen Pri cipal Planner M PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\GPA 08-112\PC RPT GPA 08-112.doc Attachments: 1. General Plan Exhibit 3.3; Pg.1: Current Road Sections, Pg.2: Proposed Additions 2. General Plan Exhibit 3.5; Pg.1: Existing Roadways, Pg.2: Proposed Roadways 3. General Plan Exhibit 3.10, Pg.1: Existing Multi -Purpose Trails Map, Pgs.2-3: Proposed Areas of Multi -Purpose Trail Modifications, Pg.4: Section 5 Area Multi -Purpose Trail Modifications 4. Planning Commission Staff Report from November 12, 2008 5. Letters from Hoffman Land Development and MSA Consulting 6. Post 2020 Traffic Volume Projections and Volume to Capacity in a Current Build -out Scenario with Avenue 62 E PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\GPA 08-112\PC RPT GPA 08-112.doe ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (CEQA GUIDELINE 15164) FOR GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 2008-112 The City of La Quinta, as lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act, ("CEQA") has prepared this Addendum pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15164. This is an Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report SCH #2000091023 ("EIR") that the City certified in 2002. The purpose of this Addendum is to document certain changes to the General Plan which will be implemented through General Plan Amendment 2008-112. The City proposes to amend the General Plan Circulation Element as follows: 1. Amend Exhibit 3.3, Street Cross Sections — City Streets 2. Amend Exhibit 3.5, City Roadway Classifications, and 3. Amend Exhibit 3.10, Multi -Purpose Trails Map The amendments are proposed to make the following changes to the General Plan's Circulation Element: 1. Exhibit 3.3: Identify four additional street cross sections for Modified Secondary Arterial — A (a 96 foot right of way, with a 12 foot raised median, one 20 foot wide lane in each direction, and a 22 foot parkway on each side); Modified Secondary Arterial — B (an 88 foot right of way, with a 12 foot raised median, one 20 foot wide lane in each direction, and an 18 foot parkway on each side); Modified Secondary Arterial — C (an 88 foot right of way, with a 12 foot raised median, two 13 foot wide lanes in each direction, and a 12 foot parkway on each side); and Modified Collector Street (a 74 foot right of way, with a 12 foot median, one 20 foot wide lane in each direction, and an I foot parkway on each side); on Exhibit 3.3. The cross sections are shown in Exhibit A. 2. Exhibit 3.5: Re-classify Madison Street, between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62, from its current Secondary Arterial to a Modified Secondary Arterial — A; Re-classify Monroe Street, between Avenue 60 and Avenue 62, from its current Secondary Arterial to a Modified Secondary Arterial — C; Re-classify Jefferson Street, between Avenue 58 and Avenue 62, from its current Secondary Arterial to a Modified Secondary Arterial — B; Re-classify Avenue 62, between Madison and Monroe Streets, from its current Secondary Arterial to a Modified Collector Street. The changes in roadway classifications are shown in Exhibit B. 3. Exhibit 3.10: Extend the multi -purpose trail designation on Madison Street from Avenue 58 to Avenue 64; extend the multi -purpose trail on Jefferson Street from Avenue 60 to Avenue 62; remove the multi -purpose trail occurring west of Jefferson Street, in an east -west direction, in the southern -most portion of the City; straighten the location of the multi -purpose trail extending south from Jefferson, and remove the multi -purpose trail on Avenue 60 west of Madison Street to the levee. The changes to the multi -use trail system are shown in Exhibit C. The modifications to the street cross sections and roadway classifications in all cases result in a downgrading of these roadways, as development limitations and anticipated future traffic will not require four travel lanes for the roadways being reclassified. The modifications will result in less land disturbance than originally analyzed in the General Plan EIR, insofar as the modified roadways, when built out, will be of narrower width than originally planned. 2 7 The modifications to the multi -purpose trail system correct changes to the trail system resulting from the City' desire to expand the multi -use trail system in the southwestern portion of the City, and eliminate dead-end trails which would not have practical use. The trails will all occur within the parkways of General Plan roadways, and would have no more physical impact on the environment than the build out of the General Plan roadways, which was previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The City has compared the impacts of the Amendment with those impacts analyzed in the EIR and finds as follows: 3 Aesthetics - Impacts less than those previously analyzed. The downgraded roadways will result in less paved areas, and less visual impacts on the environment. The anticipated lower traffic levels will also result in less light and glare than originally anticipated. Agriculture Resources - Not applicable Hazards and Hazardous Materials - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The hazards associated with roadway spills and accidents will be reduced somewhat by the lower number of vehicle trips on the downgraded roadways. The multi -use trails will continue to have no impacts associated with hazards or hazardous materials. Hydrology and Water Quality - Impacts lower than those previously analyzed. The reduction in the amount of paved area for each of the downgraded streets will result in less land covered by impervious surfaces, and will facilitate percolation of surface water. The design of the streets, including storm water control, will still be required to meet City and NPDES requirements, as would have been required in the original analysis. Public Services Impacts equivalent to those previously analyzed. The downgrading of the streets is resulting from lower numbers of trips. The roadways will still be constructed, and will still provide access for police and fire vehicles. The changes in the multi -use trail system will have no impact on public services. Recreation - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The roadway downgrades will have no impact on recreational facilities. The additions being made to the multi -purpose trail system will increase recreational opportunities for residents in the southwestern part of the City, and represents a beneficial impact. 4 Air Quality - Impacts less than those previously analyzed. The downgrading of the roadways is a result of anticipated lower numbers of vehicle trips in this area of the City. Therefore, there will be lower emissions from vehicles in this area of the City. The reduction in impacts will apply to vehicle emissions, and greenhouse gas emissions. The modifications to the multi- use trails increases opportunities for the use of non -motorized transportation in this area of the City, and could also aid in reducing air emissions, including greenhouse gas emissions. Land Use & Planning - Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The Amendment is the result of project approvals in this area of the City which have generated fewer trips than were originally anticipated for this area. The downgrading of the streets will still accommodate any and all future projects in this area, as they have been considered in the downgrading process. In addition, this area of the City abuts the Santa Rosa Mountains, and limited development is possible to the south, in unincorporated Riverside County. The addition of multi -use trails in this area of the City is consistent with the General Plan's goals for a City-wide trail system, and the lowering of the dependence on the automobile. The addition of the trails will therefore have no impact on Land Use and Planning. Impacts less than those previously analyzed. The General Plan EIR and its associated traffic impact analysis made assumptions for development in this portion of the City which have proven to be greater than the development which has or will occur in this area. As a result, trips generated by existing and proposed development will be reduced from that originally analyzed in the General Plan EIR. The roadway re -classifications correspond to these reduced trips, and are sufficient to meet General Plan Level of Service requirements of LOS D. The multi -use trail amendments will increase circulation opportunities for non -motorized vehicles in the City, thereby providing a beneficial impact by providing an added opportunity to lower motorized vehicle trips. E Biological Resources Impacts equivalent to those previously analyzed. The roadway classifications will require land disturbance for built out of the streets. However, the area to be built out will be reduced by the proposed Amendment. Landscaped parkways will still provide habitat for adapted species, and the City will still require the preparation of biological resource studies as needed as individual projects are proposed for development, and as the streets are widened to their ultimate right of way. Geology and Soils - Impacts equivalent to those previously analyzed. The City will still require the preparation of site -specific soil analysis for the build out of the street system, as it would have under the General Plan EIR. These studies will provide recommendations, if necessary, for the structural construction of the streets to assure the minimum amount of damage in an earthquake. These analyses will assure that impacts associated with seismic conditions or soil conditions are reduced to less than significant levels. Cultural Resources Impacts no greater than those previously analyzed. The area to be disturbed for the construction of the downgraded roadways, or for the multi -use trails, will be equivalent to or less than that originally analyzed. The City will continue to require the preparation of cultural resource surveys for project as they are proposed, and for the ultimate widening of the roadways. These studies will determined whether construction will impact cultural resources, and what mitigation measures are required, if any, to assure that impacts to these resources are less than significant. Noise - Impacts less than those previously analyzed. The downgrading of the roadways is the result of anticipated lower numbers of vehicle trips. Vehicle trips are the primary generators of noise in the City. Therefore, fewer trips will result in lower noise levels. As this area of the City was anticipated to have noise levels below the City's General Plan standard of 65 dBA CNEL, impacts in this area of the City will continue to be less than significant. Mineral Resources - Not Utilities and Service Systems - Impacts equivalent to those previously analyzed. The downgraded roadways will still require lighting, and will still be the location of area water and sewer lines. The downgraded roadways will all have adequate rights -of -way to accommodate utility lines, and will continue to serve as a path for these lines, as originally analyzed. Population and Housing - Impacts less than those previously analyzed. The downgraded roadways are the result of lower than expected residential unit counts in this area of the City. Therefore, the area of the Amendment, the southwestern portion of the City, will have less population than was considered in the General Plan EIR. Further, the rights -of -way are all proposed to occur in the same location as was previously analyzed, and will therefore not impact an existing population or existing housing units. 6 11 The City finds that consideration of the Amendment does not call for the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public Resources Code Section 21166, in that the Amendment does not involve: 1) substantial changes to the roadways or multi -use trails analyzed in the EIR which would involve new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; 2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Amendment is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the EIR, or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; or 3) new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the EIR which would substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, THE ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION CERTIFYING AN ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH #2000091023 CASE: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2008-602 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 12" and 25" of November 2008, hold a duly -noticed Public Hearing for a City -initiated request to consider an Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report SCH #2000091023 ("EIR") that the City certified in 2002, and General Plan Amendment 2008-1 12; WHEREAS, said Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did continue the public hearing to the 9' of December, 2008, so that staff could meet with interested representatives of the public and provide further information; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment 2008-112 under consideration will provide four additional roadway sections, identify their locations, and modify the locations of Multi -Purpose Trails; and WHEREAS, the Addendum complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (as amended, Resolution 83-68 adopted by the City Council); and WHEREAS, upon hearing and considering the EIR, the Addendum to the EIR, and all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Addendum to the EIR: 1. The Addendum to the EIR does not identify substantial changes to the roadways or multi -use trails analyzed in the EIR which would involve new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. 2. No substantial changes have been identified with respect to the circumstances under which the Amendment is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the EIR, or substantially P:\Reports - PC\2008\12-09-08\GPA 08-112\EA 2008-602 GPA pc res.doc 13 Planning Commission Resolution 2008- Environmental Assessment 2008-602 General Plan Circulation Element Adopted: December 9, 2008 increase the severity of previously identified impacts. 3. No new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the EIR which would substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That it does hereby recommend approval of the Addendum to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and as stated in the Addendum text on file in the City Clerk's Department. 3. That the Planning Commission has reviewed the Addendum, the EIR, and the subsequent CEQA compliance documents, and had determined that the Addendum reflects the independent judgment of the City. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 9t' day of December, 2008, by the following vote, to wit: F-M *51 NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ED ALDERSON, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: 14 Planning Commission Resolution 2008- Environmental Assessment 2008-602 General Plan Circulation Element Adopted: December 9, 2008 LES JOHNSON, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California 15 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2008- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2008-112, APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION ELEMENT, AMENDING EXHIBITS 3.3, STREET CROSS SECTIONS - CITY STREETS, EXHIBIT 3.5, CITY ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS, AND EXHIBIT 3.10, THE MULTI- PURPOSE TRAILS MAP CASE NO.: GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 08-112 APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 12' and 25" of November 2008, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing for a City -initiated request to consider a General Plan Amendment to modify Exhibits 3.3, Street Cross Sections - City Streets, Exhibit 3.5, City Roadway Classifications, and Exhibit 3.10, the Multi -Purpose Trails Map, within the Circulation Element; and WHEREAS, said Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did continue the public hearing to the 91" of December, 2008, so that staff could meet with interested representatives of the public and provide further information; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment under consideration will provide four additional roadway sections, identify their locations, and modify the locations of Multi -Purpose Trails; and WHEREAS, said General Plan Amendment has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" (CEQA) as amended (Resolution 83-63) in that the La Quinta Planning Department has prepared an Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report SCH #2000091023 ("EIR") that the City certified in 2002. The City compared the impacts of the Amendment with those impacts analyzed in the EIR and found that consideration of the Amendment does not call for the preparation of a subsequent EIR pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15162 or Public Resources Code Section 21166; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department published a city-wide public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on November 1, 2008, as prescribed by the Municipal Code. Public hearing notices were also posted on bulletin boards 1L4 Planning Commission Resolution 2008- General Plan Amendment 2008-112 Amendment to the Circulation Element December 9, 2008 at City Hall, on the City of La Quinta's website, at the Village Post Office, and at the 111 La Quinta Shopping Center; and WHEREAS, at said public hearings held on November 12th and 25th, and December 9", 2008, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings recommending approval of said Amendment: Finding A - The project is consistent with the General Plan. The proposed General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element is internally consistent with those goals, objectives and policies of the general plan which are not being amended. The additions to the roadway classifications and their ►ocations in all cases are consistent with the General Plan in that they provide additional available roadway classifications that are consistent and compatible with the existing goals and policies of the Traffic and Circulation Element. Changes made to the Multi -Purpose Trail system are also consistent with the General Plan in that they constitute an expansion of trail availability among locations which currently do not have trails and enhance the existing trail system by eliminating those trails which would not have practical use if developed as previously indicated. Finding B - Approval of the amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to the public health, safety and general welfare. Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment will not create conditions materially detrimental to public health, safety and general welfare in that the proposed changes will not affect existing recreational areas or access to those recreational areas, will not result in the loss of or encroachment upon existing wildlife habitat, nor will they have an effect on the conditions of the' community, developed or undeveloped, due to the fact that the modifications to the street sections and roadway classifications in all cases result in a downgrading or reduction of these roadways and that certain sections of Multi -Purpose Trails proposed for removal are either currently identified within designated habitat conservation areas or have impractical use. The modifications proposed to the roadway sections will result in less land disturbance than originally analyzed in the General Plan EIR, insofar as when built out, they will be of narrower width than originally planned due to design considerations as well as limited additional widths of public rights -of -way available 17 Planning Commission Resolution 2008- General Plan Amendment 2008-112 Amendment to the Circulation Element December 9, 2008 for dedication. The modifications to the Multi -Purpose Trail system constitute an enhancement of the network by correcting changes to the trail system resulting from the City's desire to expand the multi -use trail system in the southwestern portion of the City and eliminate dead-end trails which would not have practical use or would encroach on areas not intended for such use. As a result, the proposed General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element has been determined to not result in any changed conditions and will therefore have no effect on the health, safety, and welfare of the community or surrounding natural environment. Finding C - The new designations are compatible with the land use designations on adjacent properties. The four new roadway sections and their proposed locations will not have an effect on any adjacent land use designations in that they will safely and adequately accommodate current and future projected traffic demands from adjacent and surrounding land uses already identified in the General Plan. The Multi -Purpose Trail system modifications will enhance access and connectivity to existing residential land use areas including those which are identified for equestrian uses. As a result, the proposed General Plan Amendment is consistent with the land use designations on adjacent properties. Finding D - Approval of the amendment is warranted because the situation and the general conditions have substantially changed since the existing designations were imposed. Approval of the four new roadway sections and their proposed locations are warranted because development limitations and anticipated future traffic will not require four travel lanes for the roadways being reclassified. The modifications to the Multi -Purpose Trail system are warranted because they will eliminate dead-end trails which no longer have practical use, remove trails from areas identified for wildlife conservation in the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan, and provide new locations for trails along existing roadways which currently are not identified for Multi -Purpose Trails. These amendments will meet the current demands and projected needs of the City, while maintaining and protecting the City's character. Finding E - The project is in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act. 18 Planning Commission Resolution 2008- General Plan Amendment 2008-112 Amendment to the Circulation Element December 9, 2008 The City has prepared an Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report SCH #2000091023 ("EIR") that the City certified in 2002. The City compared the impacts of the Amendment with those impacts analyzed in the EIR and found that the Amendment does not involve 1) substantial changes to the roadways or multi -use trails analyzed in the EIR which would involve new significant effects on the environment or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; 2) substantial changes with respect to the circumstances under which the Amendment is being undertaken which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the EIR, or substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts; or 3) new information of substantial importance which would involve new significant effects on the environment not analyzed in the EIR which would substantially increase the severity of previously identified impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission in this case. 2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of General Plan Amendment 2008-112, as identified in Exhibits A, B, and C attached with this resolution, to the City Council for the reasons set forth in this Resolution. PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission, held on the 91h day of December, 2008, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ED ALDERSON, Chairman City of La Quinta, California 19 Planning Commission Resolution 2008 General Plan Amendment 2008-112 Amendment to the Circulation Element December 9, 2008 ATTEST: LES JOHNSON, Planning Director City of La Quinta 20 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2008-112 EXHIBIT A Modified Seoondary Arterial A Sr=ilar ;Maa"allev skel walk or "At- urpm Trail 96 Halved median $,Swi*r 13�&cam'cv+rgT �cewa'k ar h-l�.rp'vo T`rau9 9ha'.4dw zp-",Car (Wandenag SedxSvl:. at ;FMTdan'rl u+JC :Ok c+ AialtJ-PtrN- bail _ (}jjr tAull-L VS *Tfvi5 1st ' Sharma ;Meandering °.atl°M^W-A at Modified Collector Street* shm#dar Mmndwigj a or WrJ lnvt T•tdk Ramed median 74' Shadder rklaandang S dewalk m all Slcadder r7hanScrnp 1,bsuvk x :'J41aPupxaa Sr�O "ademldcld -mcns, nlud:iq cvnral; ROW map uarf We cv;4m:;uwx s 21 Y C a ¢ w m a U a E 0 m n s., p 5 a � U Ia � $ GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2008-112 EXHIBIT tB 3IL 11 mm t O e 1— N F +l S AL - S' GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2008-112 EXHIBIT !C Multi -Purpose Trial Revision Exhibit City of La Quinta Existing Multi -Purpose Trails Multi -Purpose Trails To Be Added Multi -Purpose Trails To Be Removed City Limit 23 STAFF REPORT ATTACHMENTS NUMBERS 1 - 6 25 N IL m E s m i, 72" f6 a z ca a c 0 a) N a 0 OF- c _a E E 8 A 12 N ►. 2 0 U a) 0 a) N 0 26 r a N c Z� oz, g n a p 8 e < J W = S atOpU J 0''0nn ' v v I i 7 p .6 . t its; ai � 2 - - ww - - - 1 �. - oa E IL W To Bn N 0 a g E a 00 t j it Aft I - - ry 2 Al S { - `7 AL — AL 'k 28 a E t r Q +�+ Z �x cc w. W a �y t9 Y '� y5 n A y q_ 4 C Fa d J i. W 6 ■ E C e x al ! y y �• i.• � 7!y y�5g Is' tl 4 8 In ' Ei rr - t: � r" W row* W _r T �} r a a30 Jj e s- _ - M. lAAll1!!„�.va.Rw-I.�...r..:ww^�^«e>rG mrwsa•.�..ew. -- _� --- ' C nl.I_ -_ t YI o pi I �• - -Q - Monroe Madison i -.* --; °,"- ,r•�. .arw< efferson s '� d • _c(a_.'. �.n '� h _ j IL • � :�"''`p¢ i �'+w�Ej�i -�_.e _, oaf � - — --- — - �'i.o-�L--t'j ,. ?-c�: .� Cam.—==__-y.6•. I _ __-�.___ LI �i�i I 29 N Ch IL M W E t Q 111 11111 to WAS • m f m m N ~ r Q N Ili io m J a EL ! - rn J J E c a a I 40 -- I oil - .i� N�a3a�r N W 30 M Lo N W 14 0 M itF- m O 0 0 N C dr`- s 0 V O O m a a , C Y i J rn _ C L L QQ LiJ z :Q C O U) d D V L. .a 2 to _ J v O N ~ O w =O •L J L O G. - N � ; g �+ ers .O to � H •� � C 'L w z > O 2 C tmO m F— U Z VN > L i Z Q I- o Z U U O_ CY O ~ O l i J Z N L1 4) = • • 0Ono ° � ' `j • • • ° � J� d L d C > I-- 000 t r n i a ti t;"* k wk " Y ♦♦'' Ef 1 �s 3 w y Ilk N 32 ATTACHMENT STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION DATE: NOVEMBER 12, 2008 CASE NO.: ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2008-602 AND GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT 2008-112 REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF AN AMENDMENT OF THE LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT, AMENDING EXHIBIT 3.3 STREET CROSS SECTIONS — CITY STREETS, EXHIBIT 3.5 CITY ROADWAY CLASSIFICATIONS, AND EXHIBIT 3.10 THE MULTI -PURPOSE TRAILS MAP. THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS WILL ADD FOUR ADDITIONAL STREET CROSS - SECTIONS, MODIFY FOUR ROADWAY SECTION DESIGNATIONS, AND MODIFY THE LOCATION OF MULTI- PURPOSE TRAILS WITHIN THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE CITY. LOCATION: CITY-WIDE APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: THE LA QUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS PREPARED AN ADDENDUM TO THE GENERAL PLAN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT SCH #2000091023 ("EIR") THAT THE CITY CERTIFIED IN 2002. THE CITY FINDS THAT CONSIDERATION OF THE AMENDMENT DOES NOT CALL FOR THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT EIR PURSUANT TO CEQA GUIDELINE 15162 OR PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166, IN THAT THE AMENDMENT DOES NOT INVOLVE: 1) SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES TO THE ROADWAYS OR MULTI -USE TRAILS ANALYZED IN THE EIR WHICH WOULD INVOLVE NEW SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT OR SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED IMPACTS; 2) SUBSTANTIAL CHANGES WITH RESPECT TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER WHICH THE AMENDMENT IS BEING UNDERTAKEN WHICH WOULD INVOLVE NEW SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOT ANALYZED IN THE EIR, OR SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED IMPACTS; OR 3) NEW INFORMATION OF SUBSTANTIAL IMPORTANCE WHICH WOULD INVOLVE NEW SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS ON THE ENVIRONMENT NOT ANALYZED IN THE EIR WHICH WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASE THE SEVERITY OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED IMPACTS. BACKGROUND: In response to recently approved projects and development proposals in the southeastern portion of the City, staff is proposing to add four new roadway 33 PAReports - PC\2008\11-12-08\GPA 08-112 Circulation Element\PC RPT GPA 08-112.doc ATTACHMENT sections and revise the location of multi -purpose trails identified within the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The current General Plan Circulation Element identifies only one roadway design each for a Secondary Arterial and Collector. As the southern portions of the City are anticipated to experience less traffic and have fewer through -trips than as proposed in the 2002 General Plan, the need for reduced roadway designs has been identified. In addition, staff has identified the need to update the location of multi -purpose trails in this area. PROJECT PROPOSAL: This proposal is to amend the General Plan Circulation Element to identify four new roadway sections in Exhibit 3.3 (Attachment 1), to identify the proposed locations for those new roadway sections in Exhibit 3.5 (Attachment 2), and to make revisions to the locations of Multi -Purpose Trails identified in Exhibit 3.10 (Attachment 3) of the General Plan. Exhibits 3.3 and 3.5 All of the road sections proposed for changes are currently identified as Modified Secondary Arterials in the General Plan. Staff is proposing the addition of three different Modified Secondary Arterials roadway sections and a Modified Collector section: Modified Secondary Arterial A is a 96 foot right of way design containing a 22 foot shoulder, a single 20 foot lane in each direction, and a 12 foot wide center median. Modified Secondary Arterial A is proposed to be used on a portion of Madison Street extending south from Avenue 60 to Avenue 62. This section of roadway will extend over the existing Bureau of Reclamation dike and is anticipated to primarily serve the proposed Travertine development and any future development in Section 5. Modified Secondary Arterial B is an 88 foot right of way design containing an 18 foot shoulder, a single 20 foot lane in each direction, and a 12 foot wide center median. Modified Secondary Arterial B is proposed to be used on a portion of Jefferson Street extending south from Cahuilla Park, through the proposed Coral Canyon development, and through the proposed Travertine development, ultimately connecting to the southern end of Madison Street. This particular roadway design was first proposed with Coral Canyon and was identified on Tentative Tract Map 33444. Modified Secondary Arterial C is also an 88 foot wide right of way design with a 12 foot wide center median, but contains a reduced 12 foot shoulder and two 13 foot lanes in each direction. This section of road is proposed on a portion of Monroe Street located between Avenue 60 and 62. This street section will run between portions of Trilogy, the approved but undeveloped Palizada project (Final Tract Maps 31732 and 31733), and the proposed Enclave project (Tentative Tract 33982) located in the County and currently being reviewed by staff. The proposed Modified Collector is identical to the existing Collector design but includes an asterisk that permits varying widths and overall right-of-way for extenuating circumstances. This section of roadway is necessary along a section of Avenue 62 south of Trilogy that leads to Jefferson and Madison Streets, due to 34 P:\Reports - PC\2008\11-12-08\GPA 08-112 Circulation Element\PC RPT GPA 08-112.cloc ATTACHMENT limited right-of-way availability over the Bureau of Reclamation dike. The current roadway section for this location is identified as a Secondary Arterial. The Modified Collector will accommodate situations where topographical or jurisdictional limitations prevent adequate right of way from being dedicated. Exhibit 3.10 Staff is proposing to update Exhibit 3.10, adding additional trail locations and modifying certain portions of the Multi -Purpose Trail system in the southeastern portion of the City. The current Multi -Purpose Trails map does not identify a Multi - Purpose trail along Madison Street south of Avenue 58. The revised map will now identify a Multi -Purpose Trail down the entire length of Madison Street. Another section of trail that has been added is located along a portion of the proposed Jefferson Street extension which runs through the proposed Travertine and Coral Canyon projects to the existing trail along Avenue 58. Other trail sections have been modified or removed due to errors or necessity. The trail section extending along Avenue 60 west of Madison Street has been removed due to the trail having been erroneously identified as extending through a dead-end street, over the storm water dike, and through an existing mountain. The intent of this originally was to provide a connection to the top of the flood control dike, which has been previously proposed as a potential trail route by the Coachella Valley Parks and Recreation Department. The Madison Street Multi -Purpose Trail route south of Avenue 60 will provide this connection. Another section of trail that has been removed is located within an undeveloped portion of Section 5. This removal is due to the area being identified for habitat conservation in the Coachella Valley Multi -Species Habitat Conservation Plan. ANALYSIS: The proposed street sections are necessary to accommodate both approved and proposed projects such as Travertine, Coral Canyon, and The Enclave. The proposed new roadway segments will provide developers and the City with additional Secondary Arterial and Collector designs and permit projects to incorporate smaller and lesser -traffic roadway designs than what are currently identified in the General Plan. These additional designs are more conducive to the actual traffic demands expected from the area, less that what was identified in the 2002 General Plan. The modifications to the Multi -Purpose Trail system will clean- up an outdated map, eliminate impractical segments, and provide improved overall connectivity to the trail system. None of the proposed revisions will result in an increase in intensity or impact upon what is currently identified in the General Plan. As the planning and design of the southeastern portion of the City progresses, these amendments are necessary to accommodate near -term future growth. All of the roadway exhibits in the Circulation Element will be revisited when the next major General Plan update occurs. CEQA: Staff has prepared an Addendum to the General Plan Environmental Impact Report which was originally approved and certified in 2002. The EIR Addendum found that 35 P:\Reports - PC\2008\11-12-08\GPA 08-112 Circulation Element\PC RPT GPA 08-112.doc ATTACHMENT the modifications to the street cross sections and roadway classifications all involved a downgrading or reduction to the current General Plan design standards and that the modifications to the Multi -Purpose Trail exhibit would have no more physical impact on the environment than the build out of the General Plan roadways previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. Because no new or increased impacts were identified, staff has determined that the General Plan Amendment does not call for the preparation of a subsequent EIR. SB 18 TRIBAL CONSULTATION: In accord with the requirements of Senate Bill 18 (2004), staff contacted the Native American Heritage Commission and forwarded a request for consultation with local Tribal Agencies. None of the tribes contacted requested formal consultation, but staff received two written comments from the Morongo Band of Mission Indians and the Cabazon Band of Mission Indians. Those comments involved a standard request for archaeological and Native American monitoring during grading activities, both of which are already accommodated under City policy. FINDINGS: The findings to support Environmental Assessment 2008-602 and General Plan Amendment 08-112 are contained in the attached Planning Commission Resolutions. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolutions recommending to the City Council approval of Environmental Assessment 2008-602 and General Plan Amendment 08-112, as recommended. Prepared by: A r w J. Mogensen incipal Planner Attachments: 1. General Plan Exhibit 2. General Plan Exhibit 3. General Plan Exhibit 3.3, Current and Proposed Additions 3.5, Existing and Proposed 3.10, Existing and Proposed kri PAReports - PC\2008\11-12-08\GPA 08-112 Circulation Element\PC RPT GPA 08-112.doc ATTACHMENT November 12, 2008 Honorable Chairman and Planning Commissioners City of La Quinta 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Subject: GPA 08-112 La Quinta General Plan Amendment for Avenue 62 Extension MSA Consulting, Inc. represents property owner, Howard Keck Jr.. Mr. Keck owns approximately 235 acres located on the south side of Avenue 62 and easterly of Monroe Street in unincorporated Riverside County. Mr. Keck objects to the widening of Avenue 62 and the crossing of the levee at Dike #4 as proposed by the General Plan Amendment. The widening and crossing of the dike are unnecessary to accommodate traffic projected for the area, would be prohibitively expensive and would substantially devalue Mr. Keck's property. The Wideninq and Crossing of the Dike is Unnecessa We are in support of the reduced right of way for Avenue 62 from the current half street designation (44 feet) to the proposed 37 feet. However, due to the minimal amount of traffic, the existing 30 foot half street is sufficient. Leaving the existing right of way in place would mean the right of way is divided equally between the properties on either side of the road. Additionally, the northern side of the street is in place at 30 feet and there is no room for expansion of the right of way due to the physical improvements that have been made by the Shea Trilogy development. There is insufficient existing right of way on the north side to address the embankments needed to elevate the roadway over the dike. Endo Engineering has prepared a traffic analysis for the Travertine project (west of the area) and the report does not indicate that a crossing on Avenue 62 is required to accommodate build -out traffic volumes. The report suggests "...that due to the limited right of way Avenue 62 may have to be constructed as a two-lane roadway in order to accommodate the embankments necessary to support the elevated road way where it crosses the levee" The report also suggests "Consideration should be given to downgrading Avenue 62 to a collector street and terminating it east of the Levee. The lack of sufficient right-of-way dedications and the cost of extending even a two-lane roadway over the dike does not appear to be warranted by the low projected traffic flows" That analysis in conjunction with the reduced right of way infers that the crossing is unnecessary. Regulatory Hurdles: The crossing of Dike #4 will require permitting from the Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) and the Bureau of Reclamation (BOR). Both agencies own land that would be impacted by the westerly extension of Avenue 62. The basic level of permitting would be an encroachment permit, however, because of liability and other issues, the Agencies may require that the land be purchased. What entity will be responsible for the purchase and construction? Because of the Flooding potential and CVWD's requirement that the storm flows not be comprised, it is likely that the roadway will have to remain elevated until it clears the floodway. 37 34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE O RANCHO MIRAGE ® CALIFORNIA ® 92270 74n inn no l .., ��l1_2�2_iR01 rnv n wxvw MC ACONRTUTING1NGCOM Honorable Chairman and Planning Commissioner November 12, 2008 Paae 2 of 2 The Extension over the Dike would be Expensive: Based on calculations done by MSA, and estimate provided by Travertine, the extension of Avenue 62 over the dike would cost from 6 to 10 million dollars. Given the minimal amount of traffic that would likely use the extension, it would be an unnecessary waste of scarce resources and an unreasonable burden on adjoining development. Avenue 62 is a General Plan street and as such is intended to benefit residents throughout the City. It is an unfair burden for the three adjacent property owners to bear the entire improvement costs for the proposed Avenue 62 extension as opposed to including the roadway in the City's Capital Improvement Program. Large Impacts to Keck's property: There will be negative financial impacts to the Keck property due to the loss of acreage and loss of future building potential, increased noise and air quality impacts, increased traffic volumes and decreased views and access if Avenue 62 crosses Dike #4. MSA Consulting conducted a quick lot analysis utilizing a similar lot size and configuration employed by Shea Trilogy to determine the lot loss due to an elevated roadway. The additional right-of-way and slope area required to construct the elevated and widened road would eliminate area to develop approximately 10 (ten) 7,000 square foot home lots. The slope and additional R.O.W would eliminate another 69,276 square feet from the property. MSA solicited opinions from two prominent home builders that construct homes in the Vista Santa Rosa area and they agree that any lots in the shadow of the elevated road adjacent to the toe of slope would be discounted in current home values anywhere from $30,000 to $50,000 per home site. If the lots faced a single loaded road at the toe of slope, the discount could be reduced to $15,000 to $30,000 per home site. Approximately 18-20 homes would be affected by the toe of the slope condition and additionally 15-20 homes will be affected by the shadow of this roadway. The average home sale price in the area on a 7,000 square foot lot is approximately $400,000 dollars. Consequently, the loss in development value to the Keck property would range from 4.8 to 5.6 million dollars. Sustainability Issues: Since the 2002 General Plan adoption additional environmental legislation has been adopted. The environmental analysis prepared for this General Plan Amendment does not speak to either AB 32 or SB 375 (greenhouse gases). We do not believe that the unnecessary widening and extension of Avenue 62 is consistent with the policy of this state to minimize the carbon footprint of future development. In conclusion, Mr. Keck's property is negatively impacted by the elevated roadway. We respectfully request that the Planning Commission accept the reduced right of way as proposed by staff and consider the physical and financial hindrances to the extension of the roadway and direct staff to remove an elevated roadway/crossing for Avenue 62 from the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Very truly yours, Margo M. Th ault, AICP Director of Planning Services MMT/nv c: Howard Keck Jr. Robert Hargreaves, Best, Best and Krieger Enclosure: Avenue 62 Impact Exhibit 38 34200 BOB HOPE DRIVE 0 RANCHO MIRAGE 0 CALIFORNIA B 92270 -.cn ann noi7 — 74n 111_'7R01 cAv M uIww MR A CnNM ILTINGINC.COM J m L1. i' �� , , '1 t. --t- - FYI:-.•-, Z Msn coxsln ruro, Irrc Keck Property 2-1 Slope at 37' flight -of -Way ..�. ...m Hipp p�[�.��¢.p�OMw,®.G 93�.ro KECK PROPERTIES mo) nwaeu . P x O6U) 3139893 IN THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CA H O F M A N N LAND C O November 12, 2008 DEVELOPMENT M P A N Y Ed Alderson, Chairman NO'V 1 2 La Quinta Planning Commission City of La Quinta CITY DP LA OUINTA L PLANNING DEPARTME 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California 92253 Re: La Quinta General Plan Amendment of the Circulation Element Dear Mr. Alderson; As representative for Travertine Corporation and the 907 acre Travertine property located south of Dike 4 at the future extension of Madison Street in the City of La Quinta. I have prepared a brief presentation package to inform the Planning Commission of our position with regards to the proposed General Plan Amendment of the Circulation Element. We are please that the City of La Quinta has decided to move forward with the Amendment to the Circulation Element but Travertine must express its strong opposition to the continued effort to extend Avenue 62 over Dike 4 to the future Madison Street extension and into the Travertine Project. Also, we would like to introduce an alternative to the Madison Street section being considered. It is clear that the Circulation Element needed to be amended to address several other issues within the southern portion of the City and we are in agreement with those efforts and recommendations. On behalf of Travertine, I truly appreciate all of staff s efforts in moving the General Plan Amendment for Circulation forward so that those items of concern to Travertine can be discussed and debated. Cordia ly; ames A. Hildenbrand Vice President Travertine Corporation/Hofmann Land Development 40 MAIN OFFICE: 1380 GALAXY WAY • P.O. Box 758 • CONCORD, CA 94522 • PHONE 925/682-4830 • FAx 925/682-4771 DESERT OFFICE: 77-852 WILDCAT DRIVE, SUITE 3 • PALM DESERT, CA 92211 0 PHONE760/772-2551 • FAx 760/772-2580 Planning Commission City of La Quinta- November 12, 2008 Environmental Assessment 2008-602 and General Plan Amendment 2008-112 Request- Consideration of an Amendment of the La Quinta General Plan Circulation Element, Amending Exhibit 3.3 Street Cross Sections — City Streets, Exhibit 3.5 City Roadway Classifications, and Exhibit 3.10 the Multi -Purpose Trails Map. Travertine Position: Addendum to General Plan A) Exhibit 3.3: We are in agreement with the proposed changes as outlined in the amendments to modify the 4 proposed street sections. B) Exhibit 3.5: We are in agreement with the proposed changes except for providing an Alternative Street Section for Madison (Madison Alternate Attached) and Avenue 62 classification. We recommend that Avenue 62 should be re-classified as follows; a. Re-classified between Monroe and the Eastern Right of Way limits of Dike 4, from its current Secondary Arterial to a Modified Collector Street. b. The General Plan be amended to remove the continuation of Avenue 62 from the Eastern Right of Way limits of Dike 4 to the future extension of Madison Street. C) Exhibit 3.10: We are in agreement with the proposed text amending the General Plan's Circulation Element extending the multi -purpose trail designations as drafted. Travertine Discussion Points: 1) The General Plan Amendment Traffic Report clearly demonstrates that the extension of Avenue 62 westerly beyond Dike 4 is not necessary to meet the goals of the General Plan. (Refer to Section 6.1 — Principal Findings Items 2, 3, 4,5, 6, 7, & 8) 2) The proposed General Plan Amendment for Avenue 62 is inconsistent with the Circulation Element since it is to provide "an efficient, cost-effective and comprehensive transportation management strategy consistent with regional plans, local needs to maintain and improve mobility, and in a manner consistent with the goals, quality and character of the community". This inconsistency is based on the complexity and enormous costs associated with an extension of Avenue 62 over Dike 4 to Madison against the benefit it provides the community. 3) The extension of Avenue 62 also has substantial impacts to adjacent property owners, communities and Federal Agencies. A clear understanding of these items would also be required to determine the benefit to the community. 41 4) The proposed Travertine Specific Plan Amendment has also commission revised Traffic Reports that have reconfirmed the extension of Avenue 62 as an unnecessary improvement for circulation. 42 MODIFIED SECONDARY ARTERIAL A MADISON STREET NO SCALE W'LY R/W dR' E'LY I R/W ..,. 26' - MULTIPURPOSE TRAIL MEyIAN C B MOUNTABLE CURB MODIFIED SECONDARY ARTERIAL A-ALT. MADISON STREET NO SCALE CURB E'LY R/W ;URB 43 ATTACHMENT 6 Cahu�ia HecreatlonAree San Rosa Figure 4-2 Post 2020 Daily Volume Projections and V/C (Alternative 1 - Existing General Plan Network) M^oun�tal ^_ " _ �_ M W'-$, r s tiv 1(0- �` i-------�\ I-------- �o.46) T - - - - - - - - - - - The Quarry �- Specific Plan all -'�i�' Green Speck Plan i (SP 94-025) 1 ----- - — - — - — 177.1 t� \ r--------_— Santa Rosao�l_ 1 Mountain 0XI&\I /1n r- Travertine Specific Plan 6,150 (SP 94•a26) _ _ Santa Rosa Mountains Trilogy 1 E..bW Maintenance Bulifts 1 Avenue .... (0.25) _ 0.25) 62 — Avenue _so 60 a a Four -Lane Primary Arterial -A _ Four -Lane Secondary Arterial 3,000 Post 2020 Daily Volume (0.12) Daily Volume -to -Capacity Ratio *.-do Engineering S, BI #A Tur 4 XPQ9«ru MEMORANDUM TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission FROM: Les Johnson, Planning Director�'�� DATE: December 09, 2008 /VVJJ RE: Request Clarification of Condition No. 85 Regarding Interim Landscaping for Site Development Permit 2006-866, Time Extension The purpose of this item is to provide clarification to staff regarding a condition of approval imposed on the recent approval of SDP 2006-866, Time Extension No. 1 for the Griffin Ranch Saddle Club Project. Minute Motion 2008-017 was approved at the Planning Commission meeting of November 12, 2008. The motion included the addition of Condition No. 85 which stated: 85. Staff shall conduct a review of the applicant's PM-10 dust control plans for Griffin Ranch involving the South Coast Air Quality Management District, Public Works, and a representative of the La Quinta Estates Homeowners' Association. Dust control measures shall be reviewed and approved by staff prior to the issuance of grading permit for the Saddle Club. Although the use of interim landscaping was discussed at length by the Planning Commission during its deliberation of this item, staff understands that Commissioner Barrows, when making the motion, referenced the use of interim landscaping for soil stabilization purposes as an optional solution to be considered but not specifically required. Since the meeting of November 12, 2008, staff contacted the South Coast Air Quality Management District and was advised there were no violations and nothing outstanding with regards to the subject property. Planning and Public Works' staff also visited the site and physically inspected the soil stabilization treatment currently in place and concluded the applicant has adequately addressed the problem through the use of topical soil treatment. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\SDP06-866 Time Ext Memo.doc It is staff's opinion that it would be detrimental to cultivate the land and disturb the currently effective soil sealant now in place. Staff requests the Commission clarify its position regarding the use of interim landscaping as either an optional or a required treatment and whether the applicant's actions to date has met the intent of Condition No. 85. PAReports - PC\2008\12-09-08\SDP06-866 Time Ext Memo.doc