Loading...
2009 09 08 PCCity of La Quinta Planning Commission Agendas are now available on the City's Web Page @ www.la-guinta.org w5 OF4 PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA A Regular Meeting to be Held at the La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber 78-495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, California SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 7:00 P.M. **NOTE** ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT REGULAR MEETING Beginning Resolution 2009-023 Beginning Minute Motion 2009-007 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 July 28, 2009. 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 .................. SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2007-879, TIME EXTENSION NO. 1 Applicant........... The Foundation Group Location............ La Quinta Village Shopping Center, on the Northwest Corner of Washington Street and Calle Tampico. Request ............. Consideration of a One -Year Time Extension for a 6,200 Square Foot Retail Building Located Within the La Quinta Village Shopping Center. Action ............... Resolution 2009- B. Item .................. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085, AMENDMENT NO. 1 Applicant........... Royal Street Communications Location............ 54-001 Madison Street; Riverside County Fire Station #70. Request ............. Consideration to Allow for the Co -Location of Six Panel Antennas on an Existing Telecommunication Monopalm Tower. Action ............... Resolution 2009- VI. BUSINESS ITEM: A. Item .................. STREET NAME CHANGE 2009-019 Applicant........... East of Madison, LLC Location............ North of Baffin Avenue, West of Pike Place; Within the Madison Club. Request ............. Consideration of Adoption of a Resolution of Intention to Change a Street Name From Fremont Way to Happy Place Lane. Action ............... Resolution 2009- B. Item .................. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REVIEW Applicant........... Mr. & Mrs. Doug Bogren Location............ 51-705 Avenida Madero; Within the La Quinta Cove Request ............. Consideration to Allow an Architectural Design That is Not Compatible With the Cove Architectural Design Guidelines. Action ............... Minute Motion 2009- VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Report on City Council meetings of August 4, 2009, by Commissioner Weber; and September 1, 2009, by Chairman Alderson. B. Commissioner Wilkinson is scheduled to attend the September 15, 2009, City Council meeting. IX. DIRECTOR ITEMS: A. Housing Element Update B. General Plan Update X. ADJOURNMENT: This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held on September 22, 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, September 8, 2009 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, 51-321 Avenida Bermudas, on Thursday, September 3, 2009. DATED: September 3, 2009 A40 (6ka/ CAROLYN WALKER, 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 July 28, 2009 CALL TO ORDER 7:02 P.M. A. This meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order at 7:02 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. Staff present: Planning Manager David Sawyer, Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco, Assistant Planner Eric Ceja, and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker. IL PUBLIC COMMENT: None III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: None IV. CONSENT CALENDAR: Chairman Alderson asked if there were any changes to the minutes of July 14, 2009. There being, no comments or corrections it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Wilkinson/Barrows to approve the minutes as submitted. Unanimously approved. V. PUBLIC HEARINGS: A. Conditional Use Permit 2003-075, Amendment 1; a request by Milan Institute of Cosmetology, for consideration of a conditional use permit to increase the number of students per session for a beauty school within the Regional Commercial District (RC) located on the east side of Dune Palms Road, approximately 300 feet south of Highway 111 (47-120 Dune Palms Road)• PAReports - PC\2009\9-8-09\PC MIN_7-28-09_Draft.doe Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 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 if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Weber asked for clarification of a possible conflict of interest since his church was looking at leasing property in the same general area. He had no connection to the negotiations, but wanted to make sure Counsel was aware of the relationship. Assistant City Attorney Michael Houston said there was no conflict since the Commissioner was not on the: Board of Directors, but only a member of the Church. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about lighting in the rear portion of the building. Staff said lighting was addressed when the building was originally approved and they have received no complaints. Commissioner Wilkinsonasked about .hours of operation. Staff responded they were from 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m. Commissioner Wilkinson said he was concerned about security, with the staff and students, parking in the rear of the building. He wanted to make sure there was enough lighting and security to avoid any future problems. :Chairman Alderson asked about how the spaces were allocated for the students. Staff .explained how the building was divided and the requirements for parking; as well as the fact the applicant would have to meet all code requirements. Chairman Alderson asked if twenty students was the maximum allowed and.<how the applicant came up with that amount. Staff said the twenty -student -limit was proposed by the applicant. There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant was available and would like to address the Commission. P tRe:porta P Cy2009%9 8-09;PC MIN_ 7-25-09_ Draft.doc 2 Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 Ms. Kathy Wohlford, 45-691 Monroe, Suite 2, Indio CA, representing Milan Institute _ of Cosmetology, introduced herself and provided background on herself and the Institute. She explained why they were interested in this location and how they decided on the number of students. She then offered to answer any additional questions. Commissioner Wilkinson asked about shift times. Ms. Wohlford explained the times and security procedures. She said she appreciated the Commissioner's concern about safety.. Commissioner Weber asked Ms. Wohlford if the Milan Institute would be encouraging the staff and students to park in the rear of the building to allow the public to use the front parking spaces. Ms. Wohlford said yes and explained the transportation arrangements they have for their students; which emphasizes car pooling and the use of public transportation. She said most of their students do not own a vehicle. Commissioner Weber asked about their experience with the Indio campus. Ms. Wohlford gave anecdotal evidence of the parking experiences at the Indio campus. Commissioner Weber asked if they anticipated -having a similar,number of students in La Quinta. Ms. Wohlford said the La Quinta location would take a number of years to grow to the size of the Indio campus and they would probably not be using the full number of parking spaces to begin with. Commissioner, Weber asked if Ms. Wohlford could speak about the layout .of the interior area. Ms. Wohlford explained how they would be utilizing the layout; 'including the training and office areas, and said they would-be operating much like an ordinary salon. Chairman Alderson commented that the last shift of students would be leaving at night and asked if there were pedestrian protection lights in the: rear of the building. Ms. Patricia Wood, 47-120 Dune Palms, La Quinta CA, owner of the building, introduced herself and responded by saying there were wall - mounted lights and parking lot standards in the rear of the building. Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. I' h�=per(s PC12009,y-8 WK MIN_,7 28-09 DraltrdOp; 3 Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 There being no public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. Planning Manager David Sawyer made a point of clarification stating the applicant had indicated they intended to grow. He wanted to make it clear, before the motion was made, the current application was for two shifts of 20 students (a total of 40) as proposed in the application and recommended by staff. He added the applicant had been advised they would have to come back for and additional amendment if they wanted more than that amount. There being no further discussion it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Wilkinson to approve Resolution 2009-020 approving Conditional Use Permit 2003-075, Amendment No. 1 as submitted. Unanimously approved. B. Conditional Use Permit 2009-119; a request by Royal Street Communications for consideration to allow the placement of roof - mounted equipment and telecommunication antennas with minor additions to the architecture of a commercial building located at 47- 647 Caleo-Bay -Drive. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner, Eric Ceja-presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Weber commented on the telecommunications equipment not requiring line -of -sight transmission since it was going to be fully screened. Staff said the equipment would be fully screened and not visible from the ground. Commissioner Weber reiterated the equipment did not need line -of - sight for transmission such as a monopalm does. Staff explained how the antennas worked, were placed, and the minimal visual impact they would have. d':%Reparts - PC\2009`:9-8-09VFC, MIN,,17-28 09 Urait.doc 4 Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 Commissioner Quill asked what the uses of the antennas were. Staff responded it was for PCS, which is wireless telecommunication including phone service. Commissioner Quill asked what PCS stood for. Staff responded they were not sure but would defer to the applicant for an explanation. Chairman Alderson commented on the history of the building and stated that screening was extremely important. He asked staff to re- confirm there would be no visible impact from the addition of these antennas. Staff said they would not be visible. Chairman Alderson reiterated the only change you would see would be some slight modifications at the parapet edge, making the enclosure slightly larger in the same architectural style, and assuring it would look like a building alteration and not a screening. Staff responded that was correct. Commissioner Weber' asked about the dimensions of the additional parapet screening. Staff gave the dimensions as noted in the staff report. Commissioner Barrows wanted to clarify a comment in the staff report on page 2,'p'aragraph 5, sentence 1, which stated: "The six.(6) panel antennas are approximately three (3) feet in height, and when placed on the buildings roof would be visible from,public view." She askedif the comment regarding "visible from public view" was a typographical error. Staff responded it was a typographical error and the antennas would not be visible. There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson asked.if'the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Veronica Arvizo, 350 Commerce, Suite 200, Irvine CA introduced herself and gave some background information on Royal Communications and stated they were a new PCS (Personal Communications Service) provider. rlSFieport; PC1%2009 9-8 09VPC iv1IN_7-28 09 0raft,doo 5 Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 Commissioner Barrows asked for a definition of the personal communications service. Ms. Arvizo explained it was just like Sprint, Nextel, Verizon, and others. She explained they were a new carrier and had come out from the east coast; starting in the Los Angeles and San Francisco areas. They were now moving into the Coachella Valley. She said they were hoping to have their network up and running by next year. Ms. Arvizo had a question, for staff, regarding condition 2, which stated: "This permit shall expire on July 28, 2011, unless a one-year time extension is applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the Zoning Code." Ms. Arvizo asked if that was before the Building Permit was applied for or was that for the entire use. Staff explained the condition was included so that if the Building Permit, or improvements, were not in place the applicant would''need,to go back through a time extension. Ms. Arvizo brought some sample parapet, material and explained it was what the`signal' would go through. She added that she had driven by a building site in Corona and the material blended so well you could not see the alterations to the building. She then passed the sample on to the Commissioners and said it would be painted to match the building. Chairman Alderson :asked if this was the product which would be the veneer of the extension of the building. Ms. Arvizo said that was correct. Commissioner Weber said the applicant mentioned they were starting service out here and asked if they had other tower sites as well as the ones that were proposed in La Quinta. Ms. Arvizo explained how many sites she was responsible for and Royal Street Communications efforts to be sensitive to the proliferation of towers, by co -locating when possible. P 1Rej)orts PC\2009`-.9-8-091PC MIN ,_7-28-09 Dratt.doc Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 Commissioner Weber asked about the contracts Ms. Arvizo already had and whether she was in the process of doing that for the other sites that were needed in La Quinta. Ms. Arvizo said they had three applications in, but for the entire La Quinta area they would have four. They still had one more search ring for which they were trying to locate a tower. Commissioner Weber said the Commission was very sensitive to comments from the Lake La Quinta residents. He asked if it was part of Royal Communications' business plan to contact potentially affected homeowners' associations. Ms. Arvizo said, generally speaking, jurisdictions notify them of any homeowners' association in the vicinity. In this case they did send out the hearing notice to all property owners within a 500 foot radius. She said she read the letter (previously mentioned) and drove by the property; which was actually located east of the building. In reading the letter it was unclear as to whether the homeowner understood it was going to be completely screened. ;She said staff spoke to the homeowner and told them the equipment would be completely screened. Commissioner Weber said he visited the. site and the address on the letter and could attest it would be hard for any addition to the building to be significantly,noticed by that location. He said they were across the waterway and had additional houses, and the La Quinta Inn Bed and Breakfast there, so they had a lot of other visual issues there. He added that;thefletter writer's comment that "...the property would be less valuable because the view would be obstructed..." was probably not accurate. Chairman Alderson asked if the Royal Street Communications would be doing the physical construction of the project. Ms. Arvizo explained Royal Street Communications bids out the construction but it is all, managed under an in-house construction manager. Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. There being no public comment, Chairman Alderson closed the public participation portion of the meeting and opened the matter for Commission discussion. r �Rrepxis PC12009:9-8-09V'C MIN. 7-28-09,Drail,doc 7 Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 There was no further discussion and it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Quill/Weber to approve Resolution 2009-021 recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2009-119 as submitted. Unanimously approved. C. Conditional Use Permit 2009-063, Amendment 2; a request by Royal Street Communications for consideration to allow the co -location of six panel antennas on an existing telecommunication monopalm tower located at 46-600 Adams Street. Chairman Alderson opened the public hearing and asked for the staff report. Assistant Planner Eric Ceja presented the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning Department. Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff. Commissioner Weber commented on the photos and the fact that they showed that the monopalm did blend in. He did point out the dead palm and condition number 30, page 14, which stated: "The applicant shall replace the 'dead' palm tree at the site and replace it with one (1) forty (40) foot tall palm tree in close: :proximity ;to the existing monopalm tower. The applicant is responsible for the health and maintenance of the palm tree and .shall .be . responsible for the palm trees replacement if determined necessary by the City." He then asked if, at some point, the height of the nearby palm trees would affect the transmission at this facility and have to be replaced. Staff stated: they were not aware of how the growing palms would affect future transmission at this site but the intent of the condition was to make sure the tower would be further screened with the addition of that palm tree. Commissioner Quill stated, as a side note, that the tower elevation appeared to be 55 feet, on a 68 foot tower, and generally speaking date palms died before they got over 45 feet. They generally do not grow that high. PRepons PC',200919-8-0916CMIN 7-2$-09. Draft,doc 8 Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 Chairman Alderson suggested the applicant might want to look into why the current palm tree died, to avoid its replacement having the same problem. He also asked if the applicant had an easement for additional ground equipment to expand their ground facilities; and did that lease negotiation have to be completed as part of their conditions. There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission. Ms. Veronica Arvizo, 350 Commerce, Suite 200, Irvine CA said Chairman Alderson was correct and offered to answer any additional questions. There being no further questions of the applicant Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment. There being no 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 Quill/Wilkinson to approve Resolution 2009-022 recommending approval of Conditional Use Permit 2009-063, Amendment 2, as submitted. Unanimously approved. VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: 'None VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS: A. Report on City Council Meeting of July 21, 2009, from Commissioner Quill. Commissioner Quill was unable to attend on that date, however Commissioner Weber was in attendance and gave a brief rundown on some of the items discussed. Discussion followed regarding of the loss of State Funds, its effect on cities' redevelopment funds, and the possibility of local jurisdictions seeking legal recourse. P:A%Reports I`C12008`S, 8-09TC MIN 7-28-09., Druit.doc 9 Planning Commission Minutes July 28, 2009 Commissioner Wilkinson introduced the subject of the Commissioners opting to reduce, or eliminate, their stipend. Assistant City Attorney Houston explained what determined the payments and stated the Commissioners were not required to accept the funds. He then explained the procedures the Commissioners could follow to make any changes to their payouts. B. Chairman Alderson noted Commissioner Weber was scheduled to report on the City Council Meeting of August 4, 2009. C. Chairman Alderson reminded the Commissioners that the Council would be dark August 18`h and September 151 and the Planning Commission would be dark the; entire month of August. IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: None X. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Commissioners Barrows/Weber to adjourn this regular, meeting of the Planning Commission to the next regular meeting to be held on September 8, 2009. This regular meeting was adjourned at 7:56 p.m. on July, 28, 2009. Respectfully submitted, Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary City of to Quinta, California f:%R2g)ortn PC12DD9i9-809,PCMIN ,,,,7-28-OH„Druftdoc 10 PH # A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2007-879, TIME EXT. 1 APPLICANT: THE FOUNDATION GROUP PROPERTY OWNER: THE FOUNDATION GROUP REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF A ONE-YEAR TIME EXTENSION FOR A 6,200 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN THE LA QUINTA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER LOCATION: LA QUINTA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER, ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND CALLE TAMPICO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING: SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES: A NEGATIVE DECLERATION (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 91-187) WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR PLOT PLAN 91-456 ON APRIL 18, 1991, FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER. THERE ARE NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS OR NEW INFORMATION PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. NC (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) CN (NIEGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) NORTH: RM - RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (APARTMENTS) SOUTH: MC - MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITY, CALLE TAMPICO, (CITY HALL) EAST: RL - RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY, WASHINGTON STREET WEST: RM - RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (APARTMENTS) BACKGROUND: Site History The original architectural and landscape plans for this Site Development Permit were approved by the Planning Commission on July 24, 2007, with a standard two-year period of validity (Attachment 1). The applicant, The Foundation Group has made a timely request in advance of the expiration date for a one-year time extension. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The Site Development Permit approved the construction of a 6,200 square foot freestanding pad building within the La Quinta Village Shopping Center. The building has been designed to accommodate up to three tenants and is architecturally compatible with the existing shopping center (Attachment 2). The applicant has stated that they are in the process of securing construction funding; however, they have been unable to commence with construction as they are in the process of addressing hydrology issues at the site. ANALYSIS: Staff has updated the conditions of approval to reflect recent changes in the Public Works Engineering Bulletin and State water quality management rules. The updates conditions of approval have been highlighted. None of these modified conditions of approval will have a noticeable effect on the approved Site Development Permit. COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES: The time extension request was sent out for comment to City Departments and affected public agencies on July 22, 2009, requesting comments returned by August 8, 2009. All applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. PUBLIC NOTICE: This request was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 28, 2009, mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site, and posted on City Public Hearing information boards. At the time of the filing of this report, staff had not received any letters or phone calls from the public regarding the proposal. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2009 approving a one-year time extension for Site Development Permit 2007-879, to allow construction of a 6,200 square foot commercial building within the La Quinta Village Shopping Center, 2 subject to the findings identified in the attached resolution and conditions of approval. Prepared by: d'� Eric Ceja, As Olant Planner Attachments: 1. Planning Commission July 24, 2007 2. Site Plans Staff Report - Site Development Permit 2007-879 - 3 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A ONE- YEAR TIME EXTENSION OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2007-879, A 6,200 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITHIN THE LA QUINTA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER CASE NO.: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2007-879, EXT. 1 APPLICANT: THE FOUNDATION GROUP WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did on the 8" day of September, 2009, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider the request of The Foundation Group to approve a one-year time extension for Site Development Permit 2007-879, for a one-story retail building of 6,200 square feet on Pad Site 'A' in a 9.25-acre shopping center in the Neighborhood Commercial (CN) Zoning District located on the west side of Washington Street, north of Calle Tampico, more particularly described as: Assessor's Parcel Number: 770-020-021-9 WHEREAS, said Site Development Permit has complied with the requirements of "The Rules to Implement the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970" as amended (Resolution 83-68) in that the Planning Director has determined that this request has been previously assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 91-187, prepared for Plot Plan 91-456, for which a Negative Declaration of Environmental Impact was certified by the City Council on April 16, 1991, and no changed circumstances, conditions or new information has been provided that would trigger the preparation of a subsequent environmental assessment pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, did on the 241" day of July, 2007, at a regular meeting, approve the development plans, subject to conditions; and, WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons wanting to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to justify approval of a one-year time extension of said Site Development Permit: 1 . An extension of time is warranted because the findings as noted below can still be made and apply to this request. 2. No changes have been made to this Site Development Permit from its original approval and no new or changed environmental considerations exist. 4 PAReports - PC\2009\9-8-09\SDP 2007-879 EXT. 1 IRESOI.doc Planning Commission Resolution 2009- Side Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 3. The commercial development in this proposed phase of the project is consistent with the General Plan in that they are designated for neighborhood commercial uses. 4. The commercial project has been designed to be consistent with the applicable provisions of the City's Zoning Code. 5. The architectural design of the commercial project, including, but not limited to, the architectural style, scale, building mass, materials, colors, architectural details, roof style, and other architectural elements, are compatible with the surrounding development, previously approved and constructed phases, and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. The commercial center is suitably designed and conforms to the established theme of the project. 6. The site design of the project, including but not limited to project entries, interior circulation, pedestrian and bicycle access, pedestrian amenities, screening of equipment, exterior lighting, and other site design elements are compatible with previously approved and constructed phases, surrounding development, and with the quality of design prevalent in the City. 7. Project landscaping, including but not limited to the arrangement, variety, size, color, texture, and coverage of plant materials, with conditions, has been designed so as to provide relief, complement buildings, visually emphasize prominent design elements, screen undesirable views, provide a harmonious transition between adjacent land uses, and provide an overall unifying influence to enhance the visual continuity of the project. 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 project is in compliance with the provisions and conditions of Plot Plan 91-456 and Environmental Assessment 91-187 as designed; 3. That the public hearing notices were mailed to adjacent property owners by the Planning Department and posted in the Desert Sun Newspaper on August 28, 2009 as required by Zoning Ordinance provisions; and PAReports - PC\2009\9-8-09\SDP 2007-879 EXT. 1 (RESO).doc 5 Planning Commission Resolution 2009- Side Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 4. That it does hereby approve the one-year time extension for Site Development Permit 2007-879 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the Conditions, attached hereto; PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta City Planning Commission, held on the 81" day of September, 2009 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ED ALDERSON, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: LES JOHNSON, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California P:\Reports - PC\2009\9-8-09\SDP 2007-879 EXT. 1 (RESO).doc 6 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 ,reld01917AI 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Tentative Tract Map, or any Final Map recorded thereunder. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense counsel. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. This Site Development Permit shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code § § 66410 through 66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"). The City of La Quinta's Municipal Code can be accessed on the City's Web Site at www.la-guinta.org. This Site Development Permit 2007-879 shall expire on July 24, 2010, unless a Site Development Permit application is filed for a time extension prior to the expiration date. 4. Prior to the issuance of any grading, construction, or building permit by the City, the applicant shall obtain any necessary clearances and/or permits from the following agencies, if required: • Riverside County Fire Marshal • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Improvement Permit) • Planning Department • Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department • Desert Sands Unified School District • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • SunLine Transit Agency • South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances from the above listed agencies. When the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when submitting those improvements plans for City approval. 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 5. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions of the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 at seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 13.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; the California Regional Water Quality Control Board — Colorado River Basin Region Board Order No. R7-2008-0001 and the State Water Resources Control Board's Order No. 99-08-DWQ. A. For construction activities including clearing, grading or excavation of land that disturbs one (1) acre or more of land, or that disturbs less than one (1) acre of land, but which is a part of a construction project that encompasses more than ;one (1) acre of land, the Permitee shall be required to submit a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan ("SWPPP"). The applicant or design professional can obtain the California Stormwater ;Quality Association SWPPP template at www.cabmphandbooks.com for use in their SWPPP preparation. B. The applicant's SWPPP shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to any on or off -site -grading. being done in relation to this project. C. __ The applicant shall ensure that the required SWPPP is available for inspection at the project site at all times_ through and including acceptance of all improvements by the City. D.- The applicant's SWPPP shall include provisions for all of the following Best Management_ Practices ("BMPs") (LQMC Section 8.70.020 (Definitions)): 1►_ __ Temporary Soil Stabilization (erosion control). Temporary Sediment Control. 3) Wind Erosion Control. 4) Tracking Control. Non -Storm Water Management., 6) Waste Management -and Materials Pollution Control. E._-_ All erosion and sediment control BMPs proposed by the applicant shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to a_ny onsit_e or offsite_ grading, pursuant to this project. N PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September S. 2009 The approved SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by the City. Additionally, the applicant shall comply with applicable provisions for post construction runoff per the City's NPDES stormwater discharge permit, LQMC Sections 8.70.010 et seq. (Stormwater Management and Discharge Controls), and 113.24.170 (Clean Air/Clean Water); Riverside County Ordinance No. 457; and the California Regional Water Quality Control Board — Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB- CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2008-001. G, _, For post -construction urban runoff from New Development and Redevelopments Projects, the applicant shall implement requirements of the NPDES permit for the design, construction and perpetual operation and maintenance of BMPs per the approved Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP) for the project as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board — Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2008-001. H. ____The applicant shall implement the WQMP Design Standards per (CRWQCB- CRB) Region Board Order No. R7-2008-001 utilizing BMPs approved by the City_Engineer.! 6. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). 7. Approval of this Site Development Permit shall not be construed as approval for any horizontal dimensions implied by any site plans or exhibits unless specifically identified in the following conditions of approval. 8. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the invoice, all costs and actual attorney's fees incurred by the City Attorney to review, negotiate and/or modify any documents or instruments required by these conditions, if Developer requests that the City modify or revise any documents or instruments prepared initially by the City to effect these conditions. This obligation shall be paid in the time noted above without deduction or offset and Developer's failure to make such payment shall be a material breach of the Conditions of Approval. PROPERTY RIGHTS 8. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the M PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 proposed development. Conferred rights shall include irrevocable offers to dedicate or grant access easements to the City for emergency services and for maintenance, construction and reconstruction of essential improvements. Said conferred rights shall also include grant of access easement to the City of La Quinta for the purpose of graffiti removal by City staff or assigned agent in perpetuity and agreement to the method to remove graffiti and to paint over to best match existing. The applicant shall establish the aforementioned requirements in the maintenance agreements for the development or other agreements as approved by the City Engineer. Pursuant to the aforementioned, the applicant shall submit and execute an "AUTHORIZATION TO REMOVE GRAFFITI FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY" form located at the Public Works Department Counter prior to Certificate of Occupancy. 9. Pursuant to the aforementioned condition, conferred rights shall include approvals from the master developer over easements and other property rights necessary for construction and proper functioning of the proposed development not limited to access rights over proposed and/or existing private streets that access public streets and open space/drainage facilities of the master development. 10. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development include: PUBLIC STREETS 1) Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial — Option B, 100' Right -of -Way) — No additional right-of-way is required along the Site Development Permit boundary on Calle Tampico as per the recorded Parcel Map No. 27984. 11. The required perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public rights -of -way as follows has been dedicated on Parcel Map No. 27984: A. Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial — Option B, 100' Right -of -Way) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L. The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to, remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes. Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks, the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes. 12. Direct vehicular access to Calle Tampico is restricted, except for those access points identified on Parcel Map No. 27984, or as otherwise conditioned in these conditions of approval. 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 13. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 14. The applicant shall furnish proof of easements, or written permission, as appropriate, from those owners of all abutting properties on which grading, retaining wall construction, permanent slopes, or other encroachments will occur. 15. The applicant shall provide reciprocal access easements necessary for the adjoining parcel(s) for access to proposed parking and access drive associated with this Site Development Permit. Additionally, the applicant shall enter into a maintenance agreement with other parcel owners/occupants for the perpetual maintenance of the parking areas and drive aisles within Parcel Map No. 27984. STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS 16. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform to the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.) A. OFF -SITE STREETS 1) Calle Tampico (Primary Arterial - Option B, 100' Right -of -Way): No additional widening on the north side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the Site Development Permit boundary to its ultimate width on the north side as specified in the General Plan and per Conditions of Approval for Tentative Parcel Map No. 27984 are required of this Site Development Permit. The applicant shall extend improvements beyond the subdivision boundaries to ensure they safely integrate with existing improvements (e.g., grading; traffic control devices and transitions in alignment, elevation or dimensions of streets and sidewalks). i17._- _Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and -signed by qualified engineers.; PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS 118. The design of parking _facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and in particular the following: 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 A.-__ _ The parking_ stall and aisle widths and the double hairpin stripe parking stall design.. B. Cross slopes should be a maximum of 2% where ADA accessibility is required including accessibility routes between buildings. C. Building access points shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plans to better evaluate ADA accessibility issues. D. Accessibility routes to public streets and adjacent development shall be shown on the Precise Grading Plan. E. Parking stall lengths shall be according to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and be a minimum of 17 feet in length with a 2-foot overhang for standard parking stalls and 18 feet with a 2-foot overhang for handicapped parking stall or as approved by the City Engineer. One van accessible handicapped parking stall is required per 8 handicapped parking stalls. F. Drive aisles between parking stalls shall be a minimum of 26 feet with access drive aisles to Public Streets a minimum of 30 feet as shown on the Site Development Plan site plan or as approved by the City Engineer. Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, corner cutbacks, bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes, ADA accessibility route to public streets and other features shown on the approved construction plans, may require additional street widths and other improvements as may be determined by the City Engineer. 19. General access points and turning movements of traffic to on site private streets are limited to the access locations approved for Parcel Map No. 27984 and these conditions of approval. 20. The applicant shall design street pavement sections using CalTrans' design procedure for 20-year life pavement, and the site -specific data for soil strength and anticipated traffic loading (including construction traffic). Minimum structural sections shall be as follows: Parking Lot & Aisles (Low Traffic) 3.0" a.c./4.5" c.a.b. Parking Lot & Aisles (High Traffic) 4.5" a.c./5.5" c.a.b. Loading Areas 6" P.C.C./4" c.a.b. or the approved equivalents of alternate materials. 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 21. The applicant shall submit current mix designs (less than two years old at the time of construction) for base, asphalt concrete and Portland cement concrete. The submittal shall include test results for all specimens used in the mix design procedure. For mix designs over six months old, the submittal shall include recent (less than six months old at the time of construction) aggregate gradation test results confirming that design gradations can be achieved in current production. The applicant shall not schedule construction operations until mix designs are approved. 22. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. 23. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refers to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 24. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans). 25. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. On -Site Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 20' Horizontal B. Private Water and Sewer Plans or combined with Precise Plan C. PM10 Plan 1" = 40' Horizontal D. WQMP (Plan submitted in Report Form) NOTE: A through D to be submitted concurrently. 13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. All On -Site Signing & Striping Plans shall show, at a minimum; Stop Signs, Limit Lines and Legends, No Parking Signs, Raised Pavement Markers (including Blue RPMs at fire hydrants) and Street Name Signs per Public_ Works Standard Plans and/or as approved by the Engineering Department. "Precise Grading" plans shall normally include perimeter walls with Top Of Wall & ;Top Of Footing elevations shown. All footings shall have a minimum of 1-foot of cover,_ or sufficient cover to clear any adjacent obstructions. The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2007 California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department I n conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it is submitted for plan checking. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "Site Development" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official, Planning Director and the City Engineer.The City maintains standard plans, detail sheets and/or construction notes for elements of construction which can be accessed via the "Plans, Notes and Design Guidance" section of the Public Works Department at the City website (www.la-quinta.org). Please navigate to the Public Works Department home page and look -for -the -Standard Drawings hyperlink. 26. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of the mylars of all approved improvement plans on a storage media acceptable to the City Engineer. 27. Upon completion of construction, and prior to final acceptance of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings or equal according to Engineering Bulletin 09-01. GRADING 28. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements). 29. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 14 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 30. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, C. A Fugitive Dust Control Plan prepared in accordance with LQMC Chapter 6.16, (Fugitive Dust Control), and D. A Best Management Practices report prepared in accordance with LQMC Sections 8.70.010 and 13.24.170 (NPDES stormwater discharge permit and Storm Management and Discharge Controls)• All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. 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. 31. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 32.__ Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the Curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1. All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1.5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 33._ Building pad elevations on the precise grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform to pad elevations shown on the Tentative Parcel Map No. 27984, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 15 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 34. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining properties and the lots within this development. Where compliance within the above stated limits is impractical, the City may consider alternatives that are shown to minimize safety concerns, maintenance difficulties and neighboring -owner dissatisfaction- with the grade differential. 35. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site by more than plus or minus five tenths of a foot (0.5') from the elevations shown on the approved Tentative Tract Map, the applicant shall submit the proposed grading changes to the City Staff for a substantial conformance finding review. 36. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor with applicable compaction tests and over excavation documentation. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 37. __Storm water handling shall conform to the approved hydrology and drainage report for Parcel Map No. 27984 and Engineering Bulletins 06-15 and 06-16. This project shall not reduce the city approved volume of the existing retention basin. 38. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.120 (Drainage), Retention Basin Design Criteria, Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. More specifically, stormwater falling on site during the 100 year storm shall be retained within the development, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The design storm shall be the 1 hour, 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off. 39. Nuisance water shall be retained on site. Nuisance water shall be disposed of per approved methods contained in Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 — Hydrology Report with Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin No. 06-015 - Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. design of retention facilities, the maximum percolation rate shall be two inches per hour. The percolation rate will be considered to be zero unless the applicant provides site specific data indicating otherwise and as approved by the City Engineer. 16 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 41. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of all private on -site drainage improvements including but not limited to the existing retention basin, underground drainage systems (Maxwells, Storm Traps... etc), and BMP's for WQMP. 42. A Covenant and Agreement establishing notification process and responsibility for Water Quality Management Plan implementation and maintenance shall be submitted to the city for review and approval and recorded. 43. Stormwater may not be retained in landscaped parkways or landscaped setback lots. Only incidental storm water (precipitation which directly falls onto the setback) will be permitted to be retained in the landscape setback areas. The perimeter setback and parkway areas in the street right-of-way shall be shaped with berms and mounds, pursuant to LQMC Section 9.100.040(B)(7). 44. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries and levels in any area outside the development. 45. The development shall be graded to permit storm flow in excess of retention capacity to flow out of the development through a designated overflow and into the historic drainage relief route. 46. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route. UTILITIES 47. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 48. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 49. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements maintained, or required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. Additionally, grease traps and the maintenance thereof shall be located as to not conflict with access aisles/entrances. 17 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 CONSTRUCTION 50. The City will conduct final inspections of habitable buildings only when the buildings have improved street and (if required) sidewalk access to publicly -maintained streets. The improvements shall include required traffic control devices, pavement markings and street name signs. If on -site streets in residential developments are initially constructed with partial pavement thickness, the applicant shall complete the pavement prior to final inspections of the last ten percent of homes within the development or when directed by the City, whichever comes first. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION 51. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans). 52. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 53. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 54. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Planning Department and green sheet sign off by the Public Works Department. When plan checking has been completed by the Planning Department, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature by the Planning Director, however landscape plans for landscaped median on public streets shall be approved by the both the Planning Director and the City Engineer. Where City Engineer approval is not required, the applicant shall submit for a green sheet approval by the Public Works Department. Final landscape plans for on -site planting shall be reviewed by the ALRC and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of first building permit. Final plans shall include all landscaping associated with this project. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by both the Planning Director and/or the City Engineer. 55. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the Planning Director. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 24 inches of curbs along public streets. 56. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance requirements per guidelines in the AASHTO "A Policy on Geometric Design of 18 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 Highways and Streets, 51h Edition" or latest, in the design and/or installation of all landscaping and appurtenances abutting and within the private and public street right-of-way. MAINTENANCE 57. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance). 58. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance of perimeter landscaping up to the curb, access drives, and sidewalks. FEES AND DEPOSITS 59. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.180 (Fees and Deposits). These fees include all deposits and fees required by the City for plan checking and construction inspection. Deposits and fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan check and permits. 60. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the provisions of the Infrastructure Fee Program and Development Impact Fee program in effect at the time of issuance of building permit(s). 61. Prior to completion of any approval process for modification of boundaries of the property or lots subject to these conditions, the applicant shall process a reapportionment of any bonded assessment(s) against the property and pay the cost of such reapportionment. 62. Final conditions will be addressed when building plans are reviewed. Prior to issuance of a building permit, applicant shall review building plans with the Sheriff's Department regarding Vehicle Code requirements, defensible space, and other law enforcement and public safety concerns. All questions regarding the Sheriff's Department should be directed to the Deputy at (760) 863-8950. FIRE DEPARTMENT 63. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering a fire flow 1500 gallons per minute for a two hour duration at 20 psi residual operating pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on the construction site. 19 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 64. Approved accessible on site fire hydrants shall be located not to exceed 500 feet apart in any direction. Any portion of the facility or of an exterior wall of the first story of the building shall not be located more than 150 feet from fire apparatus access roads as measured by an approved route around the complex, exterior of the facility or building, and no portion of a building further than 500. feet from a fire hydrant. Fire hydrants shall provide the required flow 65. Prior to building permit approval and construction, applicant/developer shall furnish two copies of the water system fire hydrant plans to the Fire Department for review and approval. Plans shall be signed by a registered civil engineer, and shall confirm hydrant type, location, spacing, and minimum fire flow. Once plans are signed and approved by the local water authority, the originals shall be presented to the Fire Department for review and approval. 66. Blue dot retro-reflectors pavement markers on private streets, public streets and driveways to indicated location of the fire hydrants. 06-05 (located at www.rvcfire.oro). 67. Display street numbers in a prominent location on the address side of the building and/or rear access. Numbers and letters shall be a maximum of 10" in height. All addressing must be legible and of a contrasting color. 68. A rapid entry Knox Box shall be installed on the outside of the building. If the building is protected with a fire alarm or burglar alarm system, the lock box will require "tamper" monitoring. Special forms are available from the Riverside County Fire Department for ordering the Knox Box. 69. The applicant shall install a complete commercial fire sprinkler system (per NFPA 13 1999 Edition). Fire sprinkler system(s) with pipe sizes in excess of 4" in diameter will require the project Structural Engineer to certify with a "wet signature", that the structural system is designed to support the seismic and gravity loads to support the additional weight of the sprinkler system. 70. All fire sprinkler risers shall be protected from any physical damage. The PIV and FCD shall be located to the front, within 25 to 50 feet of a hydrant, and a minimum of 25 feet from the building. Sprinkler riser room must have indicating exterior and/or interior door signs. A C-16licensed contractor must submit plans, along with current $307.00 deposit based fee, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. Guideline handouts are available from the Fire Department. 71. The applicant shall install an alarm monitoring system for fire sprinkler system(s) with 100 or more heads (20 or more in Group I, Division 1.1 and 1.2 occupancies). Valve monitoring, water -flow alarm and trouble signals shall be automatically transmitted to im PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 an approved central station, remote station or propriety monitoring station in accordance with 2001 CBC, Sec. 904.3.1. An approved audible sprinkler flow alarm shall be provided on the exterior in an approved location and also in the interior in a normally occupied location. A C-10 licensed contractor must submit plans designed in accordance with NFPA 72, 1999 Edition, along with the current $192.00 deposit based fee, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to installation. Guideline handouts are available from the Fire Department. 72. The application shall install a portable fire extinguisher, with a minimum rating of 2A- 10BC, for every 3,000 square feet and/or 75 feet of travel distance. Fire extinguishers shall be mounted 3.5 to 5 feet above finished floor, measured to the top of the extinguisher. Where not readily visible, signs shall be posted above all extinguishers to indicate their locations. Extinguishers must have current CSFM service tags affixed. 73. No hazardous materials shall be stored and/or used within the building, which exceed quantities listed in UBC Table 3-D and 3-E. No class I, II, or IIIA of combustible/flammable liquid shall be used in any amount in the building. 74. Exit designs, exit signs, door hardware, exit markers, exit doors, and exit path marking shall be installed per the 2001 California Building Code. 75. Electrical room doors if applicable shall be posted "ELECTRICAL ROOM" on outside of the door. 76. Access shall be provided to all mechanical equipment located on the roof as required by the Mechanical Code. 77. Air handling systems supplying air in excess of 2,000 cubic feet per minute to enclosed spaces within buildings shall be equipped with an automatic shutoff. Ref. CMC 609.0. PLANNING DEPARTMENT 78. The applicant shall work with the Planning Department to finalize the green screens location, size and plant type prior to Final Landscaping Plan approval by the ALRC. 79. No signage is permitted with this approval. All building mounted signs for the building shall comply with the existing Sign Program for the La Quinta Village Shopping Center. A separate permit from the Planning Department is required for any temporary or permanent signs. 80. Tubular -steel "ribbon -type" or other securable, foundation -inset bicycle parking racks shall be provided, large enough to accommodate five bicycles. The bicycle ray shall PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED Site Development Permit 2007-879, Time Ext. 1 The Foundation Group September 8, 2009 be placed along the buildings west elevation, out of the way of pedestrian flows and shopping cart storage and shall be provided with a mechanism which permits locking a bicycle onto the rack. 81. All roof top mechanical equipment shall be fully screened per Section 9.100.050 of the Zoning Ordinance. 82. Building mounted lighting shall comply with the City's Outdoor Lighting Ordinance, per Section 9.100.150 of the Zoning Ordinance. 83. The applicant shall comply with all Conditions Of Approval of Plot Plan 1991-456 22 ATTACHMENT # 1 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: JULY 24, 2007 CASE NO: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2007-879 APPLICANT: THE FOUNDATION GROUP PROPERTY OWNER: THE FOUNDATION GROUP REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ARCHITECTURAL PLANS FOR A 6,200 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING LOCATED WITHIN THE LA QUINTA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER LOCATION: LA QUINTA VILLAGE SHOPPING CENTER, ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND CALLE TAMPICO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: A NEGATIVE DECLERATION (ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 91-187) WAS CERTIFIED BY THE CITY COUNCIL FOR PLOT PLAN 91-456 ON APRIL 18, 1991, FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE SHOPPING CENTER. THERE ARE NO CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES, CONDITIONS OR NEW INFORMATION PROPOSED WHICH WOULD TRIGGER THE PREPARATION OF A SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PURSUANT TO PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 21166. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: NC (NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) ZONING: CN (NIEGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL) SURROUNDING ZONING/LAND USES: NORTH: RM - RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (VILLA CORTINA APARTMENTS) SOUTH: MC - MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITY, CALLE TAMPICO, (CITY HALL) EAST: RL - RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY, WASHINGTON STREET WEST: RM - RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM (SEASONS APARTMENTS) 23 P:\Eric\SDP's\SDP 07-879 Foundation Group\Public Hearings\SDP 07-879 PC (STAFF REPORT).rtf BACKGROUND: Site History The La Quinta Village Shopping Center (Plot Plan 91-456) was originally approved as a 116,000 square foot shopping center on an 11.8 acre site. Additionally, a General Plan Amendment and Change of Zone allowing commercial usage of the site were approved by the City Council in April of 1991 . In November of 1992, an amendment decreasing the project to 85,650 square feet on 9.25 acres was approved. In April of 1994, a second amendment decreasing the project to 79,000 square feet was approved (Attachment 1). Of the 79,000 square feet of approved commercial space, 20,000± square feet of space was devoted to four pad sites within the center. Under the approved amendment, Pad 'A' shows a future building of 4,500 square feet with an additional 1,500 square feet devoted to an outdoor eating area along the east elevation. The southeast corner of the shopping center is currently used as the shopping centers retention basin. The original plans for Pad 'A' showed an outdoor eating area which was anticipated to be a functional open area. In 1999, the Planning Commission approved Plot Plan 95-551, allowing a 5,700± square foot building on Pad 'A' for First Bank of Palm Desert (Attachment 2). No buildings were built and the application has expired. With exception to the subject propety (Pad 'A'), all buildings within the Center have been constructed and the project is built out. The subject property is under separate ownership from the rest of the shopping center. The existing shopping center is a Spanish architectural design motif which utilizes exterior cement plaster, arched walkways, ceramic tile accents, wood trellises, and Mission -style clay .roof tile. Building heights at the center typically range from 20 to 30 feet in height, excluding the main tower element that is 42 feet high. Perimeter freestanding pad buildings were built in 1995 (Pad 'C'), 1996 (Pad 'B') and 2003 (Pad 'D') respectively. PROJECT PROPOSAL: The applicant has submitted a Site Development Permit for a 6,200 square foot freestanding pad building within the La Quinta Village Shopping Center. The building has been designed to accommodate up to three tenants and is architecturally compatible with the existing shopping center (Attachment 2). Building Design The architecture color and materials proposed for the subject building are consistent with the existing shopping center. The building will be a Spanish architecture motif with white stucco, ceramic tile accents, Mission -style clay roof tile, and an arched colonnade (Attachment 3). The building design is intended for up to three tenant 24 P:\Eric\SDP's\SDP 07-879 Foundation Group\Public Hearings\SDP 07-879 PC (STAFF REPORT).rtf spaces, the largest being 3,600 square feet. The window treatments, location, and design are intended to match the proposed tenant spaces. Windows for corner tenants "wrap" around the buildings north, east, and west corners to allow natural light and to provide visual relief from a bare building facade. An arched colonnade and covered walkway are provided around the buildings west and north elevations. The colonnades generally range from five (5) feet to seven (7) feet in depth. Wood beams will be used as the ceiling under the covered walkways consistent with the existing ceiling beams at the shopping center. Along with the proposed depths of the surrounding colonnade, a roof overhang of eighteen (18) inches is provided. The intent of the overhang is to enhance the overall design of the building and to provide additional shade. A colonnade is provided along the south and east elevations; however, the depth of the colonnade is designed solely for visual relief and shading for the building. The depth of the south colonnade is approximately three (3) feet. The design of the surrounding colonnades, covered walkways, and building exterior is consistent with the existing shopping center building design. Access and Parking The site has previously been rough graded with the development of the overall shopping center. Currently, a two (2) foot differential exists between the proposed building pad height and the existing parking lot on the north side of the building. The applicant has addressed this issue by incorporating three steps that lead from the buildings north -facing colonnade to the parking lot. The steps begin at the buildings columns and step down to the existing parking lot. The pad will use existing parking facilities at the site and no changes to the built environment are proposed other than re -stripping for ADA parking stalls along the western portion of the building site. Sufficient parking exists to adequately serve the proposed building. The proposed building will also increase pedestrian access to the site by increasing the number of walkways and colonnades at the shopping center, including direct access to the existing adjacent bus stop and shelter. Existing ADA paths of travel connect the pad site to the existing Ralph's shopping center. The applicant proposes to create additional ADA paths of travel to buildings along the eastern portion of the shopping center by adding a pathway between the buildings north -facing elevation and the parking lot. A bus shelter exists at the sites southwest corner. Staff has received comments from SunLine Transit Agency regarding the existing shelter and the proposed development. SunLine has stated that the proposed sidewalk for the site will provide a pedestrian connection between the bus shelter and shopping center and that no other impacts to the shelter are anticipated due to construction of this site. 25 P:\Eric\SDP's\SDP 07-879 Foundation Group\Public Hearings\SDP 07-879 PC (STAFF REPORT).rtf Existing Water Feature An existing water feature is located on an adjacent parcel abutting the north-east corner of the subject property. The water feature, which was built in an earlier phase of the shopping center, is a moderately prominent amenity to this segment of the center. Existing landscaping has overgrown and essentially hidden the water feature from public view. The applicant has worked with staff to incorporate the water feature into their project and to make the feature more accessible to the public. The applicant has proposed adding pavement, benches and flowering pots at the buildings northeast corner to integrate the feature into their building site. Landscaping The proposed landscaping palette for the building will be consistent with the existing shopping center's landscaping (Attachment 4). The landscape plan shows heavy landscaping around the buildings east and south facing elevations along with six small planting areas along the six pillars on the north elevation and a small number of potted plants along the west elevation and water feature. Landscaping around the buildings south and east elevations will consist of heavy plantings and groupings of Yellow Lantana and Raphiolepis 'Ballernia'. Three Acacia Stenophylla trees are also proposed along the sites south property line to provide shade to the building. Per the ALRC's direction, the applicant has also proposed four "Green Screens" along the back of building. The Green Screens are comprised of a welded wire material that provides a security screen and shade element, and act as a living fence, as vine plants climb the trellis -like structure. The applicant has yet to finalize design of the Green Screens, but has stated they will work with staff to complete design of the Green Screens prior to completing the building. An example of a green screen is attached (Attachment 5)• The landscape area along the southeast edge of the property contains a relatively narrow Swale from the existing retention basin. The applicant has proposed to replant grass within the swale which is consistent with the existing landscape of the retention basin and Swale. The applicant will leave the Swale as is, so as not to disrupt its function with the overall design of the retention basin. ANALYSIS: Both the architecture and landscaping for the building have been designed to be compatible with the existing built environment at the shopping center. Additionally, the proposed project has increased pedestrian circulation at the center by providing direct access to the existing bus shelter and enhancing ADA paths of travel at the center. The applicant has proposed off -site improvements adjacent to the water feature in the northeast corner of the project. Generally, off -site improvements are not allowed 26 P:\Eric\SDP's\SDP 07-879 Foundation Group\Public Hearings\SDP 07-879 PC (STAFF REPORT).rtf without property owner consent. Though proposed, the applicant has not provided written proof of consent from the property owner and there is the possibility that these improvements will not occur should the applicant not be able to obtain consent. The existing on -site retention basin for the shopping center will need to be preserved in its entirety, including the Swale which encroaches into the project. The applicant has worked extensively with the City's Public Works Department in preserving the existing retention basin, and has tested the existing site for percolation. The applicants have proposed to retain all stormwater and nuisance water onsite by using an underground retention. The previously approved Plot Plan (PP 91-456) identified a large outdoor seating area on Pad 'A'. The applicant has stated that due to the shopping centers existing CC&R's, increases in food services at this location are not allowed, and therefore they have not proposed to incorporate an outdoor seating area into the buildings design. Parking calculations have been previously addressed with the original approval of Plot Plan 1991-456. The original Plot Plan shows a total of 491 parking stalls and a parking ratio of 5.73 stalls per 1,000 square feet of leaseable space. Staff has calculated theparking parking requirement per the City's Municipal Code and the uses within the shopping center, and has found that the center has adequate parking to accommodate the proposed building. The back of building faces the corner of Washington Street and Calle Tampico and is directly north of City Hall. The applicant has worked diligently with staff to address concerns with the back of building treatment. The south elevation of the building utilizes six columns, an eighteen (18) inch roof overhang, and landscaping. The columns are one foot in width, are separated from the building by one foot and support an 18 inch roof overhang. The landscaping for the back of building includes trees, green screens and heavy landscaping, all of which add depth and shade to the building. The proposed landscaping for the pad building is consistent with the existing plant palette of the shopping center. The proposed landscaping along the south elevation is intended to shield the back of building from public views and to add separation between the building and Calle Tampico. The west elevation of the building faces onto an existing parking lot, which is anticipated to be the main parking area for the proposed pad. As such, there is a need to incorporate more landscaping around the west elevation. Architecture and Landscape Review Committee (ALRC) P:\Eric\SDP's\SDP 07-879 Foundation Group\Public Hearings\SDP 07-879 PC (STAFF REPORT).rtt 27 The Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed this request at its meeting on April 4, 2007 and recommend to the Planning Commission approval of Site Development Permit 2007-879, subject to the following Conditions of Approval: 1. Final landscape plans for on -site .planting shall be reviewed by the ALRC and approved by the Community Development Director prior to issuance of first building permit. Final plans shall include all landscaping associated with this project, including perimeter landscaping. 2. In order to preserve the function of the on -site retention basin, the existing Swale shall not be degraded by the proposed landscaping for the building. Landscaping along the south elevation of the building needs to be revised to incorporate screening material and plant massing to shield the back of the building. 3. If a grade differential of two (2) or more feet exists between the proposed building and the northern parking lot, the applicant shall provide a landscape barrier to limit, but not restrict, access from the northern parking lot. COMMENTS FROM OTHER DEPARTMENTS AND AGENCIES: The project was sent out for comment to City Departments and affected public agencies on January 24, 2007, requesting comments returned by February 14, 2007. All applicable comments are incorporated in the Conditions of Approval. PUBLIC NOTICE: This project was advertised in the Desert Sun newspaper on July 14, 2007, mailed to all property owners within 500-feet of the site, and posted on City Public Hearing information boards. At the time of the filing of this report, staff had not received any letters or phone calls from the public regarding the proposal. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2007 - , approving Site Development Permit 2007-879 to allow construction of a 6,200 square foot commercial building within the La Quinta Village Shopping Center, subject to the findings identified in the attached resolution and conditions of approval. 28 P:\Eric\SDP's\SDP 07-879 Foundation Group\Public Hearings\SDP 07-879 PC (STAFF REPORT).rtf Prepared by: Eric Ceja, Assistant Planner Attachments: 1. Original Center Site Plan 2. Proposed Site Plan 3. Building Elevations 4. Landscaping Plans 5. Green Screen 29 P:\Eric\SDP's\SDP 07-879 Foundation Group\Public Hearings\SDP 07-879 PC (STAFF REPORT).rtf rrwan wT r --��-- n0 m IL t ©. W 2 a e RETAIL SI IOPS § o ®,. FF. 1CL Ff. to Z FT-1 z a 3 CALLE TAMPIGO SRE RECAP PARCEL SCMW ulM of xre-xxm.mn rxmT IWPlAg HE,,.65flmfL BM.f4.,If8 hE, SITE PLAN mxc�xuum. M6 mET. e vnaw uu-arem R. .»t. rmmoan uamr�vuoxw. rxc. .. ma wOBf EOAFA-YBmR. ATTACHMENT # 2 I reCOiv/eol �kp 16 2023 Retell Shope at LA QUINTA VILLAGE rw m. ♦..em Y pY OA -M h. Nw9r 1MNC.�N-/YY p SRE PUN ]-Lm RETM 9! S / U OwxT. NWGE �1 flETALL SHOPS I I I RESIOEN DEVELOPMENT RETAIL SHOPS I RETAIL 'SHOPS H ti W RESIDENTIAL NOEVELOPMEM I � RALPHs I I Z RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMEW RETAIL OPFSTK£E SHOPS � PARCEL SUMMMY I n i.�n � � � aNYt Vi PIJFB eterz u awrt� nuxrniu 1 t li Nit CALLE TAMPICO CHIC CENTER RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT A N OVERALL SITE PLAN� 6GYF, . received IUI 16 Z009 pryofL Qvlft 1166 Wm Cal.M BIM Svlm ID9 Pvudecti CMIfa,N 9ll96 Te - 6 /6 733 Bu: 616%�6t Retell S pa at LA QUINTA VILLAGE Y 6iY GWmY YGm<7l � BNi BEeet B ANC llwpet GW GIImY YYPd OVEw SITE PLAN aAl-�/aW..'u- FsA SCHEDULE w IQ T RETAIL SHGPS 1 a W. received Jtjl 1 GM9 CW,WL,Q,a. Mun,lng Depemm I ride . ... ...... ARCHrIECTURY, DESIGN PLANNING 14W West Colorado Blvd. ave. NO Fsed.-, C&Lif .. 4 91ID5 Ttl 6201/30,1 0733 It., 626/ 95�061 Retail Shops at LA QUINTA VILLAGE h, F, stsis T LANDSCAPE PLAN s xw. SHOP No 1 SHOP ElI JI v-cv-e� � I unx oaa-er+mm — 7 II n FLOOR PLAN N r.rn W W UUL 16 2009 Om,SD -dm nGMN90aPanma'0 11 WM C Wb BIM gum 200 Pvtd<v; Wifom1+91306 ieb 626/D04-0]I3 F¢ 636/NS-0951 RaMtl fto at LA QUINTA VILLAGE xwc on....n+m FLOOR PLAN JaLj �TNL.,,� / L. WH,. mL.� or� Ff AECMTECTUAE DESIGN PLANNING 1450 Wee Col. mlN sue. All Pew, Calif 91195 Th -626/3U3-0133 Pas 6M/2951 %l Retail Sh at LA QUINTA VILLAGE .�aN' .unm M"tlO i. ors alae,.u. 9xs6a 66s: ae e...a a6..w rv..o=+e.m runr uev DIMENSION FLOOR PUN AND TIPICAL COLUMNS DIMENSION FLOOREP� N N w I TYPICAL COLUMN O TYPICAL COLUMN A x.�: w-ra rwie. m.ra A2 PETAL .O / U WM-A -- WEST / WILU ELEVATION tr' �MJ ::. aL18a COLOP MD IMTERULB i p(R_WR BD60 WP1lB IlY f/J111M: PLIMFUWMw'PNIIex VMiP nl6 6N6 TIEC0.YN V9B: WiCN IX6TeliE PiTE 91E MCA 019igP W.1 P%Rp TiE B]L'FAVIA MNM 9F19 �FSIMO Ai TEE 611E PM fiELq Pi tlNFIIF➢ WPlll: 0.\lFL 9fAN8-RuwoA xAi�RLLTY¢ D.emu BMMiO SION3 dHlIL Ai T1E6Tc 1 59NNT: fe W f PE8 YED fCP PLL 8(3x8 EAT / L T SIDE ELEVATION NOM / PPONT ELEVATION e1ce 6Aar— ELEYA➢oN A EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS rve: M. w TYPICAL ARCH / COLUMN ELEVATION .: �'.1a ARCHMCTURE 1} Wwt C 10BF SWte "D h ff« MDS Z. 6l6/bW Dld3 Pas 636/ nil ReWl SN P. et LA QUINTA VILLAGE a w.rnye� 6M.w V OJY CaXeMM BA6� UU OR ELEVATIONS MD TYRCAL MCN I COLUMN ELEVATION A3 x6Tl B.. / u WIM,A w11. W D1 FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL NOTES: %ri%::"m.: hm�. rmwam..emeY men w.Yu. w.e s.som 4 P�WPm.�um uYi 1s' � ua.vxr omen: v Yn wxW: m/n u avnm u Rmw bt. w. S swm:..m..w mampx Y.pvam. abm:mm..Ss.. Ym m . il—tw,. ..mmW M:: Y.mnYb.. mMvmpr `� fb srygm EmMmYIMm4e aNl.d MEWIp Y•Fm ea.m. ben ��IMM. mW.l.m y.mn e+m4 max R4.4nW::msR ��ry .yen 6 �:aY mmm�m.:mw�lMOlb M.. Yv fYPA®®YFabJYYm xBY..I�W�d AW�n®a.•naumx w4. m. awne.mma[M'sm .q.v .M. m:x.Y nxmY mAm m.wm.n mwm w emnn mw m.mmn s. mw. ° s�•rY�4Vm'Y"'°a Y°i:� i°w. °:d �'o"A'�'0Y"a'mom"�v.'�wsm.mb�ao.."'°`..mm:°"b°mY"mw.m°n`.Su mqm M"�H.OW :O`�MGiMa WMDAs�m tlMml..n NYle lm Gbw Yli�` memna. POLICE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL NOTES: w rxms�ncrax Mm mnemcrc«.w.®: mrYmucnax are: ' e.m ema�xa`mYx.nii91a:::mv"'":um°0°°°.na�mA""m n.u.w.aw.m.a b.ana .�.. rvb.m Mb:eRnbm.mM mmuM Wem mtl s®�nMtl�`im�wwwln uawge'�m�bYnaEWV W.m.ub+MnmaP@n:.b.Y e ne .e n°mm mYa.Ynw mo..r wmwa.mnb amwaambn. mmaum... mwa.Ym:M: m:m,am mmm m men m a, men «m a.w � o°mmm. a M mlrnne.rt. Yub b.tlm Ra mamm:l�Y aWYO::b YapywlwmYyy fie f�um�a mA:m..W �.m��mpm�ipb:�tl W W011 rA YxGm6�myuYuvtlr�plm M dM mb.m.�mn�WbY�.N 4 p MNW b�itlbl F�Ia�i.0 e�MYYl Yxe..uM1bxv Mew v�buy. mAnxJ.n..nwmvmnV dfa. r.w.. M Yn.mm:vY mm.p� mn N.wY mlbtr�dV�d uh c Gmw[Y WMP.m.MNmv..6uM mM1m vA nvv. m:4mxib M.bNAb umavm s uenrm: .mw m.ymm Y.rm Ym m.dm.m.e � �m..m ` "v. `w ma vmw Wpma p.d�y .��.Y „Sr imbed vmn Ym ma �.m�Pss� ab mM�mY :.:rdrW� wW Patla�.eH4w x.M':mm.4Y� m�rvAvavb.am x¢mmuia 4 s.mm:mnm Ymm r.m.w n.n.:m.a mmamx mw..eamw : �mmm.Yve mwxuwmm k:..wu wnxee.a.Yb eabm mry/ua w.nmmmn .m.;eo'..:�" r..Y.. emm.mwwmtlwm.m.m m.nwmn xna x.H unmuwo: . m.m�.amv n�.waYm m..mm.Yenaammm:m:mm.e.me.:.Y. xmum m. '4 K6ID GNI110.: a FMp Mlq tmm'-mlmWpYP�+4 rtP C.F�Hpq®: ply yp YmaM"my`bm.�y4'n YbavM1�mb. 4:v14 �m��m�n.�m{v.:mRMVY1R a .mn.MMmn PYY pmW YTmYn.b�/4MV�G N. xIE fF Yilf/Im1UUL 6aM1FLAYE: a ��K YWas�i �b.m:vmm MMmM vu+'ay.wW m.Mm Mmn Ten v.4a 4 nem..m.nYmam w.m.n eYmo.mmmme. �mem....mmm u WVY.awm tlw:mL. YaWrw�Ytre.sR Ymg6mm mn mMa on xbb m+.bum a YGIMIv cR19e: a fmvvsaa mvb mmn Y.*vw@{YvnbpM%4laxe gN.u.b ans.a v.M O '6IIF5: ��pp • ��Yw�:.�mne mmmrnee m�m.u:s.m b.b nM.M. evnmvs m awmn avcnon ens: ' ��m°m"'m..n mwe w.ww+"`ma�mtl°°'°m+:.°+wao b"m�wc:o%ve x°ww �•x.w Y. ....ao�mwY::,m+Y.3+v'.."m wTtySa".ryG°i.�"ab'x:mmmY. rmu. rm�mT:W:mG.n t om.x. 4. bowl+arm�+m.m..+.:m..wa ¢,�io °'�::. svmp0.ena taYYd ° :n��e�Y.E�i mmY" Yiaa 0oa4e.:m� Y:"'dmu imu w m:m"�e n mo°m:o..°�n n sPViOw.o�"•'Y °D 4 pxv:m�Blwq CrS mgae W::bbaM3vamtlWPP wY1V tlY bnwEmts N'ml n emumm: m.. x.om mrssEcnmY4 anrwm mrmaea n .xmemY::.Y:.m.�xwma mwmms.:�mma+mmYm oxen+• rams.wn uwweea: wm.mbm admen n �°omm'w'9.::"°mman9°"`Swi w'®a.o men mwro. m:a. m.w�: m.m..aw mxv w m n ROOF.. =PLAN N ARCHITECTURE 14W Wmt Retell Shope at LA QUINTA VILLAGE la pWa G` YI�mY Y3m4 mYI B.N�T �QYY�.e4 N.+W: Bmat C.IYmi M6N MD N1D NOTES PEi4t SxUGS / U OUNLA vI11.PGE I > N ARCHITECTURE DESIGN PLANNING �I ;os� .. S gssoclate5-. mmmsifl , u�no I� 11101Ma:��.:�1 �SON 1P�MI .Ptenq�llilo �G� z : ► :� �allllli �� zns FMN , .� rwea r n PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN N u OI.MA rurrna, aue. vss..a PREJMINMY LANDSCAPE PLAN W A5 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 AMD, #1 APPLICANT: ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CA, LLC REQUEST: CONSIDERATION TO ALLOW FOR THE COLLOCATION OF SIX PANEL ANTENNAS ON AN EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATION MONOPALM TOWER. LOCATION: 54-001 MADISON STREET; RIVERSIDE COUNTY FIRE STATION #70 (ATTACHMENT 1) PROPERTY OWNER: CITY OF LA QUINTA GENERAL PLAN: MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES (MC) ZONING: MAJOR COMMUNITY FACILITIES (MC) ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: THE LA QUINTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS DETERMINED THAT THIS PROPOSAL IS CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15332 (CLASS 32) OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA), IN THAT THIS IS AN IN -FILL PROJECT SURROUNDED BY URBAN SERVICES AND EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS SURROUNDING LAND USES: NORTH: RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY/GOLF COURSE (RL/GC) (THE HIDEAWAY) SOUTH: RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY/GOLF COURSE (RL/GC) (PGA WEST) EAST: RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY (RL) (GRIFFIN RANCH) WEST: RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY/GOLF COURSE (RL/GC) (PGA WEST) BACKGROUND: The project site, located at the southwest corner of Madison Street and Avenue 54 is improved as the Riverside County Fire Department (RCFD) facility, Station 70 (Attachment 1). The station was constructed in 1986 and the property owner is the City of La Quinta. In 2004, Nextel Communications received Conditional Use Permit approval to establish a sixty (60) foot high monopalm antenna and associated unmanned accessory structures on the site (Attachment 2). REQUEST: Royal Street Communications is requesting to install and co -locate six (6) panel antennas, and associated unmanned equipment on the existing monopalm telecommunication tower (Attachment 3). Each panel antenna is approximately five (5) feet in length, ten (10) inches in width and would be painted to match the existing monopalm towers' pole. The six (6) panel antennas would be attached to the tower at a height of fifty (50) feet. The proposed antennas and equipment will increase service options in and around this portion of the City (Attachment 4). In addition to the collocation of antennas on the existing tower, the applicant has proposed to place unmanned equipment cabinets within a wall enclosure adjacent to two ground lease areas. Currently, there is one existing ground lease area which serves the existing tower for Sprint/Nextel. A second ground lease area was recently approved for Verizon Wireless (CUP 08-118), but yet to be constructed. The ground lease area proposed for this application is approximately 227 square feet and would be constructed adjacent to the proposed Verizon Wireless ground lease area (Attachment 5). The proposed equipment cabinets are completely screened from view by the construction of a six foot high CMU wall enclosure; however, a small GPS antenna unit will project slightly above the wall enclosure (Attachment 3, pg. A-2, A-3). ANALYSIS: Chapters 9.170 of the Zoning Code, regulates the use of Communication Towers and Equipment. This section encourages the collocation of antennas on an existing tower as a means of limiting the number of new towers within the City. The applicant has met the intent of this code section and has complied with the requirements set forth in this section. The expansion of the existing ground lease will not interfere with existing vehicle circulation patterns at the site. The ground lease will be screened and protected by the construction of six (6) foot high wall. The proposed wall enclosure will be stucco and painted to match the existing wall enclosure on site. Although Verizon 2 Wireless has yet to complete their wall enclosure, it is anticipated that the coordination of the construction for the enclosures will be handled between the two parties. The proposed antenna collocation will be visible below the existing screening material used on the monopalm tower - the monopalm palm fronds. Because the antennas will be attached securely below the existing screening material, Staff recommends that further screening of the antennas be established. Several screening options are possible, including the use of additional palm fronds, a palm skirt, painting of the antennas and/or a palm bulb. Since several screening options exist, and the aesthetic impact of each option will be different, Staff has recommended a condition that the screening of the antennas meet the satisfaction of the Planning Director, and to allow staff and the applicant to explore adequate screening material. The proposed height for the attachment of the antennas will not cause significant radio frequency (RF) interference with existing and approved telecommunication services. During the Public Hearing for Conditional Use Permit 2008-118, the Verizon Wireless representative stated that a five (5) foot separation of antennas is necessary to avoid RF interference. The existing Nextel antennas are located at a height of sixty (60) feet, while Verizon Wireless received approval for a height of fifty-five (55) feet. The proposed collocation of antennas for Royal Street Communication is at a height of fifty (50) feet, maintaining a five foot separation for all antennas at the site. A lease agreement between Royal Street Communications and the City is needed in order for the applicant to operate at the proposed location. Royal Street Communications will not be permitted to operate at the site until an executed lease agreement is provided to the Planning Department. Public Notice This request was published in the Desert Sun newspaper on August 28, 2009, and mailed to all affected property owners within 500 feet of site as required by Section 9.200.110 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. Public Agency Review A copy of this request has been sent to all applicable public agencies and City Departments on June 24, 2009. All written comments received are on file with the Planning Department. Applicable comments received have been included in the recommended Conditions of Approval. 3 STATEMENT OF MANDATORY FINDINGS: Findings to approve this request per Section 9.210.020.F of the City of La Quinta Zoning Code can be made and are contained in the attached Resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2009- , approving Conditional Use Permit 2009-085 Amd. #1, for the collocation of six (6) panel antennas on an existing monopalm telecommunication tower for Royal Street Communications, subject to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval. Prepared by: ERIC CEJA4Asss Planner Attachments: 1. Location 2. Original Approval (Photos) 3. Improvement Plans 4. Coverage Map 5. Lease Area by User 4 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE COLLOCATION OF SIX PANEL ANTENNAS ON AN EXISTING TELECOMMUNICATIONS MONOPALM TOWER AND UNMANNED EQUIPMENT BUILDING AT FIRE STATION #70, SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS CASE NO.: CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085, AMENDMENT #1 APPLICANT: ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CA, LLC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 8" day of September, 2009, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing to consider a request by Royal Street Communications to allow the collocation of six (6) panel antennas on an existing telecommunications monopalm tower at Riverside County Fire Station #70, located at 54-001 Madison Street, in the MC (Major Community Facilities) district, more particularly described as: APN: 775-100-004 WHEREAS, on the 241" day of June, 2009, the Planning Department mailed case file material to all affected agencies for their review and comment, with all written comments received on file with the Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the Planning Department published the public hearing notice in the Desert Sun newspaper on the 281" day of August, 2009, for the 8" day of September, 2009, Planning Commission meeting as prescribed by Section 9.200.110 (Public Notice Procedure) of the Zoning Code, and by mailing a copy of said public hearing notice to all property owners and residents within 500 feet of the site; and WHEREAS, the collocation of six panel antennas on an existing telecommunication monopalm tower will minimize adverse visual effects of the antennas and equipment on the surrounding area; and WHEREAS, the communication facility will improve telecommunication service options within the City of La Quinta; and WHEREAS, at said Public Hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did make the following mandatory findings 5 Planning Commission Resolution 2009- Conditional Use Permit 2009-085, Amd. #1 Royal Street Communications September 8, 2009 pursuant to Section 9.210.020 of the Zoning Code to justify approval of said Conditional Use Permit: Consistency with the General Plan: The design and improvements of the proposed collocation on an existing monopalm tower are consistent with La Quinta General Plan (Chapter 7) that requires utilities and communication facilities to blend in with the surrounding improvements and insures residents have access to reliable services such as wireless telephones. The collocation of communication antennas will result in less telecommunication towers being built in the City. Collocation of antennas at this site will have a negligible impact on the surrounding public thoroughfares and land uses. 2. Consistency with the Zoning Code: The proposed antenna collocation and telecommunication equipment are consistent with current standards of the Zoning Code (Chapter 9.90 and 9.170) in that the potential adverse visual effects have been mitigated. 3. Compliance with CEQA: The antenna collocation and telecommunication equipment have been determined to be exempt from CEQA, under Guidelines Section 15332 (Infill Development), in that the site is fully developed as a Fire Station that is surrounded by urban infrastructure improvements (e.g., water, sanitation, etc.)• 4. Compatibility with Surrounding Uses: The proposed improvements are located on an existing telecommunication tower and are adequately screened from view through the design and location of the tower. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, as follows: 1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the Planning Commission for this Conditional Use Permit; 2. That it does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit 2009-085, Amendment #1 for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8t' day of September, 2009, by the following vote, to wit: 2 Planning Commission Resolution 2009- Conditional Use Permit 2009-085, Amd. #1 Royal Street Communications September 8, 2009 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ED ALDERSON, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: LES JOHNSON Planning Director City of La Quinta, California 7 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 GENERAL 1. The applicant agrees to defend, indemnify, and hold harmless the City of La Quinta ("City"), its agents, officers and employees from any claim, action or proceeding to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Site Development Permit. The City shall have sole discretion in selecting its defense council. The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and shall cooperate fully in the defense. 2. This permit shall expire on September 8, 2011, unless building plans have been approved by for construction by the Building and Safety Department, or unless a one-year time extension is applied for and granted by the Planning Commission pursuant to Section 9.200.080 of the Zoning Code. 3. The Conditional Use Permit shall comply with the requirements and standards of Government Code §§66410 through 66499.58 (the "Subdivision Map Act"), and Chapter 13 of the La Quinta Municipal Code ("LQMC"). The City of La Quinta Municipal Code can be accessed on the City' Web Site at www.la-guinta.org. 4. Prior to the issuance of a grading, construction or building permit, the applicant shall obtain applicable permits and/or clearances from the following agencies, if applicable or required: • Riverside County Fire Marshall • Planning Department • Public Works Department (Grading Permit, Green Sheet (Public Works Clearance) for Building Permits, Improvement Permit) • Riverside County Environmental Health Department • Coachella Valley Unified School District (CVUSD) • Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD) • Imperial Irrigation District (IID) • Sunline Transit Agency L PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 • California Water Quality Control Board (CWQCB) • South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley • Public Utilities Commission (PUC) • Federal Communication Commission (FCC) • Federal Aviation Agency (FAA) The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits or clearances from the above listed agencies and departments. If the requirements include approval of improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of said approvals prior to obtaining City approval. IMPROVEMENT PLANS As used throughout these Conditions of Approval, professional titles such as "engineer," "surveyor," and "architect," refer to persons currently certified or licensed to practice their respective professions in the State of California. 5. Improvement plans shall be prepared by or under the direct supervision of qualified engineers and/or architects, as appropriate, and shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.040 (Improvement Plans)• 6. The following improvement plans shall be prepared and submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department. A separate set of plans for each line item specified below shall be prepared. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the City Engineer in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note, the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. A. On -Site Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 20' Horizontal The following plans shall be submitted to the Building and Safety Department for review and approval. The plans shall utilize the minimum scale specified, unless otherwise authorized by the Building and Safety Director in writing. Plans may be prepared at a larger scale if additional detail or plan clarity is desired. Note: the applicant may be required to prepare other improvement E PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other agencies and utility purveyors. B. On -Site Non -Residential/ Commercial Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 20' Horizontal Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed above shall be prepared in formats approved by the City Engineer prior to commencing plan preparation. The applicant shall prepare an accessibility assessment on a marked up print of the building floor plan identifying every building egress and notes the 2007 California Building Code accessibility requirements associated with each door. The assessment must comply with submittal requirements of the Building & Safety Department. A copy of the reviewed assessment shall be submitted to the Engineering Department in conjunction with the improvement plans when it is submitted for plan checking. In addition to the normal set of improvement plans, a "On -Site Precise Grading" plan is required to be submitted for approval by the Building Official, Planning Director and the City Engineer. "On -Site Precise Grading" plans shall normally include all on -site surface improvements including but not necessarily limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters, building floor elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA requirements. 7. Upon completion of construction, and prior to record drawing submittal of the improvements by the City, the applicant shall furnish the City with reproducible record drawings of all improvement plans which were approved by the City. Each sheet shall be clearly marked "Record Drawing" and shall be stamped and signed by the engineer or surveyor certifying to the accuracy and completeness of the drawings. The applicant shall have all approved mylars previously submitted to the City, revised to reflect the as -built conditions. The applicant shall employ or retain the Engineer Of Record during the construction phase of the project so that the EOR. can make site visits in support of preparing Record Drawings. However, if subsequent approved revisions have been approved by the City Engineer and reflect said 10 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 "As -Built" conditions, the Engineer Of Record may submit a letter attesting to said fact to the City Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal. PRECISE GRADING 8. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050 (Grading Improvements). 9. Prior to occupancy of the project site for any construction, or other purposes, the applicant shall obtain a grading permit approved by the City Engineer. 10. To obtain an approved grading permit, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of all of the following: A. A grading plan prepared by a qualified engineer, B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by a qualified engineer, All grading shall conform to the recommendations contained in the Preliminary Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by a soils engineer, or by an engineering geologist. 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. 11. The applicant shall maintain all open graded, undeveloped land in order to prevent wind and/or water erosion of such land. All open graded, undeveloped land shall either be planted with interim landscaping, or stabilized with such other erosion control measures, as were approved in the Fugitive Dust Control Plan. 12. Grading within the perimeter setback and parkway areas shall have undulating terrain and shall conform with the requirements of LQMC Section 9.60.240(F) except as otherwise modified by this condition requirement. The maximum slope shall not exceed 3:1 anywhere in the landscape setback area, except for the backslope (i.e. the slope at the back of the landscape lot) 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 which shall not exceed 2:1 if fully planted with ground cover. The maximum slope in the first six (6) feet adjacent to the curb shall not exceed 4:1 when the nearest edge of sidewalk is within six feet (6') of the curb, otherwise the maximum slope within the right of way shall not exceed 3:1 . All unpaved parkway areas adjacent to the curb shall be depressed one and one-half inches (1 .5") in the first eighteen inches (18") behind the curb. 13. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the tentative map, unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these Conditions of Approval. 14. ' Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot higher from the building pads in adjacent developments. 15. Prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building lot, the applicant shall provide a lot pad certification stamped and signed by a qualified engineer or surveyor with applicable compaction tests and over excavation documentation. Each pad certification shall list the pad elevation as shown on the approved grading plan, the actual pad elevation and the difference between the two, if any. Such pad certification shall also list the relative compaction of the pad soil. The data shall be organized by lot number, and listed cumulatively if submitted at different times. DRAINAGE 16. Stormwater handling shall conform with the approved hydrology and drainage report for Fire Station # 70. Nuisance water shall be disposed of in an approved manner. PROPERTY RIGHTS 17. Prior to issuance of any permit(s), the applicant shall acquire or confer easements and other property rights necessary for the construction or proper functioning of the proposed installation. The applicant shall allow City staff or assigned agent in perpetuity and agreement to the method to remove graffiti and to paint over to best match existing. Pursuant to the 12 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 aforementioned, the applicant shall submit and execute an "AUTHORIZATION TO REMOVE GRAFFITI FROM PRIVATE PROPERTY" form located at the Public Works Department Counter prior to Certificate of Occupancy. 18. Pursuant to the aforementioned condition, conferred rights shall include approvals from the City of La Quinta over easements and other property rights necessary for construction and proper functioning of the proposed development not limited to access rights over the existing parking lot facilities and entry access drives. Additionally, the applicant shall enter into agreements with all users within the property for reciprocal access rights and/or as specified in the lease agreement. UTILITIES 19. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110 (Utilities). 20. The applicant shall obtain the approval of the City Engineer for the location of all utility lines within any right-of-way, and all above -ground utility structures including, but not limited to, traffic signal cabinets, electric vaults, water valves, and telephone stands, to ensure optimum placement for practical and aesthetic purposes. 21. Underground utilities shall be installed prior to overlaying hardscape. For installation of utilities in existing improved streets, the applicant shall comply with trench restoration requirements as required by the City Engineer. The applicant shall provide certified reports of all utility trench compaction for approval by the City Engineer. Additionally, grease traps and the maintenance thereof shall be located so as to not conflict with access aisles/entrances. PARKING/ACCESS POINTS 22. General access points and turning movements of traffic to the site are limited those approved for the existing access drive from Madison Street and these conditions of approval. 13 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 23. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks. 24. Improvements shall be designed and constructed in accordance with City adopted standards, supplemental drawings and specifications, or as approved by the City Engineer. Improvement plans for streets, access gates and parking areas shall be stamped and signed by qualified engineers. MAINTENANCE 25. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160 (Maintenance). 26. The applicant shall make provisions for continuous, perpetual maintenance of all on -site improvements. FEE AND DEPOSITS 27. The applicant shall pay the City's established fees for plan checking and construction inspection. Fee amounts shall be those in effect when the applicant makes application for plan checking and permits. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION 28. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans). 29. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins, common lots and park areas. 30. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians, retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape architect. 31. The applicant shall submit the landscape plans for approval by the Planning Department. When plan checking has been completed by the Planning Department, the applicant shall obtain the signatures of CVWD and the Riverside County Agricultural Commissioner, prior to submittal for signature 14 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 by the Planning Director. However, landscape plans for landscaped medians on public streets shall be approved by both the Planning Director and the City Engineer. Final landscape plans for on -site planting shall be reviewed by the Architectural and Landscaping Review Committee (ALRC) and approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of first building permit. Final plans shall include all landscaping associated with this project. NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by both the Planning Director and/or the City Engineer. 32. Landscape areas shall have permanent irrigation improvements meeting the requirements of the Planning Director. Use of lawn areas shall be minimized with no lawn, or spray irrigation, being placed within 24 inches of curbs along public streets. PLANNING 33, Improvements for the ground -lease shall be limited to equipment cabinets and equipment associated with the collocation of the antennas on the existing tower. All proposed equipment, except for the GPS antenna, shall not be visible above the surrounding wall. 34. The wall construction shall be stucco and painted to match existing wall improvement at the site. Additional landscaping shall be installed around the wall improvements. 35. The applicant shall provide and make improvements for a permanent access - way from the existing sidewalk to the entrance to the ground -lease area. 36. The coax cable shall be contained within the monopalm tower unit, and shall not be placed on the surface of the pole. The coax cable shall not be visible from surrounding public views. 37. The panel antennas shall not exceed a height of five (5) feet and shall be mounted securely to the monopalm tower. All antennas and supporting 15 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 2009-085 A.1 ROYAL STREET COMMUNICATIONS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 equipment mounted to the tower shall be painted to match the existing monopalm tower. 38. The mid -point of the antennae shall not exceed fifty (50) feet, measured from finished floor. 39. The applicant shall install additional screening material to the monopalm tower to screen the additional antennas. The screening material shall be approved by the Planning Director prior to issuance of a building permit. A visual inspection by the Planning Department shall be required before final inspection is performed by the Building and Safety Department. 40. The applicant shall negotiate in good faith for shared use by third parties; an owner generally will negotiate in the order in which requests for information are received, except an owner generally will negotiate with a party who has received an FCC license or permit before doing so with other parties. 41. Royal Street Communications shall secure a lease agreement with the property owner prior to any improvements. Once the lease agreement is secured a copy shall be submitted to the Planning Department for placement in the file. 42. Royal Street Communications shall have a continuing obligation to respond to and resolve any and all complaints associated with any potential interference with frequencies related to residential and/or life safety communications and operations. Response shall be within 48 hours of receipt of notice of any such complaints. 43. The applicant shall comply with all Conditions of Approval for Conditional Use Permit 2004-085. The conditions of approval, as listed above, shall not supersede or impede existing Conditions of Approval for the existing tower and wall enclosure. 16 � a �. .L' �' •�'�* "S* A� �l 3 � ✓✓TILL. . �I ..Y;. ti -,� ,. �� , �� s � R. ATTACHMENT #3 x jig L4 } li§b , a Q 4 F' Nq,,? ii J; !' j W Q FZ- v b r r t €='.. a d� �s �• dr.: v €§ � � �. 0 N Q Y 131 ;I`I i i. Ios" Y(ti r CDC 21 22 8 N O 04 2 zd n 19 s" rl 2EIld III? wl N _I{ � i shy y�t i 1 o Et ,ytY O S {S 3 � }5' w w C ,b f F i o ALL; i C �3 a ,3Ea=.s . i El, 1, h§ 23 en. lb a -- ATTACHMENT #5 G� 14 MADISON ST. V 0 a) g 0 p / w a CL a / 0 S2 i. L�'o Ue(D �J cv� DOJC;e00"D� 25 RXI BI # A PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 CASE NO.: STREET NAME CHANGE 2009-019 APPLICANT: EAST OF MADISON, LLC REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTION OF A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION TO CHANGE A STREET NAME FROM FREMONT WAY TO HAPPY PLACE LANE LOCATION: ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION: BACKGROUND NORTH OF BAFFIN AVENUE, WEST OF PIKE PLACE; WITHIN THE MADISON CLUB THIS STREET NAME CHANGE REQUEST HAS BEEN DETERMINED TO BE EXEMPT FROM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT REQUIREMENTS UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15061 (b) (3). THERE IS NO POSSIBILITY THAT THIS PROPOSAL WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT; THEREFORE, IT IS NOT SUBJECT TO CEQA REVIEW. The Madison Club, bounded by Avenue 52 and Avenue 53 on the north, Avenue 54 on the south, Madison Street on the west, and Monroe Street on the east, received Specific Plan approval on February 1, 2005 (SP 99-035 Amendment 1), and Tentative Tract Map approval on August 2, 2005 (TTM 33076) (Attachment 1). The project area encompasses approximately 472 acres, and consists of over 190 lots for custom single-family detached homes, detached villas, and an 18-hole golf course. PROPOSAL The applicant is proposing to change the name of a street within the Madison Club community from Fremont Way to Happy Place Lane (Attachment 2). The street is located north of Baffin Avenue and west of Pike Place (Attachment 3). Sixty percent (6 out of 10) of the property owners abutting the street have signed the applicant's petition (Attachment 4). Applicable Code Provisions La Quinta Municipal Code Chapter 14.08 permits an individual to initiate a street name change (Attachment 5). The Planning Commission must adopt a resolution of intention, setting a public hearing date to review the request no less than 30 days from the date of the adoption of the resolution for a public hearing. Following the Planning Commission's public hearing, a recommendation is then forwarded to the City Council for final action. The resolution of intention will be published in The Desert Sun and posted along the subject street. RECOMMENDATION Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2009 - , setting October 13, 2009 as the public hearing datE/to consider Street Name Change 2009-019. by: Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Madison Club Vicinity Map 2. Letter of Request from Applicant 3. Fremont Way/Happy Place Lane Location Map 4. Happy Place Lane Street Name Change Petition 5. LQMC Chapter 14.08 FA PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2009- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENT TO HOLD A PUBLIC HEARING ON OCTOBER 13, 2009, TO CONSIDER A STREET NAME CHANGE FROM FREMONT WAY TO HAPPY PLACE LANE CASE NO.: STREET NAME CHANGE 2009-019 EAST OF MADISON, LLC WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 8`" day of September, 2009, consider a request of East of Madison, LLC, to set a date for a public hearing to review a street name change from Fremont Way to Happy Place Lane, located north of Baffin Avenue and west of Pike Place, more particularly described as: Portion of Tract 33076 WHEREAS, at the Planning Commission meeting, upon hearing and considering all available information, said Planning Commission did make the following findings to justify their intent to hold a public hearing regarding said street name change per Chapter 14.08.050 of the La Quinta Municipal Code: 1. Determination of Sufficiency The proposed street name change is sufficient in that at least 60% of the affected property owners have agreed with the change, as required by Section 14.08.020 of the La Quinta Municipal Code. 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 approve the above -described resolution of intention to hold a public hearing regarding the proposed street name change on October 13, 2009, at 7:00 p.m. in the La Quinta City Hall Council Chambers, located at 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, California. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission held on this 8`" day of September, 2009, by the following vote to wit: 3 AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ED ALDERSON, Chairman City of La Quinta, California ATTEST: LES JOHNSON, Planning Director City of La Quinta, California 1 ATTACHMENT 2 - THE - MADISON CLUB February12, 2009 City of La Quinta Community Development Department 78-495 Calle Tampico — PO Box 1504 La Quinta, CA 92253 RE: Application for Street Name Change To Whom It May Concern: At the request of several residents at The Madison Club, The Madison Club is applying to change the name of Fremont Way to Happy Place Lane. The community has no issue with the name change and would like the City of La Quinta to consider this request. As required by Chapter 14.08 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, please find attached a signed: petition of the property owners abutting Fremont Way. We have also included a Map ;hc,wing the location of each property owner. Sincerely, Scott P. Birdwell Business Manager East ofMadison, LLC 6 DEVELOPMENT OFFICE MAILING Anns:Ess: PO Box 1482, LA QoINTA, CA 92247 Exhibit B: Detailed Flan ATTACHMENT 4 The Madison Club // Street Name Change Petition PURPOSE: At the request of several members of The Madison Club, we are proposing to change the name of Fremont Way, located at the Southeast quadrant of the Property to Happy Place Lane. Per Chapter 14.08 of the La Quinta Municipal Code, such a change requires approval by 60% of the homeowners abutting this street. Please sign the petition below if you support the name change. PROPERTY OWNERS: Lot# Property Owner Signature t 88-B • East of Madison, LLC 89/90-B Irving Azoff 91-B Glenn Frey 92-B Glenn Frey 93-B Jerry Yang 94-B Brent Rody 95-B John Elmore 96-B Mike Michalski 97-B Jerry Williams 98-B Fred Couples 0 02/26iZ009 16:00 NO.609 D01I Feb 85-'2009,4:56PM VRh 40' 39351U P. 92i2 . 4i ! 1?:45 NU.693 DB2 The Madieon Club it Street Name Change petition PURPOSE: At the request of sevaret members of The Madison Club, we are proposing to change the name of Fremont Way,locaied at the Southeast quadrant of the Properiyto Happy Mee Lane, Per Chapter 14.09 of the La Quints Minsicipal Code, such a change require& approval by 60% of the horneownel3 &butting this swMt. Please sign the petition below if you support the flame change. PROPERTY OWNERS: Lot,M propetw Owner ftnaltoe -- -- Bea— ER-110 ear90.8 luring AzoN ,i 41.8 Glenn Frey 02.8 Gbrn Frey 9941 Jerry vane 24-8 Arent Rudy S" John Elmore 96-8 MikeMptaleW �. 97.8 JerrywilUame - - Mo Fred Couples 6 Chapter 14.08 STREET NAME CHANGES ATTACHMENT 5 La Quinta Municipal Code Up Previous Next Main Collapse Search Print No Frames Title 14 STREETS AND SIDEWALKS Chapter 14.08 STREET NAME CHANGES 14.08.010 Petition for initiation of street name change. Any person may initiate a street name change for any reason consistent with law, by complying with the provisions of this chapter. (Ord. 10 § 1 (part), 1982) 14 08.020 Initiation of, petition. A proposed change of street name may be initiated by filing with the planning commission an application in the form prescribed by the city manager and signed by the owners of at least sixty percent of the lineal frontage abutting the street to be affected. (Ord. 10 § 1 (part), 1982) 14 08 030 Application fee The application shall be accompanied by a fee in an amount established by resolution of the city council, in order to defray the costs of publishing, posting and processing, as hereinafter prescribed. (Ord. 10 § l (part), 1982) 14 08.040 Manager's examination. The city manager shall examine the application and determine the sufficiency of same as to the percentage requirement of Section 14.08.020. (Ord. 10 § 1 (part), 1982) 14.08.050 Adoption of resolution of intention. Upon determination of the sufficiency of the petition, the commission shall adopt a resolution of intention to change name and set a date for public hearing not less than thirty days from the date of adoption of the resolution. (Ord. 10 § 1 (part), 1982) 14.08.060 Publication. The city manager shall provide for at least one publication of the resolution of intention in a newspaper of general circulation within the city at least fifteen days prior to the hearing date. (Ord. 10 § 1 (part), 1982) 14.08.070 The city manager shall provide for posting copies of the resolution of intention in at least three public places along the street proposed to be affected. The posting shall be completed at least ten days prior to the hearing date. (Ord. 10 § 1 (part), 1982) 14.08.080 Commission hearing. At the time set for hearing, or at any time to which the hearing may be continued, the commission shall hear 10 http://gcode.us/codes/laquinta/view.php?topic=l4-14_08&showAll=1&frames=on 9/3/2009 Chapter 14.08 STREET NAME CHANGES Page 2 of 2 and consider proposals to adjust, alter or change the name(s) of the street(s) mentioned in the resolution, and objections to the proposals. (Ord. 10 § 1 (part), 1982) 14.08.090 Commission recommendation. At or after the conclusion of the hearing, the commission may make any recommendation to the city council which the commission deems appropriate. In its deliberations the commission shall consider any applicable specific plans in effect. (Ord. 10 § 1 (part), 1982) 14.08.100 Council action. The city council may, pursuant to California Government Code Section 34091.1, take such action as it deems appropriate upon the recommendation of the commission, and failure to take action within sixty days after submission of the commission's recommendation shall be deemed denial of the application. (Ord. 10 § I (part), 1982) 14.08.110 Commission recommendation without petition and hearing. Notwithstanding any other parts of this code, the commission may, for any reason it deems in the public interest and necessity, recommend to the city council that a street name be changed. The recommendation may be made without complying with the requirements of Sections 14.08.020 through 14.08.080. The recommendation shall be in the form of a resolution of the commission directed to the city council. Thereafter the city council shall take such action as it deems appropriate. (Ord. 10 § I (part), 1982) 11 http://gcode.us/codes/laquinta/view.php?topic=l4-14_08&showAll=1&frames=on 9/3/2009 PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: SEPTEMBER 8, 2009 PROPERTY OWNER: MR. & MRS. DOUG BOGREN REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF AN ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN PROPOSED FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED IN THE COVE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT, SUBJECT TO THE LA QUINTA COVE DESIGN STANDARDS LOCATION: 51-705 AVENIDA MADERO WITHIN THE LA QUINTA COVE BACKGROUND AND PROPOSAL: The Bogren Residence, located on Avenida Madero (Attachment 1) was constructed in 1979 and the property owner is currently proposing a significant addition and remodel to the existing house. The changes will include expanding the living area from 1,320 to 2,681 square feet (Attachment 1 Sheet 1), changing the exterior design of the house by upgrading the roof material to a 'dark green' ceramic tile and proposing a ridge to the hip of the roof and a curved eave (Attachment 1 Sheet 2). ANALYSIS: The Residential Cove District was subdivided decades before the City incorporated in 1982 and it is one of the few areas which the design of the residences do not have to adhere to the architectural design of an approved Site Development Permit. However, compliance with the guidelines in the "Architectural Standards for Single Family Houses in the Cove Residential District" is required. The standards were adopted to give property owners and builders direction on general items such as the minimum square footage, lot coverage, setbacks, and height; but also to give direction on the street facing fagade, window and roof design (Attachment 3) to avoid a monotonous appearance. Based on the building design standards set forth in the manual any significant variation from the standards requires Planning Commission approval (Attachment 4). The standards also call out that exterior building colors are subject to approval (Attachment 5). The property owner's proposal includes an Asian inspired architectural design. Staff review of the proposed architectural design and building colors has concluded that the proposed design significantly varies, with regards to the roof ridge and hip design, chimney designs and roof color, in comparison to guidelines and other single family residences in the Cove Residential District therefore, necessitating Planning Commission Review and Approval. CONCLUSION: In view of the fact that the guidelines allow a variation of the from the building guidelines with the approval of the Planning Commission, a Minute Motion will be necessary in rendering a decision on this proposal. * WA0,01 Y%V Franco, Assistant Planner Attachments: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Plan Set (Floor Plan, Elevations, & Photographs) 3. Building Design — Roof Design Basic Types from Architectural Styles from the "Manual on Architectural Standards for Single Family Houses in the Cove Residential District' 4. Building Design Standards — Architectural Styles from the "Manual on Architectural Standards for Single Family Houses in the Cove Residential District' 5. Building Design Standards - Exterior design guidelines from the "Manual on Architectural Standards for Single Family Houses in the Cove Residential District' 2 ATTACHMENT # 1 .I I CALLE DURANGO 3 / / uOld m, \ j \ \/�u9jr5oo(5no, siNq* )RU01s _, tee! e: w w_. 6 § m \ \ * §66 §i ~. ± Cl) Ja) ° ` �},8 ® \\ ,-) \ ± / \/ {\}ƒ} \ ! ) ) \ �. esue-m wroma000w oewo.+vso�is o N EojjE III SDION € I a .`P! ua bog 6no4 Siw)R •iw SU04Dn613 (yr pasodoicl I Wd NODUa 3WOHV uo4onai3 lUOJ3 uollona131U6@J U04DA913 coed uo4onal3 Aal 5 s 0 ."s a U F a3 L UZw p 99 pN. iUVI y f,,. m uJ, OysUa'ii (SUUaa N �.;, ;c TY.S. ATTACHMENT #3 Building Design Opportunities: Roof Design (Basic Types) As the major architectural feature, the type and design of the roof has the greatest influence on the overall architecture of the house. Gable Shed Flat with Parapet 16 7 ATTACHMENT # 4 Buildfng Design Standards: The following Architectural Styles 11 E� ATTACHMENT# 5 Building Design Standards: Maximum 24 inch Eave into the Setback Area Maximum Height: Exterior Materials: Exterior 17 Feet in the RC District Cement plaster and may be accented with stone, brick, wood, or other similar materials. Roof Design: Roof eaves cannot exceed 24 inches from the building wall. Eaves may be larger where necessary to provide adequate protection over the front door opening. Building Colors: Exterior siding, roof, and trim colors are subject to approval. Mechanical Equipment: Heating and cooling equipment can not be located on a sloping roof or within the required sideyard setbacks. 10 i7