2010 11 23 PCo City of La Quinta
Planning Commission Agendas are now
s available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-guinta.org
ti
OFT
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
NOVEMBER 23, 2010
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT
REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2010-023
Beginning Minute Motion 2010-007
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
II. PUBLIC COMMENT
This is the time set aside for public comment on any matter not scheduled for
public hearing. Please complete a "Request to Speak" form and limit your
comments to three minutes.
III. CONFIRMATION OF AGENDA
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR
Approval of the Minutes of the Regular Meeting of November 9, 2010.
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.
There are no Public Hearing Items for this meeting.
VI. BUSINESS ITEM:
A. Item .................. GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
Applicant........... City of La Quinta
Location............ City-wide
Request ............. Consideration Of Proposed Land Use Map, Land Use
Designation Consolidation, and General Plan Goals.
Action ................. Staff Recommendation for Adoption of Resolution
Recommending Approval - Resolution 2010-
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Report on City Council meeting of November 16, 2010 by Chairman
Alderson.
B. Commissioner Barrows is scheduled to attend the December 7, 2010,
City Council meeting.
IX. DIRECTOR ITEMS:
X. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be
held on December 14, 2010, 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,
November 23, 2010 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 November 18, 2010.
DATED: November 18, 2010
i
MONIKA BADE A, Secretary for
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
November 9, 2010
7:02 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to
order at 7:02 p.m. by Chairman Alderson.
PRESENT: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Weber, Wilkinson, and
Chairman Alderson.;
ABSENT: None
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Manager David Sawyer, City Attorney
Kathy Jenson, Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco,
and Executive Secretary Carolyn Walker.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
There being no further comments, or suggestions, it was moved by
Commissioners Quill/Wilkinson to approve the minutes of October 12, 2010
as submitted. Unanimously approved.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Site Development Permit 2010-916; a request by Michael Andersen
for consideration of a Site Development Permit for the construction of
a 5,309 square foot private fitness center within the Tradition Golf
Club on 5.69 acres located at the north end of the existing golf club
parking lot between Entry Drive and Citation Court along Peerless
Place.
Assistant Planner Yvonne Franco presented the staff report, a copy of
which is on file in the Planning Department.
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2010
Chairman Alderson asked if there were any questions of staff.
Chairman Alderson had a concern about the parking and asked if the
applicant had experienced any history of parking problems.
Planning Manager Sawyer noted that staff conducted a parking study
and found the parking area was under-utilized and that was the basis
for the recommendation.
General discussion followed regarding the definition of a golf cart and
the use of NEV's (neighborhood electric vehicles). `
Commissioner Barrows expressed her 'concern over the choice of
(Pennisetum Setaceum 'Cupreum') and the invasive qualities of
fountain grass, in general. She suggested another type of grass be
used, such as Muhlenbergia rigens (a local deer grass) to replace the
Pennisetum.
Discussion followed regarding the invasiveness of fountain grass and
the submittal of future landscape plans.
There being no further questions of the staff, Chairman Alderson
asked if the applicant would like to speak.
Mr. John W. Hopkins, from Traditions Golf Club, 52-620 Del Gato
Drive, La Quinta CA, introduced himself and offered to answer any
questions the Commissioners` might have.
Commissioner Weber commented on the Architecture and Landscaping
Review Committee's (ALRC) concerns about the varieties of palm
trees and asked if the applicant's intent was to match the existing
palm trees.
Mr. Hopkins said that was correct. He said they had directed their
landscape architect to save as many of the existing trees as possible
and any new trees would have to match the remaining trees as closely
as possible.
Commissioner Weber noted the ALRC's comments on the proposed
plant list being excessive.
-2-
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2010
Mr. Hopkins explained he had a very difficult time understanding those
comments and explained why this particular plant palette was chosen.
He also said if there was some specific reason, such as the
invasiveness of a type of grass, they would be willing to take a look at
changing it. However, it did not seem logical to make changes
because one Committee Member thought there were too many plant
materials.
Commissioner Barrows expressed her concerns about water
conservation and the City's efforts to reduce turf. She noted this site
had more turf than seemed necessary.
Discussion followed regarding ;the amount and placement of: turf and
areas of possible reduction.
There being no further questions of staff, or comments from the
applicant, Chairman Alderson asked if there was any public comment.
There being no public comment, Chairman Alderson opened the matter
for Commission discussion and closd°the,public hearing.
Positive comments followed on the aesthetics of the project.
After a tentative motion was made, Commissioner Barrows suggested
the Commission encourage the applicant, to the extent possible, to
reduce the amount of turf and take into account the issue of the
invasive plant material.
General discussion followed regarding possible wording of the motion
with regards to less -invasive plant materials.
Chairman Alderson re -opened the public comment portion of the
meeting to allow response to the comments.
Mr. Hopkins said he would need some evidence that the Pennisetum
was invasive.
Mr. Art Gardner, Essi Engineering, 78-080 Calle Amigo, Suite 102, La
Quinta CA — introduced himself (acting on behalf of the client) and
commented on the amount of turf. He said the entire area, except for
-3-
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2010
the portion that was covered by asphalt, was currently turf. The
project would include an overall 45-50% reduction of turf.
Commissioner Barrows commented that the area is currently a turfed,
open space.
Mr. Gardner responded it currently contains trees with a planter area,
at the corner, and the remainder in grass. This project would create
an overall reduction with more planter area and controlled irrigation
than at present.
Commissioner Quill commented on his concerns about turf up against
sidewalks and curbs and the possibility of overspray. He suggested it
would be beneficial if the applicant could do something to keep the
sprinklers 18 inches off the curb; thereby eliminating water running
into the parking lot, and reduce a small quantity of turf.
General discussion followed regarding the. size of the decomposed
granite border, next to the curb, which staff stated was 24-inches.
Chairman Alderson asked the applicant about the amount of water
being used by the fountain at the front entry and the one at the front
corner. Staff responded the fountain at the back end of the building
was a decorative (waterless) feature.
There being no further public' `comment, Chairman Alderson opened
the matter for Commission discussion and closed the public hearing.
There being no further questions or discussion, it was moved and
seconded by Commissioners Quill/Wilkinson to adopt Resolution 2010-
022 recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2010-916 as
submitted, with the recommendation that the applicant be encouraged
to use a less -invasive species of plant material such as Muhlenbergia
rigens, instead of the Pennisetum Setaceum listed.
AYES: Commissioners Quill, Weber, Wilkinson, and Chairman
Alderson. NOES: Commissioner Barrows. ABSENT: None.
ABSTAIN: None.
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None
-4-
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2010
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None.
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Report of the City Council Meeting of October 19, 2010 presented by
Chairman Alderson.
B. Report of the City Council Meeting of November 2 2010 presented by
Chairman Alderson.
C. Chairman Alderson noted he was scheduled to report back on the
November 16, 2010, Council meeting.
D. Commissioner Quill then had a question in reference to the Joint
Meeting and the Council's statement that they would take up the
issue of the adoption of the Non-Motoriz/ed Transportation Plan at the
recommendation of the Planning Comrnission. He asked if that item
had to be agendized or could the Commission make the
recommendation at this meeting.
General discussion followed regarding
• Placing this item on a future agenda.
• Allowing staff to look further into the matter since they were
currently working on afeasibility study for the trail portion
within the City of La Quinta.
• The Planning Commission's options, as noted by the City
Attorney.
• Inclusion of the Non -Motorized Transportation Plan (NMTP)
regulations into the General Plan Update, and the steps
necessary to make sure they were compatible
• Whether a General Plan Amendment was necessary.
• The need to adopt the NMTP as soon as possible.
IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS:
A. Planning Manager David Sawyer introduced the subject of the Holiday
Meeting Schedule.
After discussion, it was decided the Planning Commission would go
dark for the meeting of December 28, 2010. However, if items
-5-
Planning Commission Minutes
November 9, 2010
needed to be scheduled before the end of the year, the Planning
Commission would hold the December 28th meeting.
X. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved by Commissioners
Barrows/Wilkinson to adjourn this regular meeting of the Planning
Commission to the next regular meeting to be held on November 23, 2010.
This regular meeting was adjourned at 7:43 p.m. on November 9, 2010.
Respectfully submitted,
Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
M
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: NOVEMBER 23, 2010
CASE NO: GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSED LAND USE MAP, LAND USE
DESIGNATION CONSOLIDATION, AND GENERAL PLAN GOALS
LOCATION: CITY-WIDE
APPLICANT: CITY OF LA QUINTA
BACKGROUND:
The City last updated its General Plan in 2002. After its adoption, the City experienced
tremendous growth through 2008, which resulted in build out of much of the land
available in the City limits. Although the current economic conditions have stalled
development, it can be expected that when the recovery occurs, the City will once
again be under pressure for development. Additionally, State legislation, including
AB32 and SB375, as well as local concerns and interests have changed since 2002.
There is greater focus by residents and regulators on quality of life issues, including
the City's fiscal stability in the long term; the preservation and improvement of
fundamental resources such as air and water; and encouraging other means of
transportation that promote a healthy lifestyle and minimize or shorten the length of
automobile trips. These conditions cumulatively resulted in the City undertaking an
update of the General Plan.
The General Plan Update will include the City limits and the City's Sphere of Influence,
and will not include lands to the east of the Sphere, which are currently identified as a
portion of "Planning Area 2" in the General Plan. The General Plan boundary was
discussed with the Planning Commission and City Council in February and the attached
land use map reflects such. The General Plan will also include two new Elements, an
Economic Development Element and a Sustainable Community Element, which will
directly address issues that have become important to the City; economic stability and
improvement and protection of resources, as described above.
Immediately following commencing the update effort, Staff undertook a series of
community outreach meetings, which were summarized for the Planning Commission
and City Council in February. Since that time, Staff has undertaken a review of the
Land Use Map; begun the process of drafting the updated General Plan; and completed
technical analysis needed for the General Plan Update. In order to proceed to
completion of the General Plan, and preparation of the General Plan Environmental
Impact Report, Staff has prepared the draft Land Use Map, associated statistical
General Plan Update - PC Staff Report 11/23/10 Page 1 of 7
analysis, land use designation changes, and master listing of General Plan Goals for the
Planning Commission's and City Council's consideration at this time.
pRnpnSal
Statistical Analysis: Existing vs. Proposed General Plan
As described above, the current General Plan includes more geographic area than now
proposed. As shown in Tables 1 and 2, below, the current General Plan encompasses
34,112 acres, while the proposed General Plan has a total land area of 30,957 acres.
Since 2002, the City's Sphere of Influence was expanded to include Planning Area 1
and a portion of Planning Area 2. The reduction in land area is from the balance of
Planning Area 2, which is no longer included in the proposed General Plan. The current
and proposed General Plan Land Use Maps are attached as Exhibits 1 and 2,
respectively. Full size maps will also be provided for the Planning Commission at the
meeting.
Table 1
Proposed General Plan Land Use Statistical Summary
fits
.
Land Use Acres
Acres
Total
Acres
Acres
Total Acres
Acres Total
Designation Developed
Vacant
Acres
Developed
Vacant
Acres Developed
Vacant Acres
Low Density
Residential
4,170.6
1,675.9
5,846.5
567.0
6,812.7
7,379.7
4,737.6
8,488.E
13,226.2
Medium/High
Density
Residential
1, 281 .4
350.3
1,631.7
0.2
24.4
24.E
1,281 .6
374.7
1,656.3
General
Commercial
383.2
186.4
569.6
28.5
256.6
285.1
411.7
443.0
854.7
Tourist
Commercial
208.3
138.6
346.9
-
-
-
208.3
138.6
346.9
Village
i
Commercial
77.4
12.9
90.3
-
-
-
77.4
12.9
90.3
Industrial/Light
Manufacturing
-
-
0.0
-
63.8
63.8
-
63.8
63.8
Major
Community
Facilities
238.0
160.0
398.0
28.2
1.6
29.8
266.2
161.E
427.8
Open Space
6,518.0
5,520.8
12,038.8
-
-
J
6,518.0
5,520.8
12,038.8
Street Rights
of Way
1,672.0
261.7
1,933.7
67.0
251.5
318.5
1,734.41
513.2 2,252.2
Total
14,548.8
8,306.E
22,855.4
690.8
7,410.E
8,101.4
15,239.E
15,717.2130,956.8
General Plan Update - PC Staff Report 11/23/10 Page 2 of 7
(0
O
Nlzt
Cl
LO
r
N
CO
lD
N
N
M
0)
M
M
n
(p
O
O
N
'Q
M
cV
00
00
O
co
N
O
O
M
O
'-
M
M
O
O
N
O LO
0)
00
00
0
M
N
LN()
-
O
N
LO
M
M
O
M
r
(O
(O
00
(
N
N
Q)
e-
O
M
M
M
M
r
(4
00
t\
-
(M
r
O
Ln
-
n
O
0)
LO
O
0)
d
M
M
N
LO
M
00
00
(M
d
N
(O
0)
0)
O`
H
(fl
O
O
LO
n
N
(M
co
(O
O
N
00
00
a
00
LO
O
M
M
O
n
O
O
n
d.
G
(p
O
r
00
M
M
(D
M
dO
N
0.
't
O
n
N
M
N
c°
o
M
a
d
c
-p.:
O
00
It
M
n
n
r
N
0)
LC
O
0)
O
0)
d
M
c
N
M
6
(0aO
LO
0)
M
M
00
>
Ln
LO
N
DE
O
[t
00
(O
00
O
n
t`
M
N
LO
(O
N
In
M
In
O
co
ON
M
LO
Oj
LO
N
CY)
M
It
00
le
00
FO-
0)
M
(M
N
M
>,
a
L
N
rl
01
F.
LO
M
LO
O
M
M
M
N
G
N
00N
N
N
LO
O
N
0
C0
n
00
00
r
0
N
c
_
R
V
-p
O
O
N
r
O
O
N
N
0)
N
00
00
M
M
}'
C
N
00
d1
LO
r
LO LO
0)
It
It
C14
N
O
O
(a
>
d'
N
M
M
++
0
N
O
0)
(DO
LO
LA
N
00
00
O
M
N m
D
a
M
M
m
r-
°)
0o
0o
c
O
M
M
M
M
CM)
M
C
H J
C
N
LO
N
O
M
00
00
00
n
N
d
CL
N
cOo
M
>
D
c
�>
Lq
M
LO
Lq
N
M
00
(o(O
N
N
C4
C
LO
r
N
M
0)
0)
01
C
N
L
a)
Q
M LA
Q)
LO
M
tO N O
M
M
O 0) I�
01
N
O
(0
N
i0:.
00
00
M
^
N
(O
C0
M O
Lt) M
c-
6)
6)
N
to
O O
0)
Cl)
N
t\
L,
J
Ln
t
d7 00
N P')
M
�-
Cl) N
I�
LP O
(D
(D
C
F-
(O
00
ItON
N
U)
CU
V
N
0) N 0)
(0
n O
0)
O
n
N
d
O
M
M 00 LO
M
00
�
r n 00
o0 (O N
M
0)
00
LO
00
LO
4)
p
00
0)
CO 4
d) N
O LO
00 n
M
M
0)
O
LO
0)
M
LO 00
d O ^
N 0) LO M
LO
O
O
J
O M
t`
M
Lo
O
O
M
r-
d
U
�.
L(') 0) LO
(o d'
O)
N
co
N LO
M
M
N M d1
O
M
CO
n
(0
CN
N Cl) �t
O N
-e
I�
00
d
N
•-
(0
CO
O (D
00
(O LO 00
N N CD
6)
0
O (O
N O
lj�
(D
(0
y
>
cl
d
Lvj
LO
O
O
d,
q
TO
C C
Y
E
+
0
U
E
c
t+
°'
2
O
c
c
a)
i _
c
E
o
U
+�
'V
a�
c
o
c
{0
0
i
Q]
O
0) f6
7 m
0 a3
N
+ a3
N m
L
(n
7 U
O t
y
y
C
sm
a)
"O
a)
g
C L
c
W
rn c m
x`
E
c E
i L
a) .2) a)
i E
E
N .N `
o 7
O) `
`—° a)
C
U o)
y
O
m
y
c
C
a
U a
(n
N 0
U
p
Q
C U)
> ._
J
+
T
cc O
S
cc LO
E o
E 0
Z
E 0
�
o E
E
(o
2 .+_
Y
o
o C
`° o
CD
c LY
o c
°C
°
�_
E v
E
U
E v
O
E>
o
E
U o
+° m
o
c
U
U Li
U)
a o
0 n
0
o
J
c p
c
D
0 w
�UUUzUUa-
o U
o
o a co
OHU>UF—
U
0
Q
—�LL
m
a
Oc70�FL
HQ
F-
w
d
In the overall, the land use map is not significantly changing from what is currently
adopted. The mix of land uses and the comparative ratios of residential to commercial
lands will remain consistent. Changes are proposed to the terminology which identifies
the land use designations, and are further discussed under "Consolidation of Land Use
Definitions," below.
The changes in land area will also change the build out population, the number of
housing units, and the commercial square footage. Table 3 shows that the buildout
population of the current General Plan would be 160,457. The proposed General Plan
results in a smaller buildout population of 147,223, a decrease of approximately 10%.
Table 3
Comparison of Build Out Units and Population
Current and Proposed General Plan
.,,..
.
Area
Buildout
Dwelling Buildout
Units Population
Buildout
Dwelling
Units
Buildout
Population
City
25,038 60.639
29,669
85,447
Sphere
1,493 4,211
21,444
61,759
Planning Area #1
11,938 33,779
N/A
N/A
Planning Area #2
21,693 61,828
N/A
N/A
TOTAL
60,162 160,457
51,113
147,206
As shown in Table 4, the current General Plan will result in 15.9 million square feet of
commercial space at buildout. Table 5 illustrates the potential square footage which will
result in the proposed General Plan's build out.
Table 4
Current General Plan
Commercial Development Potential at General Plan Buildout
Potential
Total
Developed
Vacant
Twat
EA . , :
Future Sq.
ut .
Area
Acres
Apres
A . has,
S , . ft.,
Ft.
Ft.
City
444.5
771.5
1,216
4,259,732
7,393,439
11,653,171
Sphere
4.5
0.0
4.5
43,124
0
43,124
Planning
Area #1
54.4
5.4
59.8
521,326
51,749
573,075
Planning
Area #2
332.7
47.4
380.1
3,188,330
454,243
3,642,574
TOTAL
836.1
824.3
1,660.4
8,012,512
7,899,431
15,911,944
General Plan Update - PC Staff Report 11/23/10 Page 4 of 7
Table 5
Proposed General Plan
Commercial Development Potential at General Plan Buildout
PoteriPrai TOW
r►Fer�x cl T I ica�ati to .=�4;w�t,, FlAvir'A' !ors
City
668.9
337.9
1,006.8
6,410,2021
3,238,1631
9,648,365
Sphere
28.5
256.6
285.1
273,121
2,459,049
2,732,170
TOTAL
697.4
594.5
1,291.9
6,683,324
5,697,212
12,380,536
The proposed General Plan will result in a 30% reduction in commercial square footage,
due primarily to the commercial lands which were included in Planning Area 2
(particularly in the Kohl Ranch Specific Plan). However, the proposed General Plan
maintains almost exactly the same amount of Tourist Commercial land (346.9 acres) as
the current General Plan (351 .5 acres), thereby preserving this fiscally important land
use.
Consolidation of Land Use Definitions
Staff reviewed the current Land Use definitions, and determined that the consolidation
of some of these designations was appropriate for the General Plan. The result is that
there will be fewer land use designations in the proposed General Plan than there are in
the current General Plan. Importantly, however, the zoning designations will remain as
they currently are, which is at a higher level of detail than the General Plan. Since the
General Plan is the broadest policy document, it is appropriate that there be fewer
designations in this document, and that the specificity be provided in the Zoning
Ordinance. The consolidated designations are shown below.
signations
Proposed Designations
Comments
ensity
Consolidates the two
Low Density
single family land use
FeD
designations into one.
sity
Consolidates the three
h Density
Medium/High Density
designations which allow
multi -family residential
High Density
into one.
Regional Commercial
Community Commercial
Consolidates the retail
General Commercial
commercial designations
Neighborhood Commercial
into one.
Commercial Park/Office
Resort Mixed Use
Preserves the tourism
Tourist Commercial
related designations for
Tourist Commercial
their economic importance
Village Commercial
Village Commercial
No change.
General Plan Update - PC Staff Report 11/23/10 Page 5 of 7
Designations
Comments
ight Manufacturing
Industrial/Light Manufacturing
No change.
munity Facilities
Major Community Facilities
No change.
FEAstingesignationsProposed
e
Open Space
Consolidates the open
e
space designations into
e
one.
The consolidations shown above represent a logical simplification of the Land Use
nomenclature. The Land Use designations which have been preserved intact are
considered important distinctions which should be highlighted in the General Plan.
In the case of the Village Commercial designation, the Village is a unique and special
place - the heart of La Quinta in many ways. It is therefore important to preserve this
area and highlight it in the Land Use Element.
Similarly, the Tourist Commercial designation has historically been an economic driver
for the City - providing a significant contribution to the City's fiscal balance because of
the resulting Transient Occupancy Tax. It is important, in the Land Use Element and the
new Economic Development Element, to highlight the existing and potential value of
these lands. The revenue which will result from existing and future development of
hotel and resort development will also be analyzed in the fiscal impact analysis which
will be prepared for the General Plan EIR.
The General Plan will also enable the creation of a new overlay Zoning designation -
Mixed Use. The Mixed Use Zoning designation could apply on all the General
Commercial or Village Commercial lands, if certain specific development criteria are
met. An important consideration will be the preservation of the retail commercial
potential of these lands, and its associated fiscal benefit for the City, while balancing
the need to provide residential units in close proximity to jobs and transit, as required
by S13375. The development criteria will be detailed in an update to the Zoning
Ordinance, which will follow the completion of the General Plan Update. The Mixed Use
overlay zone may result in one or several projects in either the General Commercial or
the Village Commercial zones. It is impossible to predict how much land might be
dedicated to Mixed Use in the future. However, prior to the economic downturn, Mixed
Use had become an important tool for many California jurisdictions, allowing the
intensification of lands to provide for both residential and commercial uses on one site.
The potential benefits for La Quinta include a continued strong retail sales base;
combined with customers for that retail base in close proximity to it; reduced
automobile trips and reduced air pollution; better access to transit services for residents
to get to work; and a wider range of residential product on offer to future residents.
Master List of Goals
Staff has reviewed the General Plan's existing Goals. This review determined that the
majority of the Goals are still applicable today, and consistent with the policy direction
General Plan Update - PC Staff Report 1 1 /23/10 Page 6 of 7
the City is currently implementing. The review therefore resulted in some minor
modification of the Goals to reflect changed conditions and/or policy. These revised
Goals are attached as Exhibit 3. These Goals will be used as the basis for the
development of policies and programs in each Element of the proposed General Plan.
In addition to these goals, new goals will be created for the two new Elements -
Economic Development and Sustainable Community.
Staff respectfully requests that the Planning Commission review the goals, consider any
amendments which it may wish to make, and provide a recommendation to the City
Council.
CONCLUSION:
The General Plan Update does not significantly change the land use pattern in the City,
or the balance of land uses in the City. This review by first the Planning Commission
and then the City Council, is provided to allow staff to update both bodies, and assure
that Staff is proceeding in a direction which is consistent with your vision for the City.
Following the conclusion of the discussion on these issues with the City Council at its
meeting of December 7, 2010, staff will proceed with the completion of the General
Plan document, and will initiate the General Plan Environmental Impact Report. It is
currently expected that the draft General Plan and General Plan EIR will be complete in
the late Spring, and that public hearings before the Planning Commission and City
Council will occur in September and October of 2011. As the Planning Commission is
aware, the General Plan EIR will be released for a 45 day public comment period, during
which Staff plans to conduct an additional series of community outreach meetings, to
present the General Plan to the City's residents and businesses.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission consider the Land Use Map and Master Goals, make any
changes it may feel are necessary, and direct staff to forward the Map and Goals to the
City Council for its review and approval.
Prepared by:
_?
Les Johnson
Planning Director
ATTACHMENTS
1. Current (2002) General Plan Land Use Map
2. Proposed General Plan Land Use Map
3. Master List of Goals
General Plan Update - PC Staff Report 11 /23/10 Page 7 of 7
fit
fill
1
2 0
Lit
0
4 PM
ID
CL
c
Is,
D
n
rn
z
N
ATTACHMENT # 3
r�
_
L
4_
0
—>' O O
C O U
N
C
L
a)
U
C
ca
o
O o
L
L
Qi -a Q
0
ca
ca
OU
CU
co
U
E
L
N
C
+L to cu
a)
C
0
0)-
0
uj
C
a)cn
ca `�=
N
.�
M
LUN
oY
c00
Q-
>o
J
co
a
3 C
U
Eon
L a
°
cn
Q
L v
>°
a)
co
�c
,°,^^
cum
0-
N
C
_0 c
�
(a
UI CL
(!
L
r
N
V
O >
J
Q
o Q
p C
U c:
c
E
p
C
RS
0 L
Z
W
U
E
�a�
�
0
co
"'
a)>
cv
a)
a))U
Lu
Z
0ac
a
Q
a)N�
cca
c�
W
tea)
ocf
oc
ap
-0ca
`�Z
(n
>N oEcn
Q
M
>p~
caoTou)
O
c�
o
E
cam,
W
oc
�a
c�
o
Q
� cn
U
p0
cu
U
w
�u�p
Qpc6
0
ca
W
Leo
c:cncn
o
ULo� E•�
00
M>
oo
W
°tec.c5
ao
o�_
ai
So
a
0
cU
Q a
Z
Q>
Q
a)�
IL
�->,
p
Z
70
V
o
p
N?
d
0 O
N
o
m
M �=
CU
Q
pc
N a)
U.
a 5
co
Q L
N
Z
Q
'_
�,°��'
Q
L
n
Q�
Y
m a
Q`= m
Q
C:
O -•-
O'
w
O
U
O
O}
O
0 cn :0
c
C7 m
O
CCU
d
0 o
Qd
U 6
r•—
a i
m
0)
a`ni C
0c
c�
ca
C
cn
L
o
>
cn ()
E
U)
(6
>
O
<
a)
�-
to
O +r
Q
O)
c.
C
O
°
cn
O
Q. a)
L a
c>
2
a)
O_ —
a
-
°
—
�
U U)
L
O N
c
p
N
C
_a
+'
o
U
E�
fn
•D
U d
C
-O
o
"p
u)
E
!E1-a)
c:O
a'
O
U
m
Q U
� c
0)
L
u)
U
O O
m
N C7
IL
o
y
C
O
4- c:
O -
a)
(B
OL
U
+•
C
0)
O cn
a) U W
0
c:
c
°
a)
o
L —
o
3
cn
c
J=
c
cts
a)
o
L
a) a)
c cn
c0 O
o
0) a)
a)
U)
Q
0
g)
4=
U
> a U
-0
�
J
Q
1
c•c
c�
c-
(L)
7
c
a
ca
c
o
7C) a
c c
a) o
�-
c
O
o
w
Ecn 0
>,
N
�'
0)
N M a -a
C
`�
E
0
Q
C
cv
c0
Q a) p —
p
>
p
a)
�
°
L_
2Z
°C�
U U
O
oU
G
(n
U
oa
a) a)
>
o
F-
>+
Q
-0
J
aiL
I�
0 a)
J-0 a) 0~
Q
c
Q
—
J
ca
=
Q
to
p L�
Q 0
c
c C
J
J
H
a
N Q O
L cn
V cII
L C
�
N cn
+.
'
N
E
�->'
W
4-
L M o
O
LU
o
N
M
?
C
-m
w
J
Q
J
QU
0
J
Qcn
O
J
Q�
J
Q��
J +`�
Q`nE
J
Q
o-
Z
O
O
a)
V)
O
O
,� o c�
O-0 a)
O-0 a)
O�
p
c
Q.
w
o
(D
W
U
aci
cn
0
c 0
O t9 ca
C9 .� W
C9 r-
N
0
a)
a.
J
L
-O
70 "O
O
U
O
c
c N
C-
m (�
O
O
c
U
+U)
to
t
N
(a
_0
O
E
N
cu N
E
cu
E
(n fB
(D
U_
Q
(6
OU
Q
p
0) >,
° U
°
cn
a) U)
N
U
N
J>
U
Q
O N
07
L)
a)
L
O
CL
O
C9
>, cv
c
U c
C9 0
E
N
N
o
O
�m '.
WO
J
,
O
E
C:
c(
a)E
c
U
cnF�
cU
O
O
o
-O
c
L O
O
m�
P:o
��
C�
a
=
a)U
Q
"'
°�
>
c cu
O
U
N
U
cn-�
a)
a .E
a)C
N
cn
oU)
m�,
Q
oo
�E
o°
W
c
p°
aL
w
om
2)E
c
V
OC
o
mm
m
W
c
o
W
cn
c
o f
=
o o
a U
N
v
s c
_
O
0 L
o
�0
G
a) N
N
R'3 0
W
N
O N
L
Z
Q
O
Z
Q
Cl)
-=
W
L°
H
uJ
(�
IL c
V'
L a)
CL a
(7
�
0
c6
Q
Q o
°
J
O
c
U)
c
O
Q
m
r-
O
O
CL
Z
2
O
O
Q)
O
a)
W
J E
O
J
n
Q
a.
mW
Cl)
HJ>
a
O
O
O�n
n
�
7 U�
0 cu
_
.
C9
.
LL
.
Z
.
U
.
(D
C
a. L
c a)
2
v
c
m-c
E
c L
v E
c L
ca
co
m
M m
m a)
+
vi
O
> -°
cn
j
U
to
a) c
U)
° c
Co 0
— —
d
a)
7
O
c
U
Q
O
a)
U O
U O
cn
N
O
a)
c
c
c
Q
Fu
c
D
O
cn
uj
O
y
°�
O)
O
c
O
�' N
C
c.i
U
N a)
j
ch N
>
>
U X
X
c
cn
W
O
L
a)
W
U
a)
_
V a)
a`ni
` U
U)
LLJU
Y
a�'i a)
E E
m ()
c
E
cm
N
Q
O
O
V
'
U
L
°
cn
o
0
mJ
N
0
I L
°
U)
U))
W
U)i
W
o c
Q
mO
a)
n.
a)
t� >
J
U
Uv
O
=3
Oc
N
c
z
w(D
V
O >
0—
°
U�
c
J
°
W
mO
c
o'er
W
W
eWo
c
cr
W
CT
WZ
0
Fq
(n
N
m
3:m.
°
a
Lu°'H-0
a)
oU
cn
W
~
�
3
O
o
cnW>
J
O
J
J 6
OQ'N
w�H
a) <n
a) vQ
a
o
C
L
"a
�W
>
"a
CU
w
z
t7
0;
a2
O
N
�
aa)
ca
o
cn c
a
to U) c
Q
.
W
■
m
.
.
z
w
O