2011 06 28 PCCity of La Quinta
Planning Commission Agendas are now
available on the City's Web Page
@ www.la-guinta.org
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
A Regular Meeting to be Held at the
La Quinta City Hall Council Chamber
78-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, California
JUNE 28, 2011
7:00 P.M.
**NOTE**
ALL ITEMS NOT CONSIDERED BY 11:00 P.M. WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NEXT
REGULAR MEETING
Beginning Resolution 2011-006
Beginning Minute Motion 2011-002
I. CALL TO ORDER
A. Pledge of Allegiance
B. Roll Call
C. Election of Chair and Vice Chair
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 June 14, 2011.
V. PUBLIC HEARINGS:
For all Public Hearings on the Agenda, a completed "Request to Speak" form must be
filed with the Executive Secretary prior to the start of the Planning Commission
consideration of that item. The Chairman will invite individuals who have requested
the opportunity to speak, to come forward at the appropriate time.
Any person may submit written comments to the Planning Commission before a
public hearing, may appear and be heard in support of, or in opposition to, the
approval of the project(s) at the time of the hearing. If you challenge any project(s) in
court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at
the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to the
public hearing.
A. Item ................... CONTINUED ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 2010-610,
SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-071, AMENDMENT NO. 1, SITE
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762, EXTENSION NO.4, AND
AMENDMENT NO. 1
Applicant........... WSL La Quinta, LLC
Location............ Northeast Corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50.
Request............. Consideration of Development Plans For La Paloma, A 208-
Unit Senior Living Community.
Action ................. Staff Recommendation for Adoption of Resolution
Recommending Approval,. with Conditions - Resolution
2011- and Resolution 2011 -
B. Item ................... ZONING ORDINANCE AMENDMENT 2011-104
Applicant........... City of La Quinta
Location............ City-wide
Request ............. Consideration Of An Amendment To The La Quinta
Municipal Code, Section 9.170, Communication Towers and
Equipment.
Action ................. Staff Recommendation for Adoption of Resolution
Recommending Approval, with Conditions - Resolution
2011-
V. BUSINESS ITEM:
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL:
Vill. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Report on City Council meetings of June 7, 2011, and June 21, 2011.
B. Chairman Alderson is scheduled to attend the July 5, 2011, City Council
meeting.
C. New City Council Meeting Attendance Schedule attached.
D. Discussion of Summer Schedule
IX. DIRECTOR ITEMS:
X. ADJOURNMENT:
This meeting of the Planning Commission will be adjourned to a Regular Meeting to be held
on July 12, 2011, 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, June 28,
2011 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 June 23, 2011.
DATED: June 23, 2011
�Wy,x) IdVAA",
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.
June 14, 2011
IV
V
MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
7:03 P.M.
CALL TO ORDER
A. A regular meeting of the La Quinta Planning Commission was called to
order at 7:03 p.m. by Chairman Alderson.
PRESENT: Commissioners Barrows; Quill, Wilkinson,,and Chairman
Alderson.
ABSENT: Commissioners Quill and Weber.
STAFF PRESENT: Planning Director Les Johnson, City Attorney Kathy
Jenson, Principal Engineer Ed Wimmer, Planning
Manager, David Sawyer, Principal Planner Andrew
Mogensen,.,; Associate Planner Jay Wuu, and
Executive Secra#aty _Carolyn Walker.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA:
CONSENT CALENDAR;
There being no 1,
comments, or suggestions, it was moved by
Commissioners Wilkinson/Barrows to approve the minutes of April 26,
2011 as submitted. AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Wilkinson and
Chairman Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioners Quill,
and Weber. ABSTAIN: None.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A. Environmental Assessment 2010-610 Specific Plan 2004-
071 Amendment No 1 Site Development Permit 2003-762,
Extension No. 4, and Amendment No. 1; a request by WSL La Quinta,
LLC, for consideration of development plans for La Paloma, a 208-unit
senior living community located on the northeast corner of
Washington Street and Avenue 50.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 2011
Associate Planner Jay Wuu presented the staff report, a copy of
which is on file in the Planning Department.
Commissioner Quill joined the meeting at 7:07 p.m.
Planning Director Johnson stated staff had just a received a letter,
from MSA Consulting, and needed time to review the changes
requested in the letter. (Copy distributed to.the Commissioners). He
recommended the Commission take public testimony and continue the
item to the next meeting to allow adequate time for Planning and
Public Works staff to review and adequately respond to the request.
Chairman Alderson noted the suggestion and asked if there were any
questions of staff.
There being none from other Commissioners, Chairman Alderson
asked for clarificatiomon the height of the.towers and what the client
was requesting.
Staff responded the client was asking for 3,6,feet, instead of 28-feet,
on the one tower feature, whichwould be=the highest projection.
Chairman Alderson asked if there were any violations with parking.
Staff responded" there. were no violations and commented on carports
and proper shadng for perking areas without carports.
Chairman Alderson commented on the north property line and the new
fence planned. Staff, said the plans called for a new wall spanning the
entire northern property line. Where there were fences or existing
walls, it would be up to the property owners to work out an
agreement with La Paloma to tear down and replace those walls.
There being no further questions of staff, Chairman Alderson opened
the public hearing portion of the meeting and asked if the applicant
would like to speak.
Mr. John Rimbach, President of West Living (WSL La Quinta, LLC),
5796 Armada Drive, Suite 300, Carlsbad, CA 92208, introduced
himself and said they were the owners of the site, and then gave
some background on acquisition of the property. He explained the
-2-
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 2011
previous plans and said they were now designing this project as a
straight rental project with a full continuum of care, residential -based
care from independent living, assisted living, and a small
Alzheimer/dementia component. They have eliminated the nursing
home component from the prior project plan. The project is now
deemed to be more affordable and more economically viable, than the
previous project plans. He then explained the licensing requirements
and said his development team would come up to answer questions
and give further details on the project.
Chairman Alderson asked Mr. Rimbach 4bout the.new plan for rental,
instead of sales, of the units. He then asked about the monthly rates
on the units. Mr. Rimbach explained the continuum of.care within the
project and said the monthly rates had not yet been established.
Gregory Irwin, Irwin Partners Architects (IPA) 245 Fischer Avenue,
Suite B-2, Costa Mesa CA 92626, introduced himself and said they
had spent a lot of time looking at what was previously approved and
tried to create a project that would make them better neighbors than
what was previously approved:. He had one correction, noting the
tower entry piece was actually 'l elow he height limit. The difference
between the roof and what would make it an architectural projection
was off. He then explained 'further why it was still within the actual
height limit.
Chairman Alderson asked about the color palette and the blue element
shown, which was actually clear glass and not an additional color
"'element. Mr. Irwin confirmed it was glass.
Discussion followed on the color palette, the garage doors and the use
of opaque glass.
Mr. Marvin Roos, MSA Consulting, 34-20 Bob Hope Drive, Rancho
Mirage; .CA'- introduced himself and said they had been the project
engineers on this property since 1987. He then gave some
background on the property. He commented on the letter they
submitted saying it actually was only about four comments, because
some of the items were just notations. He understood the staff's
need to review the letter since there were concerns from their
southern neighbor, UHC, who had a representative present to discuss
it from their perspective. He then commented on the following letter
points:
-3-
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 2011
• Driveway alignment on Avenue 50
• Left in/left out movements
• Improvements on Avenue 50, east of their proposed entry
• Direct discharge into the evacuation channel
• A u turn lane southbound on Washington
• A uniform wall on the northern boundary
• Dropping the site and including a retaining wall.
General discussion then followed regarding dropping the site,
importing fill, and the design of the retairljrig wall.
Mr. Roos also stated the letter requested that the site development
permit approval be for two years, rather than one, and explained why.
Mr. Ron Gregory — Project Landscape Architect with RGA Landscape
Architects — 74020 Alessandro Drive, Palm Desert, CA — introduced
himself and commented.on the earlier statements made regarding the
multitude of fountains within the project, as well as the mention of the
lawn area. He explained,how they have to figure water calculations,
as required by the State, the Water District, and the City. He said
they have to use a water factor, for different types of plant materials,
and that "is also used for fountains. :.Ha explained how the factors
were utilized for any body of -water as well as all landscaping. He
continued by saying water, 'and' especially in smaller recirculating
water features, will be, very important to people who will be living
there. So, he hoped 'Chat would be taken into consideration. He told
how a question,was brought up, at ALRC, regarding the use of turf for
the putting green and.the pool area. The turf that is being used on the
putting green, is all faux turf, and will require no water. The turf that is
being used ini the `pool area is real turf and is cooler. Faux turf is
actually as hot as a paved surface would be. He added that even with
the use of real turf, they still fit within the maximum water use
guideline%', The rest of their landscaping was all water -efficient and
desert -type material.
Commissioner Wilkinson asked about recovering the condensation off
of air conditioning and using it to fill fountains, etc.
Mr. Gregory said their Firm was currently working on two projects
taking that into account and the problem was _that it was
extraordinarily expensive.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 2011
General discussion followed regarding the recovery of air conditioning.
condensation and various components of LEED certification.
General discussion followed on faux turf versus real turf, and under
what circumstances their individual uses are appropriate.
Commissioner Barrows asked for Mr. Gregory's comments on why
more native species are not being used and gave some examples of
non-native species that are used frequently in their place.
Mr. Gregory gave anecdotal evidence of projects he was currently
working on using native species. He, said one of the problems with
native plants was that some of them had a very 'short shelf life. A
plant such as brittle bush requires a fair amount of maintenance and
doesn't tend to last as long as.some of`the non-native' species. The
other problem was that the native plants. typically put on,a'great show
in late winter and early spring, then they"weren't at their best the rest
of the year. He said .they were trying, to introduce more of them,
especially as they are being, encouraged to do so in the pursuit of
higher LEED scores. He added there was,;a .problem with finding a
sufficient quantity of native plants for projects of this size.
Commissioner Barrows said this project seemed like a really good
opportunity to use native plants. She then asked about the water
features and commented on staffs recommendations that the smaller
water features seemed appropriate but they were concerned about the
entry. water . feature. -.,',The,, entry water feature only provided an
aesthetic benefit and no other usage, such as folks walking over and
sitting '`around the feature. She asked for Mr. Gregory for his
perspective On that'feature.
Mr. Gregory, said, at first, he didn't understand what was meant by
more than just an aesthetic feature, but he now understood about
people gathering around and enjoying the benefits of the water
feature.
General discussion followed on:
• What other purposes the water feature could/should serve.
• The current design of the water feature
• Additional discussion of the recycling of air conditioning
condensation and its possible uses.
Sim
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 2011
Chairman Alderson asked if there were any more questions of the
applicant.
There being none he asked if there was any public comment.
Mr. David Pendergrass, representative for James A. Shirley
Construction Co., 5462 Jurpe Avenue, Riverside CA — introduced
himself and commented on how much he appreciated the fact that
staff, and the developer, worked with him #a have an opportunity to
competitively bid on a project like this: He said it was just such a
difference from what he had previously experienced in other
communities. He wanted to take"the `opportunity.to.say thank you
and added that it was good that°the City apparently wee working with
local contractors and because"of that his"Jirm supported a,project like
this.
Chairman Alderson said it was very good to hear that local people
were being considered'.
Mr. Mark Irving- Urban `Housing Communities, 2000 East Fourth
Street, Suite 205, Santa Ana CA 9270 =`introduced himself and said
he was. at . the. meeting `.for several`' purposes. First, he was
representing the' . owners of the property to the south of this project,
who were,..also part of the specific plan originally approved in 2004.
He stated they were still under,that specific plan.
He continued, with his second point, saying he was at the meeting to
try to protect the left in on their property, currently within the specific
plan. The ingress , into the property would be on Avenue 50,
otherwise they just have right ins and right outs. So, it is very
important to make sure they maintain that. Third, his firm was in
support of the applicant's project. Fourth, they were asking staff to
review the, condition of approval regarding realigning the driveways
and providing ingress and egress. He said they were supportive of
that effort. Fifth, he agreed with the location and use of the entry
A
fountain. He explained a similar situation where the fountain acted as
a noise buffer and he agreed with the current design.
Chairman Alderson asked if there was any further public comment.
There being none, Chairman Alderson did not close the public hearing
since the matter was going to be continued. He suggested a
moll
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 2011
continuation of two weeks to allow time for staff to review this as the
letter had not been received until late afternoon on the day of the
meeting.
Planning Director Johnson asked the Chairman if either he, or any of
the other Commissioners, had any items for staff to discuss with the
applicant, prior to the continued meeting, to bring them forward so
staff would have that opportunity.
Chairman Alderson said he would like staff to clarify the alignment of
the driveways and confirm whether the project on the south was still
included in the specific plan.
Commissioner Quill commented on'several items:
• This was a more viable project than the,previous one.
• He agreed with the approval of the Site Development Permit for
two years, instead of one.
• There should be :real turf where there is a recreational
component (i.e., `swimrnIng„pools)
• He agreed with Commissioner Barrows"comments regarding the
use of native species.
• He agreed with direct discharge,`into the channel, if there were
no issues involved, it was done under an SWPPP, and the
water was cleaned up as it went out.
There- being no further .q11 uestions or discussion, it was moved and
seconded by Corrtmissioners Barrows/Wilkinson to continue the public
hearing' recommending approval of Specific Plan 2004-071,
Amendment No. 1, to June 28, 2011.
AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson and Chairman
Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Weber. ABSTAIN:
None,.
B. Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2011-103; a request by the City of La
Quinta for consideration of the following amendments to the La Quinta
Municipal Code: A clarification regarding the location of certain
landscaped parkways (§9.50.100), Correcting an error regarding guest
houses and secondary units (§9.140.070), Adjusting the time
extension period for development review permits (§9.200.080),
Deletion of obsolete language referencing guesthouse examples
IRM
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 2011
(§9.210.010), Revised definitions of child day care uses to be
consistent with State Law (§9.280.030), and Extend the maximum
permitted cul-de-sac length to 1320 feet (§13.24.070), to be effective
City -Wide.
Principal Planner Andrew Mogensen 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 Quill had no questions but commented on the positive
nature of the change for the permitted`cul-de-'sac length going from
660 to 1320 feet.
Chairman Alderson said he had. no further,,questions, but did mention
staff did a good job of analysis in clearing up -these items.:
There being no further:,. questions of staff, Chairman Alderson noted
the City was the applicant and asked, if there was any public
comment.
There being none, Chairman Alderson closed the public hearing and
opened the matter for Commission discussion.
There `being no further questions or discussion, it was moved and
seconded by, CommissionersBarrows/Wilkinson to adopt Resolution
20117004 recommending'a{ proval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment
201 -103 as submitted in the staff report.
AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson and Chairman
Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Weber. ABSTAIN:
None.
There `being no further questions or discussion, it was moved and
secondedby Commissioners Barrows/Wilkinson to adopt Resolution
201 1-005 recommending approval of Zoning Ordinance Amendment
2011-103, cul-de-sac amendment as submitted in the staff report.
AYES: Commissioners Barrows, Quill, Wilkinson and Chairman
Alderson. NOES: None. ABSENT: Commissioner Weber. ABSTAIN:
None.
9M.
Planning Commission Minutes
June 14, 2011
VI. BUSINESS ITEMS: None
VII. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VIII. COMMISSIONER ITEMS:
A. Discussion of the recent City Council Meetings. It was decided the
meetings of June 7, and June 21, 2011 would be discussed at the
next regularly scheduled Commission meeting.
B. Commissioner Wilkinson is scheduled ta;attend the June 21, 2011,
City Council meeting.
C. The new City Council Meeting Attendance Schedule will be included in
the June 28, 2011, packet.
D. A brief discussion of the Summer Schedule was held. It was decided
it would be discussed further, and datels}`phosen, at the next regularly
scheduled Commissiori,meeting.
IX: DIRECTOR ITEMS: None
X. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business,, . it was moved by Commissioners
Wilkinson/Barrows to' adjourn this,., -,regular meeting of the Planning
.t Commissiono the next meking to, be held on June 28, 2011. This meeting
was adjournedat 8:09 p.m. on June 14, 2011.
Respectfully submitted',
Carolyn Walker, Executive Secretary
City of La Quinta, California
STAFF REPORT
PLANNING COMMISSION
DATE: JUNE 28, 2011
CASE NO: SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-071 AMENDMENT 1
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762
EXTENSION 4 AND AMENDMENT 1
APPLICANT: WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
PROPERTY OWNER: WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
ARCHITECT: IRWIN PARTNERS ARCHITECTS
LANDSCAPE
ARCHITECT: RGA LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS, INC.
ENGINEER: MSA CONSULTING, INC.
PH # A
REQUEST: CONSIDERATION OF DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR LA
PALOMA, A 208-UNIT SENIOR LIVING COMMUNITY
LOCATION: NORTHEAST CORNER OF WASHINGTON STREET AND
AVENUE 50
ENVIRONMENTAL
CONSIDERATION: THE CITY OF LA QUINTA PLANNING
DEPARTMENT HAS
DETERMINED THAT THIS REQUEST HAS BEEN
PREVIOUSLY ASSESSED IN CONJUNCTION WITH
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
2003-470 WHICH
WAS PREPARED FOR SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-071, WHICH
WAS CERTIFIED ON DECEMBER
23, 2004. NO
CHANGED CIRCUMSTANCES OR
CONDITIONS ARE
PROPOSED WHICH WOULD
TRIGGER THE
PREPARATION OF SUBSEQUENT
ENVIRONMENTAL
ANALYSIS PURSUANT TO PUBLIC
RESOURCES CODE
SECTION 21166.
GENERAL PLAN
DESIGNATION: MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MHDR)
ZONING
DESIGNATION: MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (RMH)
PAReports - PC\201 1 \6-28-1 1 \La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 1 of 13
SURROUNDING
ZONING/LAND USES:
NORTH: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
SOUTH: MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
VACANT LAND
EAST: MUNICIPAL FACILITIES
EVACUATION CHANNEL/SPORTS COMPLEX
WEST: LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL
EXISTING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
BACKGROUND
This proposal was considered at the June 14, 2011 Planning Commission meeting.
However, the item was continued to the present date because new information
related to the proposal was submitted at the time of the public hearing, which
required additional research. The information, which primarily consists of
objections to a number of staff -recommended conditions of approval, is addressed
later in this staff report.
The La Paloma senior living community was originally reviewed and approved by
the La Quinta City Council in 2004. The original project proposal encompassed
both the northeast and southeast corners of Washington Street and Avenue 50,
and included multiple entitlements. In addition to a Conditional Use Permit (CUP
2003-074) and Site Development Permit (SDP 2003-762), a General Plan
Amendment (GPA 2003-091), Zone Change (ZC 2003-112), and Specific Plan (SP
2004-071) were approved to address project design criteria and development
standards.
At the time of the first time extension request in 2007, the project area was
revised to include only the northeast corner, with the permits associated with the
southeast corner allowed to expire. A second time extension request was approved
on October 7, 2008. A third extension request was approved on January 19,
2010, extending the approval of the site development permit to September 18,
2010. On July 6, 2010, the applicant, who is also the new property
owner/developer, submitted the subject applications to amend Specific Plan 2004-
071 and Site Development Permit 2003-762. A fourth time extension was
submitted on September 14, 2010, which is included in the attached Resolution.
Meanwhile, when the amendment application was deemed complete for review in
October, 2010, staff began working with the applicant on the amended plans,
which include a revised architectural style, site design, landscaping, and business
model.
PAReports - PC\2011\6-28-11\La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 2 of 13
PROPOSAL
Project Overview:
The applicant is requesting consideration of revised plans for La Paloma, a 208-unit
full -service senior living community located on the northeast corner of Washington
Street and Avenue 50 (Attachment 1, Sheet T). Located directly to the north of
the approximately 14-acre project site is an existing single-family residential
neighborhood. Another existing single-family residential neighborhood is located to
the west of the project site, across Washington Street. Vacant, un-entitled land is
located to the south of the project site, across Avenue 50. The La Quinta Sports
Complex is located east of the project site; on the other side of the approximately
240-foot wide La Quinta Storm Water Evacuation Channel.
La Paloma is intended to be an age -restricted residential setting where housing, 24-
hour supervision, and basic/personal care and health -related services are provided.
The community will offer programs and services such as dining, housekeeping, and
laundry, as well as on -site social and recreational activities. A variety of on -site
amenities will be provided to residents. Outdoor amenities include a pool, putting
course, dog park, and gardening areas. Indoor amenities include a library,
computer center, activity rooms, salon, and fitness center. Daily scheduled and on -
call transportation services to local dining, shopping, and appointments will also be
made available for residents.
The previously -approved project consisted of 216 independent and assisted living
units with 18 dementia care and 20 skilled nursing beds within multiple buildings
situated on two parcels. The new configuration of the La Paloma community
consists of a main building which contains 117 independent living, 54 assisted
living, and 17 Alzheimer/dementia units. Along the perimeter of the project site are
20 detached cottage units (Attachment 1, Sheet C-1).
The two-story main building has the following characteristics (Attachment 1 Sheet
Al):
• One -bed and two -bed Assisted Living and Alzheimer/dementia units
• One -bed, two -bed, and one/two-bed+den Independent Living units
• Units that include kitchens, bathrooms, and covered patios
• Community dining areas, exercise rooms, theater, and activity rooms
The 20 one-story cottage units have the following characteristics (Attachment 1,
Sheet A19 — A21):
• Two -bedroom and two -bed room+ den units
• Great rooms, kitchens, laundry rooms, and covered patios
• Two -car garages
P:\Reports - PC\2011\6-28-11\La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 3 of 13
Architectural Design:
Included with this proposal are architectural plans for the main building and cottage
units, which have been designed to reflect a Desert Contemporary theme
(Attachment 1, Sheet A3 - A6). This includes architectural elements such as the
use of stucco as the primary exterior building material, the use of flat roofing,
stacked stone, metal awnings, and incorporating shades of tan, gold, gray, and
blue. Additionally, balconies, shade structures, and other design elements provide
architectural articulation to the various building fagades.
The main building incorporates varying rooflines, with the height of the building,
not including the uninhabitable tower feature, averaging approximately 25 feet in
height at its highest ridgelines (Attachment 1, Sheet A3). The uninhabitable tower
is an approximately 1 1-foot tall architectural projection, which results in a
maximum structure height of 36 feet. Including all units, interior circulation areas,
and ancillary uses, the main building for La Paloma totals approximately 306,000
square feet (Attachment 1, Sheet T).
The height of the cottage units, at the highest roof ridgeline, is approximately 12'-
6" (Attachment 1, Sheet A19 - A21). The square footage of each of the three
cottage floor plans ranges from approximately 1,650 square feet to 1,720 square
feet (Attachment 1, Sheet T).
Included with this proposal are plans for various common areas throughout the La
Paloma site (Attachment 1, Sheet L-1.00). These areas, primarily courtyards
within the main building, include a shaded swimming pool, bocce ball court,
outdoor dance floor, putting green, active -use turf areas, and numerous gardens,
fountains, and shade structures.
Site Design:
There are two access points identified for the proposed La Paloma community
(Attachment 1, Sheet A-2). Access from the west will be from a driveway on
Washington Street. This access will serve as the primary access point for the
vehicular entry courtyard, drop-off area, and main lobby. Access from the south
will be from a driveway on Avenue 50. This access will serve as the primary
access for residents, employees, and delivery and service vehicles. The
Washington Street access consists of right -in, right -out turning movements, while
the Avenue 50 access point will allow left -in, right -in, and right -out turning
movements, with left -out movements prohibited.
Vehicular circulation within the La Paloma community consists of a singular two-
way drive aisle that meanders around the perimeter of the property, surrounding
the main building (Attachment 1, Sheet A-2). The majority of parking stalls for the
project are located along this drive aisle, as well as access to the 20 cottage units
PAReports - PC\201 1\6-28-1 1\La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 4 of 13
and the loading/unloading area for the main building. A total of 246 parking spaces
are proposed, including one bus space, eight ADA-accessible spaces, two covered
ADA-accessible spaces, two ADA-accessible van spaces, and 113 covered parking
spaces. The illuminated steel carport structures are approximately 9'-6" in height,
and will be painted to match the buildings. (Attachment 1, Sheet A3).
The applicant is also proposing landscape lighting at various locations throughout
the project site (Attachment 1, Sheet L-7.00 - L-7.04). Up -lighting of the trees
around the project site are to be done with canopy tree accent lights and palm tree
accent lights. Walkway lights are to be placed along the numerous pedestrian
walking paths throughout the site. Wall -washer lighting fixtures will also be
strategically placed on walls throughout the site. The main vehicular drive aisle and
parking areas are proposed to be lit with 18-foot tall pole lights (Attachment 1,
Sheet L-7.02). The parking lamps are High -intensity Discharge LED lamps that are
shielded and directed downward.
The applicant also proposes multiple water features (Attachment 1, Sheet L-1.04).
One feature is proposed to be placed within the planter located in the center of the
main entrance vehicular courtyard. Other features are located within the
community courtyard areas and also along the drive aisle. The features are all
similar, incorporating a cascading stone -veneered fountain and a concealed basin
covered with pebbles.
Landscaping:
Landscaping throughout the project site consists of primarily desert and other low -
to moderate -water use plants (Attachment 1, Sheet L-5.00 - L-5.04). Mostly
utilized around the buildings are various trees and shrubs, with minimal use of turf,
which has been limited to two active use lawn areas (Attachment 1, Sheet L-1.00).
The proposed tree palette includes Acacia, Citrus, African Sumacs, as well as Date
Palms and Mediterranean and California Fan Palms. The shrub palette includes
Agave, Yucca, Birds of Paradise, and Lantana, among others (Attachment 1, Sheet
L-5.02).
The landscaped areas that run along Washington Street and Avenue 50 are
proposed to be landscaped with numerous trees, shrubs, and groundcover
(minimum 24" box trees, minimum 2.5" caliper size measured six inches above
grade; minimum 5 gallon shrubs/groundcover) (Attachment 1, Sheet L-1.01 - L-
1.02). A meandering sidewalk runs throughout the landscaped area along
Washington Street and Avenue 50, with pedestrian access into the project located
at the vehicular access points.
The project perimeter also incorporates a wall/pilaster combination screen wall
(Attachment 1, Sheet L-1.04). The wall will be approximately 6'-8" in height, and
consists of a cement plaster finished wall with stone veneer accent pilasters. Each
PAReports - PC\2011 \6-28-11 \La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 5 of 13
pilaster also includes a hooded down -light bar. Along the western property line,
the wall construction will be combined with landscaped berms. A uniform
perimeter masonry wall with no pilasters will be constructed along the northern
property line. Along the east property line, abutting the La Quinta Storm Water
Evacuation Channel, a low flood control wall is proposed to be constructed.
Specific Plan Amendment:
The applicant has proposed a Specific Plan Amendment (Attachment 2). This
represents the first amendment to the original La Paloma Specific Plan, and
includes detailed development principles and design guidelines in order to develop
the community as proposed. The Specific Plan Amendment also includes the
removal of the parcel on the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50
from the La Paloma development plans, and details a number of deviations from La
Quinta Municipal Code standards.
The proposed amended Specific Plan proposes the following deviations from the La
Quinta Municipal Code (Attachment 2, Page 27):
15 feet
12 feet
20 feet I 5 feet or less
Equivalent Unit Net Densi
12 du/acre �'
750 square feet 675 square feet
28 feet 36 feet
3 feet 1 5 feet
All units are within 100 feet I No Standard
signs I Vehicular directional signs
,.Using an Equivalent Unit basis for determining the project density, the maximum resident population based on available beds is 261
!persons and the maximum staff shift is 52. Using the City standard of 2.85 persons per single-family home, the equivalent density is 110
-'I units, or 7.85 units/acre.
Furthermore, the proposed amended Specific Plan removes the land uses
"Restricted Senior Housing" and "Licensed Memory Care Facility" from "Permitted
Use — Conditional Use Permit" and adds them to "Residential Permitted Uses"
(Attachment 2, Page 25). This ties the uses within La Paloma to the Specific Plan,
and eliminates the need to maintain a Conditional Use Permit for the property.
PAReports - PC\201 1 \6-28-1 1 \La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 6 of 13
ANALYSIS
Architectural Design:
Staff finds the overall architectural style and design of the proposed La Paloma
senior living community to be acceptable. Staff has no significant issues with the
proposed main building, cottage units, and common areas.
The Desert Contemporary architecture and layout of the project site is for the most
part compatible with the surrounding residential land uses. Because the project site
is relatively isolated in terms of proximity to other similar land uses and structures,
the architecture and layout of the buildings do stand out from the surrounding built
environment. However, supplemental design elements (pop -outs, varying rooflines,
etc.) appropriately enhance the buildings by providing sufficient architectural
articulation. Also, the height, mass, and scale of the buildings are appropriate for
each proposed building location, given the design restrictions of the property.
Furthermore, the visual impact of the two-story main building is minimized from
view from the existing residential neighborhood to the north (Attachment 1, Sheet
A7). The two-story portion of the main building is located a minimum of 75 feet
from the existing single-family homes on the south side of Saguaro Road, and the
highest part of the main building, the uninhabited tower feature, is set back over
150-feet from the northern property line. Review of the northern property line
transition plan shows that the cottage units and the segment of the main building
closest to the property line have minimal visual impact on the existing residential
neighborhood.
With regards to the cottage units along the perimeter of the property, staff had
some initial concerns with the location, layout, and general purpose of the
proposed units. In particular, the placement of cottage units near the intersection
of Washington Street and Avenue 50 as well as the linear design of the units as
opposed to a more clustered design was questioned. However, the placement of
the cottage units around the perimeter of the community reduces height impact at
the edges of the property, and the applicant has stated that the proposed layout is
operationally successful and cites other existing senior -living communities that have
similar site. layouts.
Site Design:
The design of the vehicular access points, internal circulation, and parking areas is
generally acceptable. Staff anticipates the majority of vehicles will be entering the
site from the Avenue 50 entrance. Although the vehicular courtyard and main
lobby area for La Paloma are situated along Washington Street, a "No U-turn"
restriction from southbound to northbound Washington Street at the Avenue 50
intersection prevents visitors arriving via southbound Washington Street from
P:\Reports - PC\201 1\6-28-1 1\La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 7 of 13
utilizing the primary entrance.
Within the project, all applicable turning radii for large vehicles, loading/unloading
areas, and pedestrian connectivity meet the La Quinta Municipal Code development
standards. The main drive aisle for the project has a clear separation between
vehicular and pedestrian paths of travel. The proposed walkway that runs adjacent
to the drive aisle that surrounds the main building is sufficient as it provides
connectivity throughout the project site.
Based on the parking requirements in LQMC Section 9.150.060 and the parking
analysis done as part of the review process, staff has determined that the proposed
parking area design and spaces provided within La Paloma can accommodate the
proposed use. The proposal provides for 246 parking spaces, which well exceeds
the 197 parking spaces required by the Municipal Code. This excess of
approximately 25% is desired in order to help with peak periods of parking overlap
during shift changes and occasional visitor spikes during holidays. The applicant is
comfortable with the proposed parking ratios based on extensive experience with
this type of land use. With regards to the proposed carports, the previously -
approved site plan was approved with carports abutting the existing residential
neighborhood to the north. The revised site plan has relocated the carports south
of the perimeter drive aisle, with a minimum distance of 105 feet from the nearest
adjacent residence.
The proposed on -site lighting is acceptable as well, as the proposed fixtures are
consistent with the City's outdoor lighting ordinance. Pedestrian walkways and
entries will be adequately lit using decorative fixtures or landscape lighting. Parking
areas will also be sufficiently lit by the strategically -placed poles and carport lights.
All lighting will be designed and located so as to confine direct light within the
community boundaries. The submitted photometric plan confirms that the project
with be properly illuminated, with a lack of excess light and no illuminated
hotspots.
Some of the proposed water features are central to the design of the community.
Such features can be permitted if they meet the City's water efficiency
requirements and are approved as part of the project. Staff has provided a
Condition of Approval pertaining to these features, requiring energy efficient pumps
and staff review to ensure that there will be minimal water loss due to splashing,
evaporation, etc. The small-scale water features located around the common areas
and courtyards are appropriate in that their placement and scale are beneficial
towards the pedestrian atmosphere. However, staff still has some concern over
the necessity of the larger water features, such as the one within the main
entrance vehicular courtyard, as their size and location do not promote pedestrian
interactivity. Therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission discuss the
use and viability of the water feature as part of the La Paloma proposal.
P:\Reports - PC\201 1\6-28-1 1\La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 8 of 13
Landscaping:
In general, the proposed landscape palette is acceptable. The assorted species of
plants provide diversity and add character to the proposed buildings. The use of
Acacia, Citrus, African Sumacs, as well as Date Palms and Mediterranean and
California Fan Palms among others properly reflects the Desert Contemporary
architectural style, while providing sufficient screening and accents around the
project site, including the parking lot area, pedestrian circulation areas, and outdoor
use areas.
Staff typically recommends that turf areas not be installed adjacent to paved
pedestrian walkways due to possible water waste, and the applicant has satisfied
this request. Also, the proposed turf installation near the pool area is acceptable as
it will be utilized as an active -use area.
Specific Plan Amendment:
Staff finds that the proposed amendment to the La Paloma Specific Plan is
acceptable as it ensures that the project can be constructed as proposed.
Although the applicant has proposed a variety of deviations from the La Quints
Municipal Code, staff believes that the appropriate justification has been given to
consider and approve the requests.
For example, the reduction of the rear setback and garage setback are required in
order to accommodate the incorporation of the independent living cottage units
that result in a single-family residence -type buffer between the neighborhood to the
north and the main building. The reduction in minimum unit size is requested due
to the inclusion of common kitchen and dining facilities. And the added height for
architectural projections is needed to facilitate the community's architectural
design. Relief from the distance -to -guest space requirement is requested as a
result of the project's design, due to the fact that all visitors. are to enter from the
main reception area. And the added signage area for vehicular directional signs is
requested in order to deflect the need for a sign program for the community.
Staff recommends the Planning Commission review the proposed amendment to
the La Paloma Specific Plan, particularly the multiple requests for deviations from
the La Quinta Municipal Code, and discuss any areas of concern.
Sustainability:
The proposed La Paloma community should be an environmentally sustainable
community. The project is designed to provide access to public transportation
(with SunLine bus stops located adjacent and within close proximity to the
community), encourage employee carpool programs, install strategically -placed
recycling collections bins, and construct energy -efficient amenities. Furthermore,
PAReports - PC\2011\6-28-11\La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 9 of 13
architectural features, such as color, materials, and shading devices, will also
reduce energy demands on the community. Landscaping will also meet or exceed
Coachella Valley Water District water budget requirements.
ALRC Review
On June 1, 2011, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee reviewed
these architectural, site, and landscaping plans, and unanimously recommended
approval of the amended site development permit, subject to the following staff -
recommended conditions of approval (Attachment 3):
1. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping
Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans).
2. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed
landscape architect.
3. All new and modified landscape areas shall have landscaping and
permanent irrigation improvements in compliance with the City's Water
Efficient Landscape regulations contained in LQMC Section 8.13 (Water
Efficient Landscape).
4. Lighting plans shall be submitted with the final landscaping plans for a
recommendation to the Planning Director for his approval. Exterior lighting
shall be consistent with LQMC Section 9.100.150 (Outdoor Lighting). All
freestanding lighting shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and shall be fitted
with a visor if deemed necessary by staff to minimize trespass of light off
the property. The illuminated carports shall be included in the
photometric study as part of the final lighting plan submittal.
5. All water features shall be designed to minimize "splash", and use high
efficiency pumps and lighting to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
They shall be included in the landscape plan water efficiency calculations
per Municipal Code Chapter 8.13.
6. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be completely screened from view
behind the parapet. Utility transformers or other ground mounted
mechanical equipment shall be fully screened with a screening wall or
landscaping and painted to match the adjacent buildings.
7. The applicant shall submit the final landscape plans for review,
processing and approval to the Planning Department, in accordance with
the Final Landscape Plan application process. Planning Director approval
of the final landscape plans is required prior to issuance of the first
P:\Reports - PC\201 1\6-28-1 1\La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 10 of 13
building permit unless the Planning Director determines extenuating
circumstances exist which justifies an alternative processing schedule.
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the
appropriate City official, including the Planning Director and/or City
Engineer.
8. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance
requirements per guidelines in the AASHTO "A Policy on Geometric
Design of Highways and Streets, 5th 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.
Although not included as recommendations, during discussion of the project the
Committee focused on details such as carport colors, decorative paving,
mechanical screening, and the use of turf and water features, as the ALRC was
generally pleased with the architecture, site design, and project landscaping.
The applicant clarified that carports will be painted to match the building colors,
and decorative pavers will be used in the vehicular courtyard as well as on
pedestrian paths throughout the community. Also, the applicant confirmed that the
architectural design of the building will adequately screen all rooftop mechanical
equipment from view, particularly from the top of the bridge on Washington Street,,
south of Avenue 50.
With regards to the use of turf, the applicant clarified that the proposed putting
green in the central courtyard is constructed with artificial turf, and that the only
turf use of significance in the community is the active use turf area near the
swimming pool. With regards to the proposed water features, the Committee
could not come to a consensus regarding the proposed feature at the vehicular
courtyard after a discussion regarding scale and pedestrian interactivity.
Environmental Review
The City of La Quinta Planning Department has determined that this request has
been previously assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment 2003-470
which was prepared for Specific Plan 2004-071, which was certified on December
23, 2004. No changed circumstances or conditions are proposed which would
trigger the preparation of subsequent environmental analysis pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21166.
Neighborhood Meeting
On June 1, 2011, the applicant and the development team for La Paloma presented
their proposal at a neighborhood meeting. Notices for the informational meeting
P1Reports - PC\2011\6-28-1 Me Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 11 of 13
were sent out to properties within 500 feet of the La Paloma property (Attachment
4). Two people showed up to the meeting. Both attendees were representatives
of the property on the southeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50. The
Planning Department has not received any written or verbal comments regarding
the proposed project as a result of the neighborhood meeting.
Public Notice
This project was advertised in The Desert Sun newspaper on June 3, 2011, and
mailed to all property owners within 500 feet of the site. To date, no comments
have been received from adjacent property owners. Any written comments
received will be handed out at the Planning Commission hearing.
SB-18 Native American Tribal Consultation
As per SB-18 (2004) consultation requirements, information regarding the proposed
Specific Plan was forwarded to those Tribes referenced on the Tribal Consultation
List provided by the Native American Heritage Commission. Staff has followed up
with all Tribes requesting information or consultation and placed their
recommendations for monitoring in the Conditions of Approval.
June 14, 2011 Planning Commission Meeting
At the June 14, 2011 public hearing, the applicant submitted a letter to staff
outlining objections to eight of the recommended conditions of approval
(Attachment 5).
One objection addresses the proposed site development permit expiration date.
The applicant has requested that a two-year approval be granted, rather than one
year. Staff finds this to be an acceptable request due to the extent of work
necessary to prepare plans in accordance with the proposed amendments, and has
revised all Findings, Recommendations, and Conditions of Approval to allow for a
two-year approval.
Five of the objections address Public Works/Engineering conditions of approval
(COA nos. 14, 25, 28, 34, 52). These primarily involve future street dedications,
establishments of benchmarks, turning movements, and drainage. The Public
Works Department has reviewed the applicant's requests, and has responded to
each of them (Attachment 6.)
Two of the objections to the recommended conditions of approval address Fire
Department requirements. The applicant has since collaborated with the Fire
Department regarding the requested changes, and the attached recommended
conditions of approval have been revised to reflect their discussions.
PAReports - PC\201 1\6-28-1 1\La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 12 of 13
FINDINGS
Findings to recommend approval of this request can be made and are contained in
the attached Resolutions.
RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2011- , recommending to the
City Council approval of Specific Plan 2004-071 Amendment 1, subject
to the attached Findings and Conditions of Approval; and,
2. Adopt Planning Commission Resolution 2011- , recommending to the
City Council approval of Site Development Permit 2003-762 Extension 4,
and Site D velopment Permit 2003-762 Amendment 1, subject to the
attached Indings and Conditions of Approval.
by:
Planner
1. La Paloma Site Development Permit Packet
2. La Paloma Specific Plan
3. Minutes of June 1, 2011 ALRC meeting
4. Neighborhood Meeting notice
5. Letter of Response from Applicant regarding Conditions of Approval
6. Letter of Response from City Staff regarding Conditions of Approval
PAReports - PC\2011 \6-28-11 \La Paloma - cont\LA PALOMA PC cont REPORT.docx Page 13 of 13
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-
071 AMENDMENT 1, FOR LA PALOMA
CASE: SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-071 AMENDMENT 1
APPLICANT: WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California did, on the 28" day of June, 2011, hold a duly noticed Public Hearing, as
continued from the regularly -scheduled Public Hearing on June 14, 2011, to
consider a request by WSL La Quinta, LLC for approval an amendment to the
existing La Paloma Specific Plan in order to accommodate plans for a 208-unit
senior living community located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and
Avenue 50, more particularly described as:
APN: 646-070-016
WHEREAS, the Planning Department published a public hearing notice
in The Desert Sun newspaper on June 3, 2011 as prescribed by the Municipal
Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500
feet of the site; and,.
WHEREAS, per SB-18 consultation requirements, the Planning
Department has forwarded information regarding the proposed amended Specific
Plan to those Tribes referenced on the Tribal Consultation List provided by the
Native American Heritage Commission and has followed up with all Tribes
requesting information or consultation and placed their recommendations for
monitoring in the Conditions of Approval; and,
WHEREAS, the La Quinta Planning Department has determined that
this request has been previously assessed in conjunction with Environmental
Assessment 2003-470 which was prepared for Specific Plan 2004-071, which was
certified on December 23, 2004. No changed circumstances or conditions are
proposed which would trigger the preparation of subsequent environmental analysis
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21 166; 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 pursuant to
Section 9.240.010 of the La Quinta Municipal Code to justify recommending to the
City Council approval of said Specific Plan:
Planning Commission Resolution 2011-
Specific Plan 2004-071 Amendment 1
WSL Le Quints, LLC
Page 2
1. Consistency with the General Plan
The proposed Specific Plan amendment is consistent with the goals and
policies of the La Quinta General Plan in that the design, height, scale and
mass of the buildings within the community are compatible with the goals
and policies of the General Plan Medium High Density Residential (MHDR)
Land Use designation.
2. Public Welfare
Approval of the proposed specific plan amendment will not create
conditions materially detrimental to public health, safety and general
welfare as Environmental Assessment 2003-470 was prepared, and
certification of the Environmental Assessment is in compliance with
CEQA requirements.
3. Land Use Compatibility
The proposed Specific Plan amendment incorporates land uses that are
compatible with zoning on adjacent properties. The design and density
regulations specified in the Specific Plan amendment for residential and
related recreational facilities are compatible with the existing single-family
homes located near the specific plan area and on surrounding properties.
4. Property Suitability
The uses permitted in the specific plan amendment, including age -
restricted residences and common areas, are suitable and appropriate for
the subject property in that the community is surrounded by similar
existing uses such as single-family homes. The current specific plan area,
is served without adverse impact by all necessary public services and
utilities.
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 said Planning Commission in this case; and
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of
Specific Plan 2004-071 Amendment 1 to the City Council for the reasons
set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
Planning Commission Resolution 2011-
Specific Plan 2004-071 Amendment 1
WSL La Quints, LLC
Page 3
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 281" day of June, 2011 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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SPECIFIC PLAN 2004-071 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
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 counsel.
The City shall promptly notify the applicant of any claim, action or proceeding and
shall cooperate fully in the defense.
2. Specific Plan 2004-071 Amendment 1 shall be developed in compliance with
these conditions, and the approved Specific Plan document. In the event of any
conflicts between these conditions and the provisions of SP 2004-0071
Amendment 1, these conditions shall take precedence.
3. Specific Plan 2004-071 Amendment 1 shall comply with all applicable conditions
and/or mitigation measures for the following related approvals:
Site Development Permit 2003-762 Amendment 1
In the event of any conflict(s) between approval conditions and/or provisions of
these approvals, the Planning Director shall determine precedence.
4. Within 30 days of City Council approval, applicant shall provide five copies of the
Final Specific Plan document, as amended by this action, to the Planning
Department. The Final Specific Plan shall include all text and graphics except as
amended by this action, all amendments per this action, and correction of any
typographical errors, internal document inconsistencies, and other amendments
deemed necessary by the Planning Director.
Page 1 of 1
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF LA QUINTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO
THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT
PERMIT 2003-762, TIME EXTENSION 4 AND
AMENDMENT 1, INCLUDING ARCHITECTURAL, SITE, AND
LANDSCAPING PLANS FOR LA PALOMA
CASES: SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762
EXTENSION 4 AND AMENDMENT 1
APPLICANT: WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of La Quinta,
California did, on the 281" day of June, 2011, hold a.duly noticed Public Hearing, as
continued from the regularly -scheduled Public Hearing on June 14, 2011, to
consider a request by WSL La Quinta, LLC for approval of a fourth extension of
time and an amendment to architectural, site, and landscaping plans for a 208-unit
senior living community located on the northeast corner of Washington Street and
Avenue 50, more particularly described as:
APN: 646-070-016
WHEREAS, the Planning Department published a public hearing notice
in The Desert Sun newspaper on June 3, 2011 as prescribed by the Municipal
Code. Public hearing notices were also mailed to all property owners within 500
feet of the site; and,
WHEREAS, the Architecture and Landscape Review Committee of the
City of La Quinta, California, did, on the 151 day of June, 2011, hold a public
meeting to review and discuss architecture, site, and landscape plans, the minutes
of said meeting were included in the staff report for consideration by the Planning
Commission; 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 pursuant to
Section 9.210.010 of the Municipal Code to justify approval of said Site
Development Permit time extension and amendment:
1. Consistency with the General Plan
The proposed Site Development Permit is consistent with the La Quinta
General Plan, as it proposes a multi -unit age -restricted residential
Planning Commission Resolution 2011-
Site Development Permit 2003-762, Extension 4, Amendment 1
WSL La Quints, LLC
Page 2
community, which is General Plan -designated for MHDR (Medium High
Density Residential) development.
2. Consistency with the Zoning Code and La Paloma Specific Plan
The proposed structures, as conditioned, are consistent with the
development standards of the City's Zoning Code and the La Paloma
Specific Plan, in terms of architectural style, building height, building
mass, and landscaping. The community is consistent with the La Quinta
Zoning Map, as it proposes. a multi -unit age -restricted residential
community which is General Plan -designated for MHDR (Medium High
Density Residential) development. The site development permit has been
conditioned to ensure compliance with the zoning standards of the MHDR
district, and other supplemental standards as established in Title 9 of the
La Quinta Municipal Code and the La Paloma Specific Plan.
3. Compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
The La Quinta Planning Department has determined that this request has
been previously assessed in conjunction with Environmental Assessment
2003-470 which was prepared for Specific Plan 2004-071, which was
certified on December 23, 2004. No changed circumstances or
conditions are proposed which would trigger the preparation of
subsequent .environmental analysis pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 21166.
4. Architectural Design
The architectural design aspects of the proposed La Paloma community
provide interest through use of varied roof elements, enhanced building
and fagade treatments, and other design details which will be compatible
with, and not detrimental to, surrounding development, and with the
overall design quality prevalent in the City.
5. Site Design
The site design aspects of the proposed La Paloma community, as
conditioned, will be compatible with, and not detrimental to, surrounding
development, and with the overall design quality prevalent in the City, in
terms of interior circulation, pedestrian access, and other architectural
site design elements such as scale, mass, and appearance. The main
building and cottage units are properly sized with regards to height and
floor area, and are situated at engineer -approved locations with regards to
vehicular and pedestrian access. Furthermore, the visual impact of the
Planning Commission Resolution 2011-
Site Development Permit 2003-762, Extension 4, Amendment 1
WSL La Quints, LLC
Page 3
two-story main building is minimized from view from the existing
residential neighborhood to the north as the two-story portion of the main
building is located a minimum of 75 feet from existing single-family
homes on the south side of Saguaro Road, and the highest part of the
main building, the uninhabited tower feature, is set back over 150-feet
from the northern property line.
6. Landscape Design
The proposed project is consistent with the landscaping standards and
plant palette and implements the standards for landscaping and aesthetics
established in the General Plan and Zoning Code. Additionally, the
assorted species of plants, which are taken from the approved plant list in
the La Paloma Specific Plan, provide diversity and add character to the
proposed community. The project landscaping for the proposed
community, as conditioned, shall unify and enhance visual continuity of
the proposed community with the surrounding development. Landscape
improvements are designed and sized to provide visual appeal. The
permanent overall site landscaping utilizes various tree and shrub species
to blend with the building architecture.
7. Time Extension
The applicant has been diligently working on amending the previously -
granted entitlement in an effort to improve compatibility with existing
surrounding development, improve architectural quality, enhance project
hydrology, as well as improve vehicular and pedestrian circulation. Due
to the extent of work necessary to prepare plans in accordance with the
proposed amendments, a two-year extension from the date of
amendment approval is identified.
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 said Planning Commission in this case; and
2. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Site
Development Permit 2003-762 Extension 4, granting a one-year time
extension to July 5, 2012, for the reasons set forth in this Resolution and
subject to the attached Conditions of Approval; and
Planning Commission Resolution 2011-
Site Development Permit 2003-762, Extension 4, Amendment 1
WSL La Quints, LLC
Page 4
3. That the Planning Commission does hereby recommend approval of Site
Development Permit 2003-762 Amendment 1 to the City Council for the
reasons set forth in this Resolution, subject to the attached Conditions of
Approval.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the La
Quinta Planning Commission, held on this 28' day of June, 2011 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
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
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 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-quinta.org.
3. The Site Development Permit shall be expire two years from the date of City
Council approval (July 5, 2013), and shall become null and void in accordance
with La Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.210.020, unless a building permit has
been issued. A time extension may be requested per LQMC Section 9.200.080.
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, Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP)
Exemption Form — Whitewater River Region, Improvement Permit)
• Planning Department
• Riverside Co. Environmental Health Department
• Desert Sands Unified School District (DSUSD)
• Coachella Valley Water District (CVWD)
Imperial Irrigation District (IID)
Page 1 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
•. California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB)
• State Water Resources Control Board.
e SunLine Transit Agency (SUNLINE)
e South Coast Air Quality Management District Coachella Valley (SCAQMD)
The applicant is responsible for all requirements of the permits and/or clearances
from the above listed agencies. When these requirements include approval of
improvement plans, the applicant shall furnish proof of such approvals when
submitting those improvements plans for City approval.
5. A California Construction General Permit must be obtained by the applicant; who
then shall submit a copy of the Regional Water Quality Control Board's
("RWQCB") acknowledgment of the applicant's Notice of Intent ("NO[") and
Waste Discharger Identification (WDID) number, prior to the issuance of a grading
or building permit by the City.
6. 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. 2009-0009-DWQ and Order
No. 2010-0014-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") to the State Water
Resources Control Board.
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 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.
Page 2 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
C. 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).
2) Temporary Sediment Control.
3) Wind Erosion Control.
4) Tracking Control.
5) Non -Storm Water Management.
6) Waste Management and Materials Pollution Control.
E. The SWPPP and BMPs shall remain in effect for the entire duration of
project construction until all improvements are completed and accepted by
the City Council.
7. 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).
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. Developer shall reimburse the City, within thirty (30) days of presentment of the
invoice, all costs and actual consultant's fees incurred by the City for engineering
and/or surveying consultants to review and/or modify any documents or
instruments required by this project. 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.
Page 3 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
PROPERTY RIGHTS
11. 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 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.
12. Pursuant to the aforementioned condition, conferred rights shall include approvals
from the master developer or the HOA 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.
13. The applicant shall offer for dedication all public street rights -of -way in
conformance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code, applicable specific
plans, site development permit, and/or as required by the City Engineer.
14. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this development
include:
A. PUBLIC STREETS
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) - The standard 60
feet from the centerline of Washington Street for a total 120-foot
ultimate developed right of way except for:
Additional right-of-way is required on Washington Street north of
Avenue 50 to provide for the realignment of Washington Street to
accommodate the dual left turn lanes for southbound Washington
Street to eastbound Avenue 50 as approved by the City Engineer.
A. An additional variable right of way dedication for a
deceleration/right turn only lane and bus turnout at the
proposed primary project entry measured seventy-six feet (76')
east of the centerline of Washington Street and length as
conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
(Condition of Approval No. 23A(1)1b11.
2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial, Option B 100' ROW) - The standard 50
feet from the centerline of Avenue 50 for a total 100-foot ultimate
Page 4 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
developed right of way except for:
A. An additional right of way dedication of 10 feet for a right turn
only lane at the Avenue 50 intersection with Washington
Street (a total of sixty feet (60') north of the centerline of
Avenue 50) and length as conditioned under STREET AND
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS (Condition of Approval No.
23A(2)(a)1.
15. Dedications shall include additional widths as necessary for dedicated right and
left turn lanes, bus turnouts, and other features contained in the approved
construction plans.
Pursuant to this requirement, the Applicant shall include in the submittal packet
containing the rough grading plans submitted for plan checking, an offsite street
geometric layout, drawn at 1 " equals 40 feet, detailing the following design
aspects: median curb line, outside curb line, lane line alignment including lane
widths, left turn lanes, deceleration lane(s) and bus stop turnout(s). The
geometric layout shall be accompanied with sufficient professional engineering
studies to confirm the appropriate length of all proposed turn pockets and
auxiliary lanes that may impact the right of way dedication required of the project
and the associated landscape setback requirement.
16. When the City Engineer determines that access rights to the proposed street right-
of-way shown on the approved Site Development Permit are necessary prior to
approval of the improvements dedicating such right-of-way, the applicant shall
grant the necessary right-of-way within 60 days of a written request by the City.
17. The applicant shall create perimeter landscaping setbacks along all public rights -
of -way as follows:
A. Washington Street (Major Arterial) - 20-foot from the R/W-P/L.
B. Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial) — A minimum 20-foot from the R/W-P/L.
The listed setback depth shall be the average depth where a meandering wall
design is approved.
The setback requirements shall apply to all frontages including, but not limited to,
remainder parcels and sites dedicated for utility purposes.
Page 5 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
Where public facilities (e.g., sidewalks) are placed on privately -owned setbacks,
the applicant shall offer for dedication blanket easements for those purposes on
the Final Map.
18. At locations where the onsite finished grade adjacent to the landscaped setback
lot has an elevation differential with respect to the arterial street top of curb
exceeding 11.0 feet, the applicant shall comply with, and accommodate, the
maximum slope gradients in the parkway/setback area and meandering sidewalk
requirements by either: ►).increasing the landscape setback size as needed, or 2)
installing retaining walls between the sidewalk and the back of the landscaped
area as needed.
19. The applicant shall offer for dedication those easements necessary for the
placement of, and access to, utility lines and structures, drainage basins, mailbox
clusters, park lands, and common areas.
20. Direct vehicular access to Washington Street and Avenue 50 from lots with
frontage along Washington Street and Avenue 50 is restricted, except for those
access points identified on the Site Development Permit, or as otherwise
conditioned in these conditions of approval.
21. 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.
22. The applicant shall cause no easement to be granted, or recorded, over any
portion of the subject property after the date of approval of the Site Development
Permit unless such easement is approved by the City Engineer.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
23. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Sections 13.24.060
(Street Improvements), 13.24.070 (Street Design - Generally) & 13.24.100
(Access for Individual Properties and Development) for public streets; and Section
13.24.080 (Street Design - Private Streets), where private streets are proposed.
24. Streets shall have vertical curbs or other approved curb configurations that will
convey water without ponding, and provide lateral containment of dust and
residue during street sweeping operations. If a wedge or rolled curb design is
approved, the lip at the flowline shall be near vertical with a 1 /8" batter and a
minimum height of 0.1'. Unused curb cuts on any lot shall be restored to
standard curb height prior to final inspection of permanent building(s) on the lot.
Page 6 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
25. The applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with
the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses.)
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial; 120' R/W):
Widen the east side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the project
boundary to its ultimate width on the east side as specified in the General
Plan and the requirements of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or
reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and
convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban
arterial design standard. The east curb face shall be located fifty-one feet
(51') east of the centerline, except at locations where additional street
width is needed to accommodate:
a) The applicant shall construct a concrete bus stop pad
equipped with night lighting, bench, and trash receptacle north
of the primary entry drive on Washington Street as approved
by the Planning Director and the City Engineer. Bus turnout
shall be provided if required by SunLine Transit for the bus
stop.
b) A deceleration/right turn only lane with bus turnout
incorporated as part of the lane (if approved by SunLine
Transit and the City Engineer) shall be provided at the
Washington Street Primary Entry. The east curb face shall be
located sixty four feet (64') east of the centerline and length
to be determined by a traffic study prepared for the applicant
by a licensed traffic engineer per Engineering Bulletin # 06-13
or as determined by the City Engineer.
c) The east curb face shall be located fifty-six (56') east from the
centerline of Washington Street to accommodate the dual left
turn lane on southbound Washington Street at the Avenue 50
intersection.
Other required improvements in the Washington Street right-of-way and/or
adjacent landscape setback area include:
d) All appurtenant components such as, but not limited to: curb,
gutter, traffic control striping, legends, and signs.
Page 7 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
e) 8-foot wide meandering sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk
shall have an arrhythmic horizontal layout that utilizes concave
and convex curves with respect to the curb line that either
touches the back of curb or approaches within five feet of the
curb at intervals not to exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk
curvature radii should vary between 50 and 300 feet and at
each point of reverse curvature, the radius should change to
assist in creating the arrhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall
meander, into the landscape setback lot and approach within 5
feet of the perimeter wall at intervals not to exceed 250 feet.
f) Extend the existing raised median on Washington Street north
of Avenue 50 to line up with the curb face on the south side
of the primary entrance to prevent southbound Washington
Street traffic from making illegal left turns into the project
entrance on Washington Street as approved by the City
Engineer.
g) Establish a benchmark in the Washington Street right of way
and file a record of the benchmark with the County of
Riverside.
2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial — Option B; 100' R/W):
Widen the north side of the street along all frontage adjacent to the project
boundary to its ultimate width on the east side as specified in the General
Plan and the requirements . of these conditions. Rehabilitate and/or
reconstruct existing roadway pavement as necessary to augment and
convert it from a rural county -road design standard to La Quinta's urban
arterial design standard. The north curb face shall be located thirty-eight
feet (38') north of the centerline, except at locations where additional
street width is needed to accommodate:
a► A right turn only lane on Avenue 50 at the Avenue
50/Washington Street intersection. The north curb face shall
be located forty eight feet (48') north of the centerline of
Avenue 50 and deceleration length to be determined by a
traffic study prepared for the applicant by a licensed traffic
engineer per Engineering Bulletin # 06-13 or as determined by
the City Engineer.
Page 8 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMEN[
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
Other required improvements in
adjacent landscape setback area in
b) All appurtenant coml
gutter, traffic control
c) 6-foot wide meanderir
shall have an arrhythm
and convex curves w
touches the back of cr
curb at intervals not
curvature radii should
each point of reverse
assist in creating the
meander into the land;
feet of the perimeter )A
d) A 12-foot wide raised
as needed along the er
for a left turn lane for
the project entry on thi
for westbound Avent.
Washington Street and
1
Avenue 50 right-of-way and/or
such as, but not limited to; curb,
, legends, and signs.
sidewalk. The meandering sidewalk
horizontal layout that utilizes concave
i respect to the curb line that either
i or approaches within five feet of the
o exceed 250 feet. The sidewalk
iry between 50 and 300 feet and at
rrvature, the radius should change to
rhythmic layout. The sidewalk shall
ipe setback lot and approach within 5
1 at intervals not to exceed 250 feet.
indscaped median plus variable width
ire project boundary to accommodate
:he eastbound Avenue 50 traffic into
north side and for dual left turn lanes
50 traffic at the intersection of
.venue 50.
The landscaped median improvements are eligible for reimbursement
from the City's Development) Impact Fee fund in accordance with
policies established for that program.
e) In the event the left 1
traffic into the projec
construction of the off
development on other
widen the south side o1
to its existing southerh
existing two eastbound
24 feet) as approved b)
im pocket for eastbound Avenue 50
t entry is constructed prior to the
site improvements associated with the
side of the street, the applicant shall
Avenue 50 along the project boundary
right-of-way to maintain the currently
through lanes on Avenue 50 (minimum
the City Engineer.
The applicant shall extend improvements bl yond the project 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).
Page 9 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA OUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
Entry drives, main interior circulation routes, standard knuckles, corner cutbacks,
bus turnouts, dedicated turn lanes and other features shown on the approved
construction plans, may require additional street widths as may be determined by
the City Engineer.
The applicant is responsible for construction of all improvements mentioned
above.
B. INTERNAL STREETS
1► Construct internal streets per the approved Site Development Permit
Preliminary Grading Exhibit and as approved by the City Engineer.
Minimum street width shall be 26 feet except at the entry
accessway. On -street parking shall be prohibited except in
designated parking stall areas. The applicant shall make provisions
for perpetual enforcement of the No Parking restrictions.
2) The location of driveways shall not be located within the curb return
when possible.
C. KNUCKLE
1) Construct the knuckle to conform to the lay -out shown in the Site
Development Permit, except for minor revisions as may be required
by the City Engineer.
26. 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:
Residential/ 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.
Primary Arterial 4.5" a.c./6.0" c.a.b.
Major Arterial 5.5" a.c./6.5" c.a.b.
or the approved equivalents of alternate materials.
27. 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.
Page 10 of 20
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
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.
28. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
A. Primary Entry (Washington Street): Right turn movements in and out are
allowed. Left turn movements in and out are prohibited. All right -turn -out
only driveways shall have a splitter median island located in the driveway
throat that adequately channelizes the exiting right -turn vehicles turning
onto the arterial street to eliminate illegal left turns. The splitter island shall
be designed in conformance with design concepts approved by the City
Engineer.
B. Primary Entry (Avenue 50): Right turn in and out and left turn in
movements are allowed. Left turn movements out are prohibited. All right -
turn -out only driveways shall have a splitter median island located in the
driveway throat that adequately channelizes the exiting right -turn vehicles
turning onto the arterial street to eliminate illegal left turns. The splitter
island shall be designed in conformance with design concepts approved by
the City Engineer.
29. Improvements shall include appurtenances such as traffic control signs, markings
and other devices, raised medians if required, street name signs and sidewalks.
Mid -block street lighting is not required.
30. 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.
31. Standard knuckles and corner cut -backs shall conform to Riverside County
Standard Drawings #801 and #805, respectively, unless otherwise approved by
the City Engineer.
PARKING LOTS and ACCESS POINTS
32. The design of parking facilities shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150 and in
Page 11 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
particular the following:
A. The parking stall and aisle widths and the double hairpin stripe parking stall
design shall conform to LQMC Chapter 9.150.
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
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.
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.
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.
33. 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).
34. 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.
Page 12 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
A. On -Site Rough Grading Plan
B. PM10 Plan
C. WQMP
1 " = 40' Horizontal
1 " = 40' Horizontal
(Plan submitted in Report Form)
NOTE: A through C to be submitted concurrently.
D. On -Site Precise Grading Plan 1 " = 30' Horizontal
E. Off -Site Street Improvement/Storm Drain Plan
Vertical
F. Off -Site Signing & Striping Plan
1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4'
1 " = 40' Horizontal
The Off -Site street improvement plans shall have separate plan sheet(s)
(drawn at 20 scale) that show the meandering sidewalk, mounding, and
berming design in the combined parkway and landscape setback area.
G. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan
1 " = 40' Horizontal, 1 " = 4' Vertical
NOTE: D through G to be submitted concurrently.
(Separate Storm Drain Plans if applicable)
H. Off -Site Median Landscaping Plans 1 " = 40' Horizontal
Other engineered improvement plans prepared for City approval that are not listed
above shall be prepared informats approved by the City Engineer prior to
commencing plan preparation.
All Off -Site Plan & Profile Street Plans and Signing & Striping Plans shall show all
existing improvements for a distance of at least 200-feet beyond the project
limits, or a distance sufficient to show any required design transitions.
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.
Page 13 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
"Rough 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 2010
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
Public Works Department in conjunction with the Site Development Plan when it
is submitted for plan checking.
"On -Site Precise Grading" plans shall normally include all on -site surface
improvements including but not limited to finish grades for curbs & gutters,
building floor elevations, wall elevations, parking lot improvements and ADA
requirements.
35. 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.
36. The applicant shall furnish a complete set of all approved improvement plans on a
storage media acceptable to the City Engineer (currently mylars).
37. 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 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 FOR can make site visits in support of preparing "Record Drawing". However,
if subsequent approved revisions have been approved by the City Engineer and
reflect said "Record Drawing" conditions, the Engineer Of Record may submit a
letter attesting to said fact to the City Engineer in lieu of mylar submittal.
IMPROVEMENT SECURITY AGREEMENTS
38. Prior to constructing any off -site improvements on Washington Street and Avenue
Page 14 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
50, the applicant deposit securities equivalent to both a Performance and labor &
Material Bonds each valued at 100% of the cost of the off -site improvements
required on Washington Street and Avenue 50.
39. In the event the applicant fails to construct the improvements for the
development, or fails to satisfy its obligations for the development in a timely
manner, pursuant to the approved phasing plan, the City shall have the right to
halt issuance of all permits, and/or final inspections, withhold other approvals
related to the development of the project, or call upon the surety to complete the
improvements.
40. Depending on the timing of the development of this Site Development Permit, and
the status of the off -site improvements at the time, the applicant may be required
to:
A. Construct certain off -site improvements.
B. Construct additional off -site improvements, subject to the reimbursement of
its costs by others.
C. Reimburse others for those improvements previously. constructed that are
considered to be an obligation of this tentative tract map.
D. Secure the costs for future improvements that are to be made by others.
E. To agree to any combination of these actions, as the City may require.
Off -Site Improvements should be completed on a first priority basis. The applicant
shall complete Off -Site Improvements in the first phase of construction.
In the event that any of the improvements required for this development are
constructed by the City, the applicant shall, prior to the approval of the Final Map,
or the issuance of any permit related thereto, reimburse the City for the costs of
such improvements.
41. If the applicant elects to utilize the secured agreement alternative, the applicant
shall submit detailed construction cost estimates for all proposed on -site and off -
site improvements, including an estimate for the final survey monumentation, for
checking and approval by the City Engineer. Such estimates shall conform to the
unit cost schedule adopted by City resolution, or ordinance.
Page 15 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
For items not listed in the City's unit cost schedule, the proposed unit costs shall
be approved by the City Engineer.
Estimates for improvements under the jurisdiction of other agencies shall be
approved by those agencies and submitted to the City along with the applicant's
detailed cost estimates.
Security will not be required for telephone, natural gas, or Cable T.V.
improvements.
GRADING
42. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.050
(Grading Improvements).
43. 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.
44. 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 civil engineer registered in the State of
California,
B. A preliminary geotechnical ("soils") report prepared by an engineer
registered in the State of California,
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).
E. WQMP prepared by an engineer registered in the State of California
All grading shall conform with the recommendations contained in the Preliminary
Soils Report, and shall be certified as being adequate by soils engineer, or
engineering geologist registered in the State of California.
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.
Page 16 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
Additionally, the applicant shall replenish said security if expended by the City of
La Quinta to comply with the Plan as required by the City Engineer.
45. 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.
46. 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.
47. Building pad elevations on the rough grading plan submitted for City Engineer's
approval shall conform with pad elevations shown on the preliminary grading plan,
unless the pad elevations have other requirements imposed elsewhere in these
Conditions of Approval. Pursuant to the aforementioned, the applicant is advised
of the Coachella Valley Water District letter dated May 24, 2011 to the Planning
Department stating the development may set the finish floor elevations at a
minimum of 47 feet MSL with the condition that the development be protected by
means of a flood wall along the La Quinta Evacuation Channel. The flood wall
shall be certified by a geotechnical engineer with the top of the wall at a minimum
elevation of 52 feet AMSL as required by CVWD.
48. Building pad elevations of perimeter lots shall not differ by more that one foot
higher from the building pads in adjacent developments.
49. The applicant shall minimize the differences in elevation between the adjoining
properties and the lots within this development.
50. Prior to any site grading or regrading that will raise or lower any portion of the site
by more than plus or minus half of a foot (0.5') from the elevations shown on the
approved Site Development Permit Site Plan, the applicant shall submit the
proposed grading changes to the City Engineer for a substantial conformance
Page 17 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
finding review.
51. 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
52. If permitted by CVWD and the City Engineer, when an applicant proposes
discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the La Quinta Evacuation
Channel, the applicant shall indemnify the City from the costs of any sampling
and testing of the development's drainage discharge which may be required under
the City's NPDES Permit or other City- or area -wide pollution prevention program,
and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such
discharge. The applicant is required to construct required discharge treatment
Best Management Practice facilities per the NPDES Permit per Supplement A but
at a minimum shall install a CDS Unit or equal system as approved by the City
Engineer. The indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to
the issuance of any grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding
on all heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the
land within this tentative parcel map excepting therefrom those portions required
to be dedicated or deeded for public use. The form of the indemnification shall be
acceptable to the City Attorney. If such discharge is approved for this
development, the applicant shall make provisions for meeting these obligations.
The 100-year storm water HGL shall be at 48 foot elevation + or as determined
by CVWD.
Additionally, the applicant shall submit verification to the City of CVWD
acceptance of the proposed discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into
the La Quinta Evacuation Channel with the initial submittal of storm drain
improvement plans.
53. Since the preliminary rough grading plans previously submitted to the Public
Works Department did not demonstrate how storm water would be adequately
discharged into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel during major storm events
Page 18 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
resulting in possible flooding of the site, the applicant is hereby notified that
future site modifications may be necessary including, but not limited to building
and street reconfiguration and additional improvements to the existing drainage
facilities. Verification of the proposed storm water retention system is subject to
review and approval by the Coachella Valley Water District and the City Engineer.
If in the event, the proposed retention capacity or pass through storm water flow
is found to be inadequate during final design, the Applicant shall revise what is
currently proposed in the preliminary hydrology study and make adjustments to
the site layout as needed to accommodate the increased retention/detention or
pass through capacity required to satisfy safety issues of the Public Works
Department and CVWD. Pursuant to the aforementioned, the applicant may be
required to construct additional underground and above ground drainage facilities
to convey on site and off site stormwater as well as stormwater from adjacent
terrain by the La Quinta Evacuation Channel that historically flows onto and/or
through the project site. Any proposed channels that convey stormwater shall be
lined to protect against erosion as required by the Public Works Department and
CVWD.
54. If the development is not able to discharge storm or nuisance water from the
project into the La Quinta. Evacuation Channel, 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 either the 1 hour, 3 hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest
total run off.
55. 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.
56. In 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.
57. The project shall be designed to accommodate purging and blowoff water
Page 19 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
(through underground piping and/or retention facilities) from any on -site or
adjacent well sites granted or dedicated to the local water utility authority as a
requirement for development of this property.
58. No fence or wall shall be constructed around any retention basin unless approved
by the Planning Director and the City Engineer.
59. For on -site above ground common retention basins, retention depth shall be
according to Engineering Bulletin No. 06-16 - Hydrology Report with Preliminary
Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems. Side slopes shall not exceed
3:1 and shall be planted with maintenance free ground cover. Additionally,
retention basin widths shall be not less than 20 feet at the bottom of the basin.
60. 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).
61. The design of the development shall not cause any increase in flood boundaries
and levels in any area outside the development.
62. 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.
63. Storm drainage historically received from adjoining property shall be received and
retained or passed through into the historic downstream drainage relief route.
64. The applicant shall comply with applicable provisions for post construction runoff
per 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; and the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board - Colorado River Basin (CRWQCB-CRB)
Region Board Order No. 137-2008-001.
E. 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
Page 20 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
No. R7-2008-001
F. The applicant shall implement the WQMP Design Standards per (CRWQCB-
CRB) Region Board Order No. 137-2008-001 utilizing BMPs approved by the
City Engineer. A project specific WQMP shall be provided which
incorporates Site Design and Treatment BMPs utilizing first flush infiltration
as a preferred method of NPDES Permit Compliance for Whitewater River
receiving water, as applicable.
G. The developer shall execute and record a Stormwater Management/BMP
Facilities Agreement that provides for the perpetual maintenance and
operation of stormwater BMPs.
65. The applicant shall install suitable facilities along the easterly boundary of the
project to preserve CVWD access and prohibit access to the right-of-way of the
La Quinta Evacuation Channel. Additionally, the applicant shall work with CVWD
to construct,a perpetual maintenance access to the La Quinta Evacuation Channel
as required by CVWD and approved by the City Engineer.
UTILITIES
66. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.110
(Utilities).
67. 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.
68. Existing overhead utility lines within, or adjacent to the proposed development,
and all proposed utilities shall be installed underground.
All existing utility lines attached to joint use 92 KV transmission power poles are
exempt from the requirement to be placed underground.
69. 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
Page 21 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
thereof shall be located as to not conflict with access aisles/entrances.
70. Utility easements in favor of CVWD shall be clear of any obstructions including
overhead obstructions.
71. 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
72. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping
Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans).
73. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape
architect.
74. All new and modified landscape areas shall have landscaping and permanent
irrigation improvements in compliance with the City's Water Efficient Landscape
regulations contained in LQMC Section 8.13 (Water Efficient Landscape).
75. Lighting plans shall be submitted with the final landscaping plans for a
recommendation to the Planning Director for his approval. Exterior lighting shall be
consistent with LQMC Section 9.100.150 (Outdoor Lighting). All freestanding
lighting shall not exceed 18 feet in height, and shall be fitted with a visor if
deemed necessary by staff to minimize trespass of light off the property. The
illuminated carports shall be included in the photometric study as part of the final
lighting plan submittal.
76. All water features shall be designed to minimize "splash", and use high efficiency
pumps and lighting to the satisfaction of the Planning Director. They shall be
included in the landscape plan water efficiency calculations per Municipal Code
Chapter 8.13.
Page 22 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
77. All rooftop mechanical equipment shall be completely screened from view behind
the parapet. Utility transformers or other ground mounted mechanical equipment
shall be fully screened with a screening wall or landscaping and painted to match
the adjacent buildings.
78. The applicant shall submit the final landscape plans for review, processing and
approval to the Planning Department, in accordance with the Final Landscape Plan
application process. Planning Director approval of the final landscape plans is
required prior to issuance of the first building permit unless the Planning Director
determines extenuating circumstances exist which justifies an alternative
processing schedule.
NOTE: Plans are not approved for construction until signed by the appropriate City
official, including the Planning Director and/or City Engineer.
79. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance
requirements per guidelines in the AASHTO "A Policy on Geometric Design of
Highways and Streets, 5th 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.
80. The applicant shall comply with LQMC Sections 13.24.130 (Landscaping
. Setbacks) & 13.24.140 (Landscaping Plans).
81. The applicant shall provide landscaping in the required setbacks, retention basins,
common lots and park areas.
82. Landscape and irrigation plans for landscaped lots and setbacks, medians,
retention basins, and parks shall be signed and stamped by a licensed landscape
architect.
83. All trees located within the project site shall have a minimum trunk caliper of 2.5
inches.
84. The applicant shall submit all landscape plans for approval by the Planning
Department with 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.
Landscape plans for landscaped medians 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 approval by the Public
Page 23 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
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.
85. Final field inspection of all landscaping materials, including all vegetation,
hardscape and irrigation systems is required by the Planning Department prior to
final project sign -off by the Planning Department. Prior to such field inspection,
written verification by the project's landscape architect of record stating that all
vegetation, hardscape and irrigation systems have been installed in accordance
with the approved final landscape plans shall be submitted to the Planning
Department.
86. 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.
87. The applicant or his agent has the responsibility for proper sight distance
requirements per guidelines in the AASHTO "A Policy on Geometric Design of
Highways and Streets, 5`h 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.
PUBLIC SERVICES
88. The applicant shall provide public transit improvements as required by SunLine
Transit Agency and approved by the City Engineer.
MAINTENANCE
89. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.160
(Maintenance).
90. The applicant shall make provisions for the continuous and perpetual maintenance
of perimeter landscaping up to the curb, access drives, sidewalks, and
stormwater BMPs.
Page 24 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
FEES AND DEPOSITS
91. 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.
92. Permits issued under this approval shall be subject to the Coachella Valley Multi -
Species Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Community Habitat Conservation Plan
Mitigation Fee, in accordance with LQMC Chapter 3.34.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
93. Provide or show there exists a water system capable of delivering a fire flow
4000GPM per minute for four hours duration at 20 psi residual operating
pressure, which must be available before any combustible material is placed on
the construction site.
94. Approved accessible on -site super fire hydrants shall be located not to exceed
200 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.
95. The minimum dimension for gates is 20 feet clear and unobstructed width and a
minimum vertical clearance of 13 feet 6 inches in height. Any gate providing
access from a road shall be located at least 35 feet setback from the roadway
and shall open to allow a vehicle to stop without obstructing traffic on the road.
Where a one-way road with a single traffic lane provides access to a gate
entrance, a 38-foot turning radius shall be used.
96. Prior to building plan approval and construction, applicant/developer shall furnish
two copies of the water system fire hydrant plans to 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.
97. Prior to issuance of building permits, the water system for fire protection must be
provided as approved by the Fire Department and the local water authority.
98. Blue dot retro-reflectors pavement markers on private streets, public streets and
Page 25 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
driveways to indicated location of the fire hydrant. 06-05 (located at
www.rvcfire.org)
99. Fire Apparatus access road shall be in compliance with the Riverside County Fire
Department Standard number 06-05 (located at www.rvcfire.org). Access lanes
will not have an up, or downgrade of more than 15%. Access roads shall have an
unobstructed vertical clearance not less than 13 feet and 6 inches. Access lanes
will be designed to withstand the weight of 60 thousand pounds over 2 axles.
Access will have a turning radius capable of accommodating fire apparatus.
Access lane shall be constructed with a surface so as to provide all weather
driving capabilities.
100. Dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be
provided with approved provision for the turn around capabilities of fire apparatus
101. Driveway loops, fire apparatus access lanes and entrance curb radius should be
designed to adequately allow access of emergency fire vehicles. The applicant or
developer shall include in the building plans the required fire lanes and include the
appropriate lane printing and/or signs.
102. An approved Fire Department access key lock box shall be installed next to the
approved Fire Department access door to the building. Required order forms and
installation standards may be obtained at the Fire Department.
103. Display street numbers in a prominent location on the address side of building(s)
and/or rear access if applicable. Numbers and letters shall be a minimum of 12" in
height for building(s) up to 25' in height. In complexes with alpha designations,
letter size must match numbers. All addressing must be legible, of a contrasting
color, and adequately illuminated to be visible from street at all hours.
104. Should any portion of the building be deemed "mixed occupancy" the sprinkler
system shall be designed per referenced standard NFPA13R 7.2.4.1 through
7.2.4.2 per the CBC.
105. The PIV and FCD shall be located to the front of building and a minimum of 25
feet from the building(s). Sprinkler riser room must have indicating exterior and/or
interior door signs. A C-16 licensed contactor must submit plans, along with
current permit fees, to the Fire Department for review and approval prior to
installation.
106. Install an alarm monitoring system for fire sprinkler system(s) with 20 or more
heads, along with current permit fees, to the Fire Department for review and
Page 26 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
approval prior to installation.
107. Install a portable fire extinguisher, with a minimum rating of 2A-10BC, for every
3,000 sq. ft. and/or 75 feet of travel distance. Fire extinguishers shall be
mounted 3.5 to 5 ft 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.
108. No hazardous materials shall be stored and/or used within the building, which
exceeds quantities listed in 2010 CBC. No class I, II or IIIA of
combustible/flammable liquid shall be used in any amount in the building.
109. Exit designs, exit signs, door hardware, exit markers, exit doors, and exit path
marking shall be installed per the 2010 California Building Code.
110. Electrical room doors if applicable shall be posted "ELECTRICAL ROOM" on
outside of door.
111. Fire Alarm Control Panel room doors if applicable shall be posted "FACP" on
outside of door.
112. Fire Riser Sprinkler room doors if applicable shall be posted "Fire Riser" on outside
of door.
113. Roof Access room door if applicable shall be posted "Roof Access" on outside of
door.
114. Access shall be provided to all mechanical equipment located on the roof as
required by the Mechanical Code.
115. Air handling systems supplying air in excess of 2000 cubic feet per minute to
enclosed spaces within buildings shall be equipped with an automatic shutoff.
2010 CMC
116. Gatels► shall be automatic or manual operated. Install Knox key operated
switches, with dust cover, mounted per recommended standard of the Knox
Company. Building plans shall include mounting location/position and operating
standards for Fire Department approval.
117. Nothing in our review shall be construed as encompassing structural integrity.
Review of this plan does not authorize or approve any omission or deviation from
all applicable regulations. Final approval is subject to plan review and field
Page 27 of 28
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 2011-
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL - RECOMMENDED
SITE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT 2003-762 AMENDMENT 1
WSL LA QUINTA, LLC
JUNE 28, 2011
inspection. All questions regarding the meaning of the code requirements should
be referred to Fire Department at 760-863-8886.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
118. Approved Cultural Resource Monitor(s) be present during all ground disturbing
activities. Experience has shown that there is always a possibility of encountering
buried cultural resources during construction related excavations, or
archaeological testing/data recovery. Should buried cultural deposits be
encountered, the Monitor may request that destructive construction halt and the
Monitor shall notify a Qualified (Secretary of the Interior's Standards and
Guidelines) Archaeologist to investigate and, if necessary, prepare a mitigation
plan for submission to the City and the Ague Caliente THPO.
119. Additionally, in accordance with State law, the County Coroner should be
contacted if any human remains are found during earthmoving activities. If the
remains are determined to be of Native American origin, the Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC) shall be contacted. The NAHC will make a
determination of the Most Likely Descendent (MLD). The City will work with the
designated MLD to determine the final disposition of the remains.
120. A sign permit shall be submitted for staff approval for proposed monument signs
specified in Specific Plan 2004-071 Amendment 1.
Page 28 of 28
ATTACHMENT 3
MINUTES
ARCHITECTURE & LANDSCAPING REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING
A regular meeting held at the La Quinta City Hall
78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA
June 1, 2011 10:00 a.m.
CALL TO ORDER
A. This regular meeting of the Architecture and Landscaping Review
Committee was called to order at 10:00 a.m. by Planning Manager
David Sawyer who led the Committee in the flag salute.
B. Committee Members Present: Jason Arnold, Kevin McCune, and
David Thorns
Committee Member Absent: None
C. Staff present: Planning Manager David Sawyer, Associate Planner
Jay Wuu, and Secretary Monika Radeva.
II. PUBLIC COMMENT: None
III. CONFIRMATION OF THE AGENDA: Confirmed
IV. CONSENT CALENDAR:
Staff asked if there were any changes to the Minutes of April 6, 2011.
There being no comments or corrections it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Arnold/Thoms to approve the minutes as submitted.
Unanimously Approved.
V. BUSINESS ITEMS:
A. Site Development Permit 2003-762, Amendment 1, a request
submitted by WSL La Quinta, LLC. for consideration of
Architectural, Site, and Landscaping Plans for La Paloma, a 208-unit
senior living community located at the northeast corner of
Washington Street and Avenue 50.
Associate Planner Jay Wuu presented the information contained in
the staff report, a copy of which is on file in the Planning
Department.
Architecture and Landscaping. Review Committee
Minutes
June 1, 2011
Committee Member McCune said he reviewed the plans extensively
and was very pleased with the project and the proposed desert
contemporary architectural style. He said RGA Landscape
Architects, Inc. had done an outstanding job with the plant palette
selection. He suggested the applicant use synthetic turf for the
putting greens to avoid maintenance issues, but he thought that.
natural turf should be used for the proposed courtyards.
Committee Member McCune commended the applicant for choosing
to use LED lighting, and he said he found the proposed water
features to be adequate and in line with the City's water
conservation efforts.
Committee Member McCune said he found the proposed project to
be beautiful and was very much in favor of it.
Committee Member Arnold said he was also very pleased with the
proposed plans and was in agreement with staff's recommendations
and Committee Member McCune's comments, as stated above, and
was very much in favor of the project as well.
Committee Member Thorns commended staff for the well -written
staff report on the project, he said the report was very informative.
He also commended the project architect as he found the proposed
desert contemporary architectural style to be well -welcomed in the
City of La Quints.
Committee Member Thorns asked if there was exterior access to
the proposed courtyards, from the outside of the buildings.
Mr. Greg Irwin, Partner of IPA Irwin Partners Architects, 245
Fischer Avenue, Suite # B-2, Costa Mesa, CA 92626, introduced
himself and said the courtyards were not accessible from the
outside, but the doors were aligned in such a way that one could go
through the building from one side directly to the other.
Committee Member Thorns asked how the turf in the courtyards
would be maintained if there was no exterior access. Mr. Irwin said
the floor surface used in the hallways of the buildings allowed for
lawn mowers and other equipment to be pushed through the
building into the courtyard.
P:\Reports - ALRC\2011\ALRC_6-22-11_Special Mtg\ALRC M1N_6-1-11_Approved.docx 2
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
June 1, 2011
Committee Member Thorns suggested the applicant use artificial
turf in the courtyards to avoid maintenance issues and water
overspray on the concrete.
Ron Gregory, President of RGA Landscape Architects, Inc., 74020
Alessandro, Suite E, Palm Desert, CA 92260, introduced himself
and clarified that the applicant was proposing the use of natural turf
only in the main courtyard, as it was much cooler in the summer
and the turf would be more actively used. He noted that artificial
turf would be used in the remaining courtyards. He assured the
Committee that the applicant was aware of the difficulties involved
with maintaining the natural turf and was prepared to deal with it as
best as possible. He noted the turf would be kept minimum 18",
maybe 24" away from the buildings, and very low -arc sprinkler
heads would be utilized, to minimize the overspray of water.
General discussion followed regarding the advantages and
disadvantage of the use of natural vs. synthetic turf.
Committee Member Thorns suggested the applicant reconsider the
proposed locations of the trees for the covered parking areas
located on the east, as some of them might potentially interfere
with the parking spaces. Mr. Gregory said the suggestion would be
taken into account when finalizing the landscaping plans.
Committee Member Thorns asked what material would be used for
the property line wall on the north side of the project. He noted the
proposed wall would create a trapping space between the wall and
the existing residential fences. Mr. Irwin said it would be a block
wall and explained that the existing fences were not consistent in
material and setbacks; therefore, in order to create a nice clean look
for the project, a new wall would have to be built. He explained the
residents could tear down their existing fences and the proposed
wall would become the new consistent property line.
Committee Member Thorns asked if the residents would have to
absorb the demolition costs. Mr. Irwin replied the residents would
have pay to have their existing fences torn down, however, they
would not be incurring any of the cost associated with building the
new proposed wall. He said the applicant had scheduled a meeting
with the residents to discuss any issues and/or concerns.
P:\Reports-ALRC\2011WLRC_6-22-11_SpecialMtg\ARCMIN_6-1-11_Approved.docx 3
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
June 1, 2011
Committee Member Thoms suggested the applicant remove the
proposed water feature for the front courtyard. He encouraged the
use of decorative paving to enhance the concrete image of the
walkways and the courtyard. Mr. Gregory replied it was the
applicant's intention to use decorative pavers, however, the details
and materials had not yet been selected.
Committee Member Thorns suggested the facia of the carports be
painted in one of the darker and stronger colors selected for the
buildings to make it stand out and to expand the color palette
throughout the entire project.
Committee Member Thorns said when traveling north on
Washington Street, the project is visible from a birds point of view
for part of the way. Therefore, he suggested that any equipment
located on the roof be completely screened. Mr. Irwin replied that
all equipment located on the roof would be completely screened and
that it was the applicant's intent to make the screening an
architectural element to the buildings as well.
Committee
Member
Thorns asked staff to consult
with the traffic
engineer to
find out
if a u-turn could be allowed
on Washington
Street from
Avenue
50 while traveling southbound.
He said there
was a left
turning
lane currently existing, but
no u-turn was
allowed.
There being no further discussion, it was moved and seconded by
Committee Members Thoms/McCune to adopt Minute Motion 2011-
004, recommending approval of Site Development Permit 2003-
762, Amendment 1, with staff's recommendations. Unanimously
approved.
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN MATERIAL: None
VII. COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS: None.
Vill. PLANNING STAFF ITEMS:
B. Discussion Regarding Summer Meeting Schedule
The Architecture and Landscape Review Committee unanimously agreed
to go dark in the month of July 2011.
P:Vteports - ALRC\2011\A RC_6-22-11_Special Mtg\ALRC NUN _6-1-11_Approved.docx 4
Architecture and Landscaping Review Committee
Minutes
June 1, 2011
IX. ADJOURNMENT:
There being no further business, it was moved and seconded by Committee
Members McCune/Thoms to adjourn this meeting of the Architecture and
Landscaping Review Committee to a Special Meeting to be held on June 22,
2011. This meeting was adjourned at 10:38 a.m. on June 1, 2011.
Resp tfullr ubmitted,
MONIKA RADEV
Secretary
P: Reports-ALRC\2011W RC_6-22-11_Special Mtg41LRC MIN_6-1-11_Approved.docx 5
ATTACHMENT 4
r- b6d; t 0 1
i�. �`
I �y1 Y /j 7�F6
I. �.
I
Date: June 1;2011
ry
Time. 530 PtvV: 6 30 PPvt
Place Cify of. Lai nta Library'
Community Room
Dear. Resident,-
'We would like to share,with you our proposed development located on 14+/- acres at
the northeast comer of tashington Street and Rvenue'SO in La Quinta. We are
processing
. enKHelnents wffh the,, ity for a full service senior-cbmmunity that oAll-consist of independent
'
living as to Win, m g sand rrleary care units`. .
You are invitgd
to cittend o neighborhood meeting an,Wednesdoy .dune; Itt at 5:30PM at
the La t�uint' Library
-0rc rpvnity Room;' We°,Yuould like -to take the.opportunity to acquaint
you it ttiedesign an to 116ar your feedback regarding; the new development
,A.
,, C.i 3 Eq uss
., ,. ...
..�mx IV
�4r'u ..
-` 5{HOF0 s M.ig
3
E
June 14, 2011
JayWuu, Associate Planner
Planning Department
CITY OF LAQUINTA
T8-495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta CA 92247
Subject: La Paloma Specific Plan 2004-071 /Site Development Permit 2003- 762
Amendment No.1 Draft Conditions of Approval
Dear Jay:
On behalf of our client West Living we offer the following comments to the Conditions of.
Approval dated June 14, 2011. We are available to answer any questions regarding fhese
requested modifications:
GENERAL
3. The Site 0evelupment Parrnft shall expire one year from the date of City Council approval
(July 5, 2012), and shelf become null and void in accordance weth La Quints Municipal Code
Section 9,210,020, unless a building permit has been issued. A tie extension may be
requested per LQAdC Section 9.200080.
We would Hke, to request that the SDP approval be for a period of 2 years.
PROPERTY RIGIiTS
14. The public street right-of-wey offers for dedication required for this development include:
A. Public Streets
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) - The standard 60 feet from the
centedine of Washington Street for a total of 120-fppt ultimate developed right of
way except for.
Additional right-of-way. is required on Washington Street north of Avenue 50 to
provide for the realignment of Washington Street to accommodate the dust left tum
lanes for southbound Washington Street to eastbound Avenue Sit as approved by
the City Engineer.
34200,BOB MOPE DRIVE ® RANCHO MIRAGE ® CALIFORNIA ® 92270
760-320-9911 ® 760-323-7893 FAX ® www.MSACONSULTIN4GINC.COM
Mr. Jay Wuu
June 13, 2011
Page 2 of 4
A. An additional variable night of way dedication for the decaleratlonlright turn only
lane and bus turnout at the proposed primary project entry measures seventy-
six. feet (76) east of the c:enterfine of Washington Street and length as.
conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS (Condition of
Approval No. 23A(1) (b))'.
2) Avenue. 50 (Primary Arterial, Option B 10V ROW) - The standard 50 feet from the
centerline of Avenue 50 fDr a total of 100-foot ultimate developed right of way
except for
A. An additional light of way dedication of 10 feet for a right turn only large at the
Avenue 50 intersection with Washington Street (a total of 60 feet (60') north of
the centerffne of Avenue 50) and length as conditioned under STREET AND
TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS (Condition of Approval No. 23A (2)(8)).
We would note that all dedications have been made to the City with the -exception of the
deceleration lane on Washington.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
26. The Applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform with the
General Plan (street type noted in parentheses).
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial, • 120' RIkVJ
g) Establish a benchmark in the Washington Street right of away and file a record of the
benchmark with the County of Riverside.
The condition requiring the establishment of a benchmark on Washington Street does
not appear to have a nexus to the development of this project and should be eliminated.
2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial @piton B; 100'R/W)
d) A 12 foot wide raisedlandscape median plus variable width as needed along the entire
project boundary to accommodate for a left turn lane for the eastbound Avenue 30 traffic
into the project entry on the north side and for dual left turn lanes for wastbound Avenue
50 traffic at the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 50.
Due to the unusual slope conditions on Avenue 50 east of the proposed entry, the
requirement to build the full median island and add pavement to maintain two eastbound
through traffic lanes could end up involving retaining walls and or encroachments Into
CVWD property on the south side of Avenue 50 which would be a financial burden on the
La Paloma project, We would propose building the median Island just past our Avenue
50 entry including landscapingbut then tapering the paving and striping at that pohrt
and leaving the remainder of the median and landscape east of the entry to the
developer of the project on the south side of Avenue 50 upon its development.
34200 Boa HOPE DIUVE 0 RANCHO MIRAGE a CAI IFQRNIA 0 9227�0
760-320-9811 a 760-323-7893 FAX a www.MSACoNSULTINs1NC.COM
Mr. Jay Wuu
June 13, 2011
pave 3 of 4
2& General access points and tuming movements of traffic are limited to the following:
B. PrimaryEntry (Avenue 50): Right turn in and out and left tum in movements are
allowed. Left turn movements out are prohibited. All nght-tum-out only driveways shall
have a splitter median Island located In the driveway throat that adequately
channalizes the existing right-tum vehicles turning onto the arterial street to eliminate
Illegal left turns. The spotter island shall be designed in conformance with daslgn
concepts approved by the City Engineer.
Both property owners Involved along Avenue 50 would like a full left in I left out
drlveway; we would request that the condition be changed to allow this type of access to :
both proPerties.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
34. The following Improvement plans shaft 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 ata.large scale IF
additional detail or plan clarity is desired Mote, the applicant may berequiredto prepare
other improvement plans not listed here pursuant to improvements required by other
agencies and utili(y purveyors.
G. On -Site Street ImprovementslSigning rt SNpingI term Drain Plan
We would request that the requirement for proffie of the on -site street improvements and
storm drain be eliminated. The on site driveway and parking area layout is not the same
as a typical street with continuous curb and gutter where profile design is an
understandable requirement.
DRIANAGE
52. The applicant shall comply with the provisions of LQMC Section 13.24.120 (Drainage),
Retention Basin Design Criteria, Engineering Bulletin No. 0&16 — Hydrology Report with
Preliminary Hydraulic Report Criteria for Storm Drain Systems and Engineering Bulletin 06-
015 — Underground Retention Basin Design Requirements. More specifically, stormweter
falling on site during the I00-year storm shaft be detained within the development, unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. The design storm shall be either the t hour, 3
hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total nun off.
While La Paloma has been designed for on -site retention, it is possible that direct
discharge (as currently approved) may be pursued based on a hydrology study of the
tributary of the evacuation channel. We would request that the condition be worded to
allow the direct discharge as an option subject to the demonstration of feasibility in said
study.
34200 BOB HOPE [ RIVE. a RANCHO [MIRAGE M CALIFORNIA 0 92270
760-320-9811 a 760-323-7893 FAX 0 www.MSACoNSULrINGINC.COM
Mr. Jay Wuu
June 13, 2011
Fade 4 of 4
FIRE DEPARTMENT
101. Install a complete commercial fire sprinkler system (per NFPA 13 2010 Edition). Fire
sprinkler systems with pipe sizes in excess of 4^ in diameter will require the project
Strucfurai Engineer to certffy 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. All. fire sprinkler risers shall be protected from any physical damage.
We believe that the USC allows.a residential type sprinkler system and not a commercial
system. We would like this condition to indicate that the project shall comply with the
require merits of the Uniform Building Code
104. Instaff a complete Class I standpipe system (per NFPA 14 2007 Edition and 2010 CFC
Chapter 905) along with current permit Tees, to the Fire Department for review and
approval prior t o installation.
Similarly, we believe that the Uniform Building Code does not require a Glass 1
standpipe system and the wording of this condition should be changed to Indicate that
the project shall comply with the requirements of the uniform Building Code.
Lastly, we would request that a southbound U-tum movement be considered at the Washington
Streat/Avenue 50 intersection. This restriction seems to have been placed there during recent
street improvements and .will increase the overall vehicle miles traveled for project tragic during
the life of the development. Project delivery traffic will be directed to the entry on Avenue 50
and would not need the U-turn movement.
We thank the staff for the time spent and consideration of these few requests. Please feel free
to contact me if you have any questions.
Very truly yours,
Marvin D. Roos
Directorof'Design Development
34200 BOB NoPE DRIVE ® RANCHO MIRAGE ® CALIFORNIA 2 92270
760-320-981'1 a 760-323-7893 FAX 13 www.MSACONSULTINCINC.COM
ATTACHMENT 6
Text: Recommended Conditions of Approval - - --
Italicized Text. Applicant's Objections to Recommended Conditions of Approval
Bold Italicized Text: City Staff Responses to Objections
GENERAL
3. The Site Development Permit shall expire one year from the date of City Council
approval (July 5, 2012), and shall become null and void in accordance with La
Quinta Municipal Code Section 9.210.020, unless a building permit has been
issued. A time extension may be requested per LQMC Section 9.200.080.
Applicant. We would like to request that the SDP approval be for a period of
2 years.
Planning Department Response. Condition of Approval revised.
PROPERTY RIGHTS
14. The public street right-of-way offers for dedication required for this
development include:
A. Public Streets
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial, 120' ROW) - The standard 60 feet
from the centerline of Washington Street for a total of 120-fppt ultimate
developed right of way except for:
Additional right-of-way is required on Washington Street north of Avenue
50 to provide for the realignment of Washington Street to accommodate
the dual left turn lanes for southbound Washington Street to eastbound
Avenue 50 as approved by the City Engineer.
A. An additional variable right of way dedication for the
deceleration/right turn only lane and bus turnout at the proposed
primary project entry measures seventy-six feet (76') east of the
centerline of Washington Street and length as conditioned under
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS (Condition of Approval No.
23A(1) (b))•
2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial, Option B 100' ROW) - The standard 50
feet from the centerline of Avenue 50 for a total of 100-foot ultimate
developed right of way except for:
A. An additional right of way dedication of 10 feet for a right turn only
lane at the Avenue 50 intersection with Washington Street (a total of
60 feet (60") north of the centerline of Avenue 50) and length as
conditioned under STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
(Condition of Approval No. 23A (2)(a)1.
Applicant. We would like to note that all dedications have been made to the City
with the exception of the deceleration lane on Washington.
Public Works Department Response: Staff will evaluate whether or not all
required dedications have been made in the future when the right of way for
the deceleration lane is dedicated. There is no need to check the right of way
dedication until that time.
STREET AND TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS
25. The Applicant shall construct the following street improvements to conform
with the General Plan (street type noted in parentheses).
A. OFF -SITE STREETS
1) Washington Street (Major Arterial; 120' R/W)
g) Establish a benchmark in the Washington Street right of way and file a
record of the benchmark with the County of Riverside.
Applicant: The condition requiring the establishment of a benchmark on
Washington Street does not have a nexus to the development of this project and
should be eliminated.
Public Works Department Response: The setting of monuments is associated
with the construction of infrastructure. We agree that most infrastructure is
constructed in association with a parcel or tract map. in your client's case,
he will likely be conditioned to build infrastructure to support his land use as
part of his development permit (a discretionary action by the Planning
Commission). it is the construction of this infrastructure that triggers the
requirement for monuments (not the filing of a final map).
2) Avenue 50 (Primary Arterial - Option B; 100' R/W)
d) A 12-foot wide raised landscape median plus variable width as needed along
the entire project boundary to accommodate for a left turn lane for the
eastbound Avenue 50 traffic into the project entry on the north side and for
dual left turn lanes for westbound Avenue 50 traffic at the intersection of
Washington Street and Avenue 50.
Applicant. Due to the unusual slope conditions on Avenue 50 east of the
proposed entry, the requirement to build the full median island and add
pavement to maintain two eastbound through traffic lanes could end up
involving retaining walls and or encroachments into CVWD property which
would be a financial burden on the La Paloma project. We would propose
building the median island just past our Avenue 50 entry including landscaping
but then tapering the paving striping at that point and leaving the remainder of
the median and landscape east of the entry to the developer of the project on
the south side of Avenue 50 upon its development.
Public Works Department Response. Avenue 50 currently has 2 eastbound
through lanes. Staff cannot support any proposal which reduces these lane
widths or eliminates these lanes. Staff is open to considering viable
engineering solutions during the plan check process.
28. General access points and turning movements of traffic are limited to the
following:
B. Primary Entry (Avenue 50): Right turn in and out and left turn in
movements are allowed. Left turn movements out are prohibited. All right -
turn -out only driveways shall have a splitter median island located in the
driveway throat that adequately channelizes the existing right -turn vehicles
turning onto the arterial street to eliminate illegal left turns. The splitter
island shall be designed in conformance with design concepts approved by
the City Engineer.
Applicant. Both properties involved along Avenue 50 would like a full left in /
left out driveway, we would request that the condition be changed to allow this
type of access to both properties.
Public Works Department Response. Access for the La Paloma Specific Plan
on the north side of Avenue 50 can only be addressed at this time. Access
to the property on the south side of Avenue 50 can only be addressed during
the entitlement process. However, it should be noted that the City will not be
able to support a full movement access without a median from the property
on the south side of Avenue 50. The access is approximately 350 feet from
.Washington Street and would not meet the spacing requirements for a traffic
signal. If the access designed for full movements without a traffic signal, it
has a very high potential for eventually meeting Warrant No. 7 in the
CAMUTCD related to collisions as volumes increase on Avenue 50.
Therefore, a median will be required on Avenue 50 that restricts left -turn
movements out of the project access onto Avenue 50.
IMPROVEMENT PLANS
34. 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 large 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.
G. On -Site Street Improvements/Signing & Striping/Storm Drain Plan
Applicant: We would request that the requirement for plan/profile of the on -
site street improvements be eliminated.
Public Works Department Response. Plan and profile will be required
for plan checking these improvements.
DRIANAGE
52. 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 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 either the 1 hour, 3
hour, 6 hour or 24 hour event producing the greatest total run off.
Applicant: While La Paloma has been deigned for on -site retention, it is
possible that direct discharge (as currently approved) may be pursued based
on a hydrology study of the tributary of the evacuation channel.
Public Works Department Response: The proposed conditions of
approval allow for project associated storm water to be handled by
either discharging directly to the Evacuation Channel or by on -site
retention or by a combination of both options.
FIRE DEPARTMENT
101. Install a complete commercial fire sprinkler system (per NFPA 13 2010
Edition). Fire sprinkler systems 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. All fire sprinkler risers
shall be protected from any physical damage.
Fire Department Response. Condition of Approval revised.
104. Install a complete Class I standpipe system (per NFPA 14 2007 Edition and
2010 CFC Chapter 905) along with current permit fees, to the Fire Department
for review and approval prior to installation.
Fire Department Response. Condition of Approval revised.
PH#B
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Les Johnson, Planning Directq
DATE: June 28, 2011 l///`
RE: Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2011-104
Zoning Ordinance Amendment 2011-104 is scheduled for public hearing before the
Planning Commission at tonight's meeting. Due to a public notice error, it is
necessary for this item to be continued to the next regularly scheduled Planning
Commission meeting of July 12, 2011, in order for this matter to be considered.
Therefore, staff recommends Planning Commission open the public hearing and
immediately move to continue ZOA 2011-104 to the July 12, 2011, meeting.
CI C
PLANNING COMMISSIONER ATTENDANCE
AT CITY COUNCIL MEETINGS
JULY 5, 2011 THROUGH JUNE 19, 2012
2011
July
5
Ed Alderson
19
Katie Barrows
August
2
Mark Weber
16
Council Dark
September
6
Council Dark
20
Robert Wilkinson
October
4
Robert Wright
18
Ed Alderson
November
1
Katie Barrows
15
Mark Weber
December
6
Robert Wilkinson
20
Robert Wright
2012
January
3
Ed Alderson
17
Katie Barrows
February
7
Mark Weber
21
Robert Wilkinson
March
6
Robert Wright
20
Ed Alderson
April
3
Katie Barrows
17
Mark Weber
May
1
Robert Wilkinson
15
Robert Wright
June
5
Ed Alderson
19
Katie Barrows
VI. CORRESPONDENCE AND WRITTEN
MATERIAL
.!�
� k \{
�\ƒ\���\#
g;»:
k��
B§\3
r\�
® a;!!
-;! !! ,a
.)ƒ� !'` ;
/`R*/k\
# :
�
i (�\\
!!!�
_
:� !
,\ } i /
»!§ ! (; ! ). /
)\# \�:\t�� 2
,
�
�
)�
§ \}/
;Gznaay:■
�!-}\k\�)§:/)
k})k! \ ; !\\\ § !{\)
�«�yw
:
E
■
§
. #;;
,\! #i;/! _:�: ; _,;!
�!! - \) ,\!
$�/\/
-
2
»i\/!�§_\)�}
§t2
,fs7�;
�
#\.;!■:;»�!�!f
�
\\/\\�
\� /G\�\G\
\
��/�\�\�
\!\
a
%ƒ2\(�\�f
� t)�Z
ƒ; _
��_
`` /§_;!- � �-}
\}_:
� }\/:
_
_ (\/�)(( /!t!
;ƒ )!!f/;3
_ ;:f!}!
!a |i!l;z;
/ \\�/�/
2 /
■ ))\
� s
!2Qƒ� /G)
� 2\ «7! d- 2 e.
Z/=/ �: t�`/« .
s_x w__ s G\� ƒ\ �
§ /\��\1
■ 2=
� k� � »a
=a,-- —Z 9;ƒ\
. \ `
J 2 \
± \
V/0
a
MEMORANDUM
TO: Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: vAmothy R. Jonasson, P.E.
Public Works Director/City Engineer
DATE: June 28, 2011
RE: Requested Changes to the Recommended Conditions of Approval
Site Development Permit (SDP) 2003-762 Amendment 1
After publication of the Planning Commission Agenda Report, representatives of WSL
La Quinta, LLC requested the following changes to the Recommended Conditions of
Approval for the above mentioned Site Development Permit. The Public Works
Department recommends the following changes:
1) Replace Condition 52 in its entirety in the SDP 2003-762 Amendment 1
Recommended Conditions of Approval and replace it with the following:
"52. If permitted by CVWD and the City Engineer, when an applicant proposes
discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the La Quinta Evacuation Channel,
the applicant shall execute an indemnification instrument as approved by the City
Engineer and City Attorney. Additionally, the applicant shall pay for all costs of sampling
and testing associated with the development's drainage discharge which may be
required under the City's NPDES Permit or other City or area -wide pollution prevention
program; and for any other obligations and/or expenses which may arise from such
discharge. The applicant is required to construct required discharge treatment Best
Management Practice facilities per the NPDES Permit Supplement A but at a minimum
shall install a CDS Unit or equal system as approved by the City Engineer. The
indemnification shall be executed and furnished to the City prior to the issuance of any
grading, construction or building permit, and shall be binding on all heirs, executors,
administrators, assigns, and successors in interest in the land within this tentative parcel
map excepting therefrom those portions required to be dedicated or deeded for public
use. If such discharge is approved for this development, the applicant shall make
provisions for meeting these obligations. The 100-year storm water hydraulic grade line
shall be at elevation 48 feet or as determined by CVWD and the City Engineer.
Additionally, the applicant shall submit verification to the City of CVWD acceptance of
the proposed discharge of storm water directly, or indirectly, into the La Quinta
Evacuation Channel with the initial submittal of storm drain improvement plans."
2) Replace: Condition 25 A 1) g) in its entirety of the SDP 2003-762 Amendment 1
Recommended Conditions of Approval and replace it with the following:
"g) Establish a Class Il Level 11 benchmark in the Washington Street right of way and
file a record of the benchmark with the County of Riverside."
3) Replace Condition 25 A 2) d) in its entirety of the SOP 2003-762 Amendment 1
Recommended Conditions of Approval and replace it with the following:
"d) A 12-foot wide raised landscaped median plus variable width as needed along the
entire project boundary to accommodate a left turn lane for the eastbound Avenue 50
traffic into the project entry on the north side and for dual left turn lanes for westbound
Avenue 50 traffic at the intersection of Washington Street and Avenue 50. Interim and
ultimate improvements shall be as approved by the City Engineer. The applicant shall
be responsible for 50% of the cost to design and construct said raised landscaped
median. "